These kinds of metrics give the environmental movement a bad name. It’s complete bullshit. Edited to add: you probably have an intuitive idea of what “overshoo

These kinds of metrics give the environmental movement a bad name. It’s complete bullshit. Edited to add: you probably have an intuitive idea of what “overshooting” our “environmental footprint” means, but I guarantee that your intuition does not tally with the details of how this number is derived. The huge number involved principally relies on the area of forest required to offset human carbon emissions, which is a bizarre choice of land use. File this one away with the “happiest/sadness/most flatulent” day of the year formulas. It’s a bunch of numbers multiplied together designed to generate headlines, not a serious instrument we can use to guide policy decisions. https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001700 https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/jou...