Don´t know how accurate this thing is, should perhaps ask much more questions, but anyways, if anyone else wants to try it out....
http://www.ecofoot.org

(My ecological footprint is apparently 4 hectares and under the national average for Spain of 4,7 hectares, though if eveyone lived like me we´d need 2,2 planets like earth, apparently)
(It´s in all languages, I´m just pasting here what I got at the end)


RESULTADOS

CATEGORÍA HECTÁRES GLOBALES
COMIDA 1
MOVILIDAD 0.5
VIVIENDA 0.9
BIENES/SERVICIOS 1.6

SU HUELLA TOTAL 4

EN COMPARACIÓN, LA HUELLA ECOLÓGICA PROMEDIA EN SU PAÍS ES 4.7 HECTÁRES GLOBALES .

EN EL MUNDO ENTERO EXISTEN 1.8 DE ÁREA BIOLOGICAMENTE PRODUCTIVA PARA HECTÁRES GLOBALES CADA PERSONA.

SI TODOS LO HABITANTES DEL MUNDO VIVIERAN COMO USTED NECESITARÍAMOS 2.2 PLANETAS

CATEGORY GLOBAL HECTARES

FOOD 1.3

MOBILITY 0.2

SHELTER 0.9

GOODS/SERVICES 0.6

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 5.3 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.




IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 1.7 PLANETS.

Interesting. Friggen food (I like to eat, and eat bad)

oops :blush: , I see I´m taking up more room than the others (with my 2,2 planets as opposed to their 1,7....)

It says for Wingfoot:
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 3. IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 5.3 GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON. WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 1.8 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE GLOBAL HECTARES PER PERSON.
And for Delta:
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 7. IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON. WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.

Wingfoot, I take it you´re European to get your results in hectares? I see your national average is 5,3 and mine is 4,7.

And Delta, how do you convert acres into hectares? (ie: to know US average for example, which you´re like a third of with your result!)

1 Hectare equals about 2.5 acres, I think.

Accordinly, 24 acres is about 9.75 hectares.

And Wingfoot is from England, so yeah. Being from the US, I'm not surprised at the high number of acres each person uses.

CATEGORY ACRES

FOOD 4.2

MOBILITY 0.5

SHELTER 4

GOODS/SERVICES 4

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 13



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.




IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.8 PLANETS.

FOOD 4.9

MOBILITY 1

SHELTER 2

GOODS/SERVICES 2.7

TOTAL FOOTPRINT 11



IN COMPARISON, THE AVERAGE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN YOUR COUNTRY IS 24 ACRES PER PERSON.

WORLDWIDE, THERE EXIST 4.5 BIOLOGICALLY PRODUCTIVE ACRES PER PERSON.




IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 2.4 PLANETS.


Now I feel wasteful.

Dang. I really feel wasteful now. At first I was a bit surprised with that because I try to be pretty ecologically friendly and my answers reflected that... then I realized that the airplane travel question had screwed me over. See, I do a lot of travelling, and for that question, I said that I spend approximately 100 hours flying each year. The number is probably closer to 75, but 100 was the closest option. I retook the test and picked 25 hours, and only got a footprint of 5.5. I hadn't realized arplane travel was so wasteful. :o

Yeah, its not just the airplane, its all the support that it requires to take off and the like.

The same happened to me, which surprized me that my results were relatively high although I thought I lived very sparingly in energy/goods consumption (I put 25 hours, as I´ve flown already this year 22). A friend had told me some stats about flying which were quite frightening (and apparently there was a good article in the Independent about this which I hope to dig out), such as this one:

a round trip (per seat) London -> Barcelona is equivalent in energy spent to 2 years energy spent in normal living – cooking ,washing, transport, light, etc.

So anyone can imagine how long flying hours push up the score.

That's my life in America. I think my life in China would be a bit lower, since I don't have a car (I ride a bike), I eat much less meat, and I walk everywhere.

Anyway I think my footprint is hard to pin down since I travel a lot.

Thats all under travel right? Cause your "Goods and Services" score is high as well.

Yeah, airplane travel just affects mobility, I think. Goods and Services is probably high because of my affinity for meat. <_<

I think thats food you planet waster you.

Oh, so it is.

Hm... then I'm not sure. I guess I'm just wasteful. <_<

I guess so.

What did you put for trash output?

Um... I don't remember for sure. Either about the same or much less.

Thank you, proletariat.