[–] 10442242? 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago
It is a number how many trees you have destroyed that filters out the C from the CO2.
You can see in European countries where they mass deforest all their trees so they get higher CO2 footprints. That way they can eco tax more people.
Look at this example: Antwerp. They turned the city in a LEZ, and yet they kill all their trees at the same time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKeey9zNjFk and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgjbJBGsgXQ They kill the trees in Antwerp city because this way they have another excuse to tax more people because they can't reach the carbon footprint target.
You reduce the carbon footprint by planting new trees. Lost of new tress. But that is not where the profit is for the government.
[–] Sire 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
It's an arbitrary measurement with social meaning from a political agenda. Supposedly it tells you how much CO2 is being produced/used by your usage of those products. Unfortunately, nobody can check if it's correct, and in which circumstances it'd be correct.
So it's a useless measurement.
[–] SurfinMindWaves 2 points 4 points 6 points (+6|-2) ago
It is a measurement of the impact on the environment by your existence here on earth. If you live a simple life, recycle and consume reasonable amounts you have a smaller footprint left on the earth than someone like Al Gore, who flies around in private jets and wastes resources because he thinks he is more important than little people like you.
[–] ArsCortica 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
It basically an estimate of how much carbon dioxide is blown into the atmosphere due to your actions. For instance, a person who will exclusively travel by bike or public transportation such as buses unsurprisingly would produce less carbon dioxide than someone who'd spend all day flying around in his private jet while burning kerosene like crazy.
Whether or not producing more or less carbon dioxide is an inherently bad thing depends on who you ask.