Help! Does anyone know the source of the often quoted "50Gt/y material footprint is the sustainable maximum"?
Another user here asked about this a while back but I don't think anyone found it.
@gerrymcgovern found this:
https://ayhoekstra.nl/pubs/Hoekstra-Wiedmann-2014-EnvironmentalFootprint.pdf
Which relies on this:
M. Dittrich, S. Giljum, S. Lutter, C. Polzin, “Green economies around the world? Implications of resource use for development and the environment”
(Sustainable Europe Research Institute, Vienna, Austria, 2012).
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301790657_Green_economies_around_the_world_Implications_of_resource_use_for_development_and_the_environment/link/572895b508ae0acc4f497c9b/download
on page 37 they say:
"with regard to the environment, it could be argued that nature has limited resources, and therefore, global resource extraction should be frozen at the level of one base year, for example 1992, the year of the first Rio Summit at around
50 billion tonnes."
Is 50Gt really just a guess? Does it/should it include biomass, and sand and gravel?
#MF #MaterialFootprint #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #Degrowth #LessIsMore