3 ms·

Money (spent) is the measure of someone's pollution footprint

• lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
  My electricity provider has a program which accepts voluntary additions to my bill to fund projects for creating wind and solar farms (among other things). As far as I know, this is the single most valuable thing I can do with my money with respect to reducing my carbon footprint. It’s not precisely a bad heuristic that buying many things is wasteful (as I assume this comment intends to argue) but “throwing things away” is the measure, rather than “spending money”.
  • 11235813213455 3y ago
    What you're saying is a bit like offsetting your footprint. Ideally we should rather have very low consumption. Partly agreed on throing away, a car is not thrown away frequently, even if it's an EV, it has a large footprint from its maintenance and all the services and infrastrictures dedicated to cars, 25% of our cities space. Same for a swimming pool, for a tourism boat, planes etc..
• tjmc 3y ago
  What if you spend your money on solar panels? We produce twice as much power as we consume
  • 11235813213455 3y ago
    It's better to consume very few electricity, produced from nuclear for example, than setting up solar energy (with a significant loss on conversion and a footprint in materials, as well as nuclear plants, but what I mean is it's more our lifestyle that matters rather than the solutions themselves Indirectly consuming few electricity means you've few devices which also have a number of footprints, so it's quite a large gain The only counter example to what I said is maybe buying land to convert it to a food forest / permaculture, and save it from another guy building a villa with swimming pool