Post by account_disabled on Feb 21, 2024 19:58:50 GMT -10
As of August 22, Humanity has already consumed all the resources that the planet is capable of regenerating this year. “Overshoot Day”, also known as “Overshoot Day”, has been delayed by 3 weeks compared to 2019. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced a reduction in human activity and this has given a slight respite to the planet, which continues far from sustainable at this rate. In 1970, the Earth's biocapacity was more than sufficient to meet the annual demand for human resources. But in the half century since then, we have steadily surpassed our only planet. Humanity now consumes about 60% more than the Earth can produce in a year, meaning we need 1.6 planets to sustain ourselves. In 2019, we had already spent our resource budget for that year on July 31st. Since the first Earth Overshoot Day recorded by the Global Footprint Network, which has been calculating global and national ecological impacts for nearly three decades, humanity has exceeded its biocapacity – defined as the “capacity of ecosystems to produce biological materials used by people and to absorb waste material generated by humans. But due to the global coronavirus lockdown, the year 2020 has changed the trend. This year, Earth Overshoot Day has been delayed by more than three weeks to August 22. The day we finished the planet.
Earth overshoot day 2020 The day we finished the planet. Earth overshoot day 2020 Projections point to a nearly 15% reduction in CO² emissions (around 60% of the total footprint) in 2020 as a result of the pandemic-related decline in the use of fossil fuels in the transportation, energy, industry, aviation and housing. The global Earth Overshoot calculation, which uses data from organizations such Bulgaria Mobile Number List as the International Energy Agency, also includes forestry production, which was reduced by almost 9%, and our food footprint, which remained stable. A planet of misery or prosperity? According to Mathis Wackernagel, founder and president of the Global Footprint Network, this year's contraction is welcome. But he says the fact that it's accidental means it's not sustainable. The tragedy this year is that reducing carbon emissions is not based on better infrastructure, such as better electricity grids or more compact cities. We need to move the date by design, not by disaster. Doing nothing, being confined at home, that is not the kind of transformation we need. It is not durable. Mathis Wackernagel To meet the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) goals of limiting warming to 1.5-2 degrees Celsius, the current decline in the emissions curve would have to continue at the same rate over the next decade, Wackernagel says. However, today, this is being achieved through economic and social suffering. The goal should be to “systematically adjust to the physical budget we have,” added the Swiss-born founder of the Global Footprint Network, winner of the 2018 World Sustainability Award.
Do you want a planet of misery or a planet of prosperity? ?» Wackernagel argues that the coronavirus is itself a reflection of ecological stress. These pressures that we see as pandemics, as famines, as climate change, as loss of biodiversity, are all manifestations of an ecological imbalance. Reduce emissions for the benefit of all A key side effect of disaster emissions reductions is the fact that " the pain is going to be distributed unevenly ," according to Wackernagel. Marginalized groups, especially people of color, have been disproportionately affected by the “ huge economic impacts ” of the pandemic, said Sarah George, a senior reporter at Edie, a U.K. media company that promotes sustainable business practices. . Edie held her first Earth Overshoot webinar in 2019, with the goal of empowering organizations to reduce their resource footprint through business models that are sustainable for everyone in the long term. George says this year's webinar, on August 22, will also address the misconception spread by some climate skeptics that a green, energy-efficient future is only possible under the deprivations of a lockdown. They have used the situation to say that lockdown is 'what green activists want', and that we cannot enjoy things like international travel, economic growth etc.