Whats your Change.ie result?

barnicles

I'm calculating mine at the moment

Post like this

CF= 3.0 Tons

Then try to reduce it!:)
And post how you're doing

Wazdakka

Hmm I've never worked this out before..

My CF = 13.36 Tons

Wow..

barnicles

WOW

My CF=5.06

:eek:

djpbarry

My CF = 2.92 tonnes per year.

Apparently I can drop it below 2 tonnes if I cut out some flights. Not sure how accurate this is to be honest.

homer911

2.28 - I dont travel as much as you guys, use public transport and have solar hot water

andrewlownie101

What a con.

I've got size 11's so I presume mine 'carbon footprint' will be considerable.

Im gonna cut my toes off when the governemnt state the carbon tax scam.

Alkers

Got 4.48. Over 90% of mine is from flying (guessed at 2 long haul flights and 4 short haul per year). The rest of my emissions are split between the other two people sharing the house with me but are still low (geothermal heating and solar panels). Don't own a car either (50cc moped). Basically the message from the site is that it doesn't matter what you do as long as you don't fly anywhere. I wonder how the alternatives (long drives/ferrys etc) are with emissions.

Danno

CF = 2.02 Tons - It says it is low.

2.2 - I expected higher as I work in Dublin.

Macha

2.07

ChocolateSauce

Mine's 8.45, but 78.12% of that is on flying! Haha....

P. Breathnach

I got a score of 1.98, which I simply don't believe.

While I accept that a calculator like that must be a bit imprecise, leaving my motoring and domestic heating out of the calculation looks a bit suspect.

Musha

7 Tonnes but that should be divided by 4 as there are 4 in the house, or atleast 2 adults

djpbarry

P. Breathnach wrote: »

While I accept that a calculator like that must be a bit imprecise, leaving my motoring and domestic heating out of the calculation looks a bit suspect.

How do you mean?

Musha wrote: »

7 Tonnes but that should be divided by 4 as there are 4 in the house, or atleast 2 adults

Pretty sure that's taken into consideration - you are asked to input the number of residents in your home.

Dilbert75

4.39 - thought I was great until I saw some of the other results here. And 64% of mine is personal transport, despite me cycling to work most days and the family only doing maybe 10,000 miles per year.

BendiBus

CF=6.82

70% of it for using storage heaters for home heating, 25% flights.

I live in an apartment and have no other choice in heating. And only 5 short haul flights per year. I don't even own a car.

Can't see how I can improve things!

Edit: Living on my own is the problem (obvious when I think about). Did a new calc with 2 in the house and got down to 4.4. Need to find someone to move in with me. That'll be my excuse anyway

jaffa20

2.67

I'm happy with that. Don't own a car and walk most times to work. Live in an apartment. Wasn't sure what to put in for bills though as i just moved in so just estimated. I only take one flight per year.

blackbox

11.4

Suggestions on how to reduce are rubbish - anyone sufficiently interested to do this survey will already know what they tell you.

NB website doesn't seem to work very well, or am I staring at something and not seeing it - How do you go back to review the things you have entered?

djpbarry

blackbox wrote: »

How do you go back to review the things you have entered?

Just click on calculator, then the relevant tab.

GG66

mine is 2.02

and if I check all of my suggested changes - which I have done it's 1.62

Think I'll go off and buy a V8 engine now and splash petrol all over the road as I've done my bit ....

jaycen

17.1 Class

jaycen

jaycen wrote: »

17.1 Class

Time to ditch the private jet!

Downtime

CF= 18.92 Tons

Above average I think. 80% is flights

jaycen

Deleted User wrote: »

Time to ditch the private jet!

Lol, I wish think a lot of that score comes from road mileage, part of the my job.

The site really isn't up to much, IMO, needs work. I don't really agree with the whole change mantra, there are other more important things that need to be done before we could have any tangable effect.

GG66

This site is a little better at outlining possible changes and making committments ..http://www.edenbee.com/

djpbarry

jaycen wrote: »

I don't really agree with the whole change mantra, there are other more important things that need to be done before we could have any tangable effect.

I disagree. There are reasons why per capita emissions in this country are way above the EU average and I think it's important that people realise what those reasons are.

jaycen

djpbarry wrote: »

I disagree. There are reasons why per capita emissions in this country are way above the EU average and I think it's important that people realise what those reasons are.

I agree with you dj but don't you think the likes of China and the US should drop their output too, our's is literally a drop in the ocean why kill ourselves when it will make no difference???


On another note, I'd guess (only a guess) that our figures are higher due to 2 main reasons:

Recycling is very new to the general public here and will take a while to catch on (I do but only in the past couple of years)

Our public transport system is an embarrasment, if you're outside a city you pretty much have to have your own transport unless you're very lucky and willing to get soaked like today. (old excuse but it's true nonetheless)

Macha

Recycling doesn't really have that much to do with climate change. Ireland actually has quite high levels of recycling - although we also produce very high levels of waste, which more than cancels out that good.

GG66

jaycen wrote: »

Our public transport system is an embarrasment, if you're outside a city you pretty much have to have your own transport unless you're very lucky and willing to get soaked like today. (old excuse but it's true nonetheless)

True, when I lived in Dublin I either cycled or took the bus everywhere. used the train when going outside Dublin. My wife and I had zero cars between us.

Now that I live in the country we've managed to collect 3..

djpbarry

jaycen wrote: »

I agree with you dj but don't you think the likes of China and the US should drop their output too, our's is literally a drop in the ocean why kill ourselves when it will make no difference???

In fairness, that's like saying it's ok to litter because you saw somebody else do it.

jaycen wrote: »

Recycling is very new to the general public here and will take a while to catch on

I don't know about that. I can remember, about 20 years ago, kids in primary school being encouraged to collect bags of aluminium cans for recycling. I think it was part of a competition of some kind? And anyone who grew up in the 80's most likely had parents who were very reluctant to waste anything; pretty much everything was reused in some shape or form, where possible.

Besides, as taconnol has already said, we're actually pretty good at recycling in this country. The problem is, we're consistently producing more and more waste and this trend has to be reversed. From the EPA's National Waste Report 2006:

"Some 36% of municipal waste is now recycled and this exceeds for the first time the 2013 national target of 35% recycling. While the actual quantity of municipal waste recycled increased by 18%, the quantity landfilled increased by 8%. This means that the recovery rate for municipal waste only increased marginally from 34% in 2005 to 36% in 2006.
...
In 2006, an additional 49,031 tonnes of household waste was recycled (an increase of 14%). However the amount of household waste going to landfill also increased, by 180,742 tonnes (15%), a reversal of the downward trend of recent years. Due to this large increase in the landfill disposal of household waste, the recycling rate for household waste is unchanged at 22%.
...
The quantity of packaging waste being recycled increased by 8% in 2006.
...
The continued good progress in recycling is however overshadowed by increased landfilling of packaging waste, and consequently the recycling rate decreased from 59% in 2005 to 57% in 2006. This is still well in excess of the 2005 target of 50% recycling and is expected to remain on track to achieve the next target of 60% recycling by 2011."

siralfalot

ha ha!!!! I win!!
25.21 tonnes, its telling me to change my band f car, eeh sorry but no!! its too much fun

Personal Travel (58.31%)

Flights (12.33%)

Household (14.37%)

Heating (14.99%)

rvd156

6.52

-TK^Creator

7.04, 93% on flights damn that 28000km trip to south america

jaycen

djpbarry wrote: »

In fairness, that's like saying it's ok to litter because you saw somebody else do it.
I don't know about that. I can remember, about 20 years ago, kids in primary school being encouraged to collect bags of aluminium cans for recycling. I think it was part of a competition of some kind? And anyone who grew up in the 80's most likely had parents who were very reluctant to waste anything; pretty much everything was reused in some shape or form, where possible.

Um, no, it's like saying it's ok to drop litter in the local landfill actually


Yes, IMO recycling (as a lifestyle) is very new to most people I know, still quite a lot throw everything in the bin, I didn't inferr that it's a waste of time in any way just that the benefits are a bit off yet.

blackbox

I note on the change.ie website that they state

"The most important ‘greenhouse gases’ are:
carbon dioxide (CO2)
methane (CH4)
and nitrous oxide (N2O). "

Inaccuracy like this is what gets "environmentalists" a bad name.

djpbarry

blackbox wrote: »

I note on the change.ie website that they state

"The most important ‘greenhouse gases’ are:
carbon dioxide (CO2)
methane (CH4)
and nitrous oxide (N2O). "

Inaccuracy like this is what gets "environmentalists" a bad name.

I'm not sure I follow; what's the problem?