It is well known that Americans consume far more natural resources and live much less sustainably than people from any other large country of the world.
“A child born in the United States will create thirteen times as much ecological damage over the course of his or her lifetime than a child born in Brazil,” reports the Sierra Club’s Dave Tilford, adding that the average American will drain as many resources as 35 natives of India and consume 53 times more goods and services than someone from China.
So, I think before the underdeveloped areas can enjoy modern life,It is very important for Americans to reduce their luxury life first!
Yes, your proposal is quite right. In fact, in my opinion, Americans are like moths of the earth!
On average, one American consumes as much energy as
o 2 Japanese 日本人的2倍
o 6 Mexicans 墨西哥人的6倍
o 13 Chinese 中国人的13倍
o 31 Indians 印度人的31倍
o 128 Bangladeshis 孟加拉人的128倍
o 307 Tanzanians 坦桑尼亚人的307倍
o 370 Ethiopians 埃塞俄比亚人的370倍
The average American individual daily consumption of water is 159 gallons, while more than half the world''''s population lives on 25 gallons.
In my opinion, as long as Americans "save" a little bit, the environmental problem is not as complicated as it is now!
Yes exactly. Also while we have a huge energy resource footprint, developed nations also have infrastructure and a functioning educated society governed by laws, where we could begin forcing efficiency.
Ha ha ha ha, look, an American's "defense", you mean that all of us in the underdeveloped areas should die? We're not people? Yes, you are more efficient and noble!
Your accusation is "unprovoked". It may mean "efficiency problem" related to environmental protection
Many countries do not, and people only have a smaller footprint because they aren''''t able to get more resources by any means. I am pretty sure these stats are not very well thought out in any case. A couple small examples. What about dynamite fishing, or dumping toxins into the ground Those happen daily all over the planet where people are impoverished. That doesn''''t happen much at all in a developed nation. That kind of damage is not just inefficiency it''''s permanent destruction. That kind of thing isn''''t accounted for, there''''s just no comparison.
Do you mean that the pollution of the world's environment is due to the fact that people in poor countries use explosives to fry fish in order to eat enough? As for dumping toxins into rivers, where does the final industrial product flow? Who is the biggest gainer? This is a question worth thinking about!
The Western standard of living isn’t wrong; it’s the Western style of living that creates the problems. Nothing wrong with wanting enough food, good healthcare and a decent education. Plenty wrong with a disposable trash lifestyle which derives its wealth by robbing future generations.
There''''s a difference between "we should all pollute less by doing xyz as suggested by the UN" and "America doesn''''t have to cut its emissions until those billions of Indians stop existing." The latter is seen all over reddit, even here, as well as in the mainstream media. And that is racist.
Suggesting that an entire culture is responsible for a global crisis, and that oddly enough, the millions of Americans driving SUVS and eating beef three times a day is a drop in the bucket, is racist. And racism is the fundamental base for fascism, and since we''''re all worried about the rise of eco-fascism in its many forms, we should be trying to discredit this shit whenever we see it.
But in fact, what you call "the life of a few Americans" is most of the truth!
Americans like private cars and enjoy the feeling of abundant food. Just last year, Americans consumed 815 billion calories a day, which is 200 billion calories more than needed, and can feed 80 million people!
SO，Next time you hear about a woman in India who has seven children, remember that she''''d have to have more than 20 children to match the impact of an American woman with just one child.
As long as an American lives in the United States, he may consume more energy. Even if he saves energy at home, everything he buys will increase the consumption of energy and other resources.
Well, if you list the countries of the world in order by their population , the U.S. comes in third... but the combined energy consumption of the other five largest added together doesn''''t match U.S. energy consumption! In other words, the 5% of the world''''s population that lives in the U.S. has more environmental impact than the 51% that live in the other five largest countries.
Yes, Americans may not feel how much they have consumed!
Tilford cites a litany of sobering statistics showing just how profligate Americans have been in using and abusing natural resources. For example, between 1900 and 1989 U.S. population tripled while its use of raw materials grew by a factor of 17.
“With less than 5 percent of world population, the U.S. uses one-third of the world’s paper, a quarter of the world’s oil, 23 percent of the coal, 27 percent of the aluminum, and 19 percent of the copper,” he reports. “Our per capita use of energy, metals, minerals, forest products, fish, grains, meat, and even fresh water dwarfs that of people living in the developing world.”
Meanwhile, National Geographic’s Greendex found that American consumers rank last of 17 countries surveyed in regard to sustainable behavior. Furthermore, the study found that U.S. consumers are among the least likely to feel guilty about the impact they have on the environment, yet they are near to top of the list in believing that individual choices could make a difference.
Paradoxically, those with the lightest environmental footprint are also the most likely to feel both guilty and disempowered. “In what may be a major disconnect between perception and behavior, the study also shows that consumers who feel the guiltiest about their impact—those in China, India and Brazil—actually lead the pack in sustainable consumer choices,” says National Geographic’s Terry Garcia, who coordinates the annual Greendex study. “That’s despite Chinese and Indian consumers also being among the least confident that individual action can help the environment.”
Hahaha，This is a satire!