Introduction
Dear reader,
Our aim is to inform you and to make you aware of your ecological footprint and the consequences. Especially nowadays, because climate change is a big thing.
Is it possible to reduce your ecological footprint or the ecological footprint of your family by more than 20% or more? That is our main question. To be honest, we were quite surprised by the outcome. We did research about the ecological footprint in general and the one of our family. The collected information is combined in this document. At first we only knew so much about this topic. However, while doing this project, we discovered a lot about how our deeds affect the ecological footprint and how to reduce it.
We hope you learn something from this report. We certainly did.
Group two,
Julia, Lindsay, Mark and Yoram
Index
Dear reader,
Our aim is to inform you and to make you aware of your ecological footprint and the consequences. Especially nowadays, because climate change is a big thing.
Is it possible to reduce your ecological footprint or the ecological footprint of your family by more than 20% or more? That is our main question. To be honest, we were quite surprised by the outcome. We did research about the ecological footprint in general and the one of our family. The collected information is combined in this document. At first we only knew so much about this topic. However, while doing this project, we discovered a lot about how our deeds affect the ecological footprint and how to reduce it.
We hope you learn something from this report. We certainly did.
Group two,
Julia, Lindsay, Mark and Yoram
Index
- Awareness activity
- Ecological footprint test results
- Explanation ecological footprint
- Most efficient ways to reduce your ecological footprint
- Contributing to the reduction of the ecological footprint
- Interview with two grandparents
- Conclusion
- Videoconference evaluations
- Reflection
- Evidence of communication
- Comparison
- Final conclusion
Awareness activity
Lindsay: I dicsussed with my father if we could Go Green for one day. Of course he agreed. My father went to his work by bike instead of by car and I also went to school by bike (as I usually do). We decided not to eat fish or meat. My father bought food at the local farmers instead of going to the supermarket. That day I did pay more attention to my use of water (shower shorter), switching off electronical devices instead of leaving them on standby and so on. Maybe we could all try to do this at least one day per month, or maybe even a week per month. You might think it is a small step, but if everyone does it, we actually make a lot of progress.
Yoram: One day I wanted to be better for the environment. So when me and my family had breakfast in the morning I told them my idea. They all agreed so we were good for the environment one day. We didn’t use any cars, so my father had to go to work by bike (about 2 hours cycling). We all took a quick shower and turned the lights off for most of the day. We went to bed early so we could turn the heating down and turn the lights off. We surprisingly made it through the whole day, it was fun to try, but I don’t think I would want to do it every day.
Lindsay: I dicsussed with my father if we could Go Green for one day. Of course he agreed. My father went to his work by bike instead of by car and I also went to school by bike (as I usually do). We decided not to eat fish or meat. My father bought food at the local farmers instead of going to the supermarket. That day I did pay more attention to my use of water (shower shorter), switching off electronical devices instead of leaving them on standby and so on. Maybe we could all try to do this at least one day per month, or maybe even a week per month. You might think it is a small step, but if everyone does it, we actually make a lot of progress.
Yoram: One day I wanted to be better for the environment. So when me and my family had breakfast in the morning I told them my idea. They all agreed so we were good for the environment one day. We didn’t use any cars, so my father had to go to work by bike (about 2 hours cycling). We all took a quick shower and turned the lights off for most of the day. We went to bed early so we could turn the heating down and turn the lights off. We surprisingly made it through the whole day, it was fun to try, but I don’t think I would want to do it every day.
Ecological footprint test results
We did the ecological footprint test at myfootprint.org
These are the results. If you want to find your ecological footprint, don't hesitate! It is interesting to know.
We did the ecological footprint test at myfootprint.org
These are the results. If you want to find your ecological footprint, don't hesitate! It is interesting to know.
What is the ecological footprint?
Mark: The Ecological footprint measures the needs of humanity on nature which is mostly expressed in hectares. The measurements compare the biological productive area that people use for consumption to the biological productive area available in a certain area or the world. This can very clearly show the human dependence on earth and the dependence of the economy on natural capital. The calculation of the biological footprint considers the biological productive area of all the things humans regularly including but not limited to: Fruits, vegetables, fish, wood, fibers, absorption of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use and the space necessary for buildings and roads. The ecological footprint measures these factors mostly in global hectares but sometimes the amount of earths needed to sustain the whole human population is depicted if everyone lived like an individual or a certain group of people.
According to the global footprint network as of 2013 the average ecological footprint in India is 1.1 global hectares per capita and the per capita footprint in the Netherlands is 5.8 global hectares and the average footprint in Europe is about 4.6 global hectares. The Netherlands has a relatively high Footprint and ranks 24th while India has an insanely low footprint and ranks 169th out of 192 but this list excludes: Greenland, Taiwan and Iceland for unknown reasons.
We included a map to show the location of the Netherlands. It is located between Germany, Belgium and the North Sea.
Mark: The Ecological footprint measures the needs of humanity on nature which is mostly expressed in hectares. The measurements compare the biological productive area that people use for consumption to the biological productive area available in a certain area or the world. This can very clearly show the human dependence on earth and the dependence of the economy on natural capital. The calculation of the biological footprint considers the biological productive area of all the things humans regularly including but not limited to: Fruits, vegetables, fish, wood, fibers, absorption of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use and the space necessary for buildings and roads. The ecological footprint measures these factors mostly in global hectares but sometimes the amount of earths needed to sustain the whole human population is depicted if everyone lived like an individual or a certain group of people.
According to the global footprint network as of 2013 the average ecological footprint in India is 1.1 global hectares per capita and the per capita footprint in the Netherlands is 5.8 global hectares and the average footprint in Europe is about 4.6 global hectares. The Netherlands has a relatively high Footprint and ranks 24th while India has an insanely low footprint and ranks 169th out of 192 but this list excludes: Greenland, Taiwan and Iceland for unknown reasons.
We included a map to show the location of the Netherlands. It is located between Germany, Belgium and the North Sea.
Most efficient ways to reduce the footprint in a family
Julia: I think about everyone knows at least some ways how you can reduce your ecological footprint, but let’s put all of them in a row:
Julia: I think about everyone knows at least some ways how you can reduce your ecological footprint, but let’s put all of them in a row:
- Separating materials like glass, plastic, paper of vegetables and groceries
- Instead of putting old clothes or toys in the bin, try to sell or donate them, so they’re being reused. You can also try to repair stuff yourself instead of replacing it.
- Use less paper by for example using your e-mail more than your regular mail box
- Use less plastic by taking your own bag instead of asking for a plastic bag when you buy something new.
- If you have a garden, try to plant more trees. More trees means more oxygen!
- Try to not put your central heating system too high. It is better for the environment and also for your wallet. And besides, sleeping in an area where it’s cold is even good for your body.
- CFL or LED lights use a lot less energy than the usual, so when your light bulb has stopped working try to replace it by one of these. It is even cheaper because they use less energy.
- When it’s time to replace an appliance, look at the Energy star label. This might mean a big difference in how much energy it uses.
- Another big change can be by driving your car less. You can reduce this by for example carpooling, riding your bike or using public transport.
Contributing to the reduction of the ecological footprint
Yoram: I think that we could reduce the ecological footprint of a family by driving less. As for me, my father drives to his work every day which is about 40 kilometres away. If his work would be closer to home, he wouldn’t have to drive that much and we may have needed one earth less. Also, I have flown a lot this year, more than usual, I think that was also a big part of my outcome. If I don’t eat meat almost every day, which I do, that will change something as well. I myself cycle to school every day and I’m also almost never in a car. I also play a lot of computer games, if I would play a little bit less, I think it may save some energy.
Yoram: I think that we could reduce the ecological footprint of a family by driving less. As for me, my father drives to his work every day which is about 40 kilometres away. If his work would be closer to home, he wouldn’t have to drive that much and we may have needed one earth less. Also, I have flown a lot this year, more than usual, I think that was also a big part of my outcome. If I don’t eat meat almost every day, which I do, that will change something as well. I myself cycle to school every day and I’m also almost never in a car. I also play a lot of computer games, if I would play a little bit less, I think it may save some energy.
Interview with two grandparents
Lindsay: I held an interview with my grandparents, Wil (68), Vlissingen and Daan (71), Vlissingen. They were eager to do the interview and to find out more about the ecological footprint. I constructed the interview questions myself, later combining the answers.
Back then, my grandparents didn’t have anything like the ecological footprint we have nowadays. There were no governmental measures and the people were unaware about how their deeds affected the climate. They didn’t recycle because there was nothing to recycle.
Electricity and the heating were provided by the electricity network and the nuclear plant.
They did eat seasonal food, mostly from their gardens. My grandmother didn’t eat a lot of meat because it was quite expensive. My grandfather, on the other hand, ate more, his household was smaller and therefore less food had to be bought.
Most of the time the types of transport my grandparents used were the bike and just walking. Occasionally they used public transport. Once a year they went on holiday.
Also, they were economical at home and didn’t spend that much. Partly because there wasn’t a lot of money.
I asked them if they think their ecological footprint was big in 1960. Both shook their heads. Life was simpler back then, people weren’t as rich as they are now. Next to that, households have shrunk.
My grandparents did the WWF ecological footprint test. First they filled in the answers how it was in 1960. Their result was 46%, which is quite small compared to the average footprint of a British person. Then they did a different test, the Dutch version, about how they live now, in 2018. This one showed how much hectare they used. It turned out my grandparents use 5.47 hectare, which is also smaller than the average: 6.3 hectare.
You can read the full interview below.
Lindsay: I held an interview with my grandparents, Wil (68), Vlissingen and Daan (71), Vlissingen. They were eager to do the interview and to find out more about the ecological footprint. I constructed the interview questions myself, later combining the answers.
Back then, my grandparents didn’t have anything like the ecological footprint we have nowadays. There were no governmental measures and the people were unaware about how their deeds affected the climate. They didn’t recycle because there was nothing to recycle.
Electricity and the heating were provided by the electricity network and the nuclear plant.
They did eat seasonal food, mostly from their gardens. My grandmother didn’t eat a lot of meat because it was quite expensive. My grandfather, on the other hand, ate more, his household was smaller and therefore less food had to be bought.
Most of the time the types of transport my grandparents used were the bike and just walking. Occasionally they used public transport. Once a year they went on holiday.
Also, they were economical at home and didn’t spend that much. Partly because there wasn’t a lot of money.
I asked them if they think their ecological footprint was big in 1960. Both shook their heads. Life was simpler back then, people weren’t as rich as they are now. Next to that, households have shrunk.
My grandparents did the WWF ecological footprint test. First they filled in the answers how it was in 1960. Their result was 46%, which is quite small compared to the average footprint of a British person. Then they did a different test, the Dutch version, about how they live now, in 2018. This one showed how much hectare they used. It turned out my grandparents use 5.47 hectare, which is also smaller than the average: 6.3 hectare.
You can read the full interview below.
Extended interview with two grandparents
Interviewees: Wil (68), Vlissingen and Daan (71), Vlissingen. Grandparents of Lindsay.
First things first. What did your household look like?
Wil: There were six children, father and mother, two canaries as pets
Daan: Father, mother and two children, no pets
A big aspect of your ecological footprint is the use of vehicles. I did the ecological footprint test at WWF and I found out that my percentages were relatively low, except the one about travel. So I was wondering, how did you travel?
Both: Walking or by bike
And what kind of vehicles did you use?
Both: By bike, and a few times with public transport
Nowadays we’re keen on eating wholesome and biological food. Was that also the case back then?
Wil: We didn’t eat a lot of meat because it was too expensive. We ate a lot of fish though and vegetables from our own garden.
Daan: We had a smaller household. We ate seasonal food and also vegetables from our own garden. Very simple compared to nowadays. There was no such thing as vegetarians.
What provided electricity in your home? And heating?
Wil: The electricity network or the plants which were fuelled by coal and oil.
Daan: Yes. We didn’t use gas but wood or coal. There was no central heating.
Were you aware how this might influenced the environment?
Both: Noooooo! The plants used coal, which is not recommended now. The people were quite oblivious.
Did you recycle?
Daan: No, because there was nothing to recycle.
Wil: You had two sets of clothes and one set of clothes for the Sunday. We wore the same clothes until they fell apart.
Did the government encourage this?
Wil: Not in the time we were the same age as you.
Daan: In the seventies, people thought we should do something about the environment.
Were you economical at home or did you spend quite a lot?
Daan: Economical because we didn’t have a lot of money. You could only buy things when you had the money for it. Begging your parents was no option.
Wil: We had pocket money and that was all.
Was there actually something similar like the ecological footprint we have now?
Both: No. Again, no one thought about that.
Did environmental problems occur or did nobody pay attention?
Daan: There was certainly pollution but no one was aware of it. After the second world war, we had nothing. No industries, no houses. A lot of things had to be produced to satisfy the people, new houses, new products. There was a surplus of employment. So yes, a lot of pollution but it was necessary. Now we would’ve considered it as pollution, but life back then had to go on. We were born after the war and we didn’t know better. We started to rebuild our land, not just in the Netherlands but in Europe. In 1960 wages were rising, more and new products, things we didn’t have before that time to satisfy people.
Wil: Yes, new machines like a washing machine.
Daan: We weren’t aware of that, especially not because we were childs. Our parents were busy with working, so they could buy supplies for us. They didn’t enlighten us.
Do you think your ecological footprint was big?
Daan: Our ecological footprint was not that big. In our household, most of it was simple. Because people just had to recover from the damage after the second world war. Then the households were bigger, there were no contraceptives, not a lot of family planning. A friend of us had seventeen brothers and was the youngest of all them. He even had a brother who was almost 20 years older. In Brabant, they were more religious, catholic. Big families had no time and no priority to think about our environment.
Wil: Our parents controlled most of it, they didn’t tell us much about it.
Would you like to do a test about your ecological footprint?
Both: sure
Thank you for your time and answers.
Interviewees: Wil (68), Vlissingen and Daan (71), Vlissingen. Grandparents of Lindsay.
First things first. What did your household look like?
Wil: There were six children, father and mother, two canaries as pets
Daan: Father, mother and two children, no pets
A big aspect of your ecological footprint is the use of vehicles. I did the ecological footprint test at WWF and I found out that my percentages were relatively low, except the one about travel. So I was wondering, how did you travel?
Both: Walking or by bike
And what kind of vehicles did you use?
Both: By bike, and a few times with public transport
Nowadays we’re keen on eating wholesome and biological food. Was that also the case back then?
Wil: We didn’t eat a lot of meat because it was too expensive. We ate a lot of fish though and vegetables from our own garden.
Daan: We had a smaller household. We ate seasonal food and also vegetables from our own garden. Very simple compared to nowadays. There was no such thing as vegetarians.
What provided electricity in your home? And heating?
Wil: The electricity network or the plants which were fuelled by coal and oil.
Daan: Yes. We didn’t use gas but wood or coal. There was no central heating.
Were you aware how this might influenced the environment?
Both: Noooooo! The plants used coal, which is not recommended now. The people were quite oblivious.
Did you recycle?
Daan: No, because there was nothing to recycle.
Wil: You had two sets of clothes and one set of clothes for the Sunday. We wore the same clothes until they fell apart.
Did the government encourage this?
Wil: Not in the time we were the same age as you.
Daan: In the seventies, people thought we should do something about the environment.
Were you economical at home or did you spend quite a lot?
Daan: Economical because we didn’t have a lot of money. You could only buy things when you had the money for it. Begging your parents was no option.
Wil: We had pocket money and that was all.
Was there actually something similar like the ecological footprint we have now?
Both: No. Again, no one thought about that.
Did environmental problems occur or did nobody pay attention?
Daan: There was certainly pollution but no one was aware of it. After the second world war, we had nothing. No industries, no houses. A lot of things had to be produced to satisfy the people, new houses, new products. There was a surplus of employment. So yes, a lot of pollution but it was necessary. Now we would’ve considered it as pollution, but life back then had to go on. We were born after the war and we didn’t know better. We started to rebuild our land, not just in the Netherlands but in Europe. In 1960 wages were rising, more and new products, things we didn’t have before that time to satisfy people.
Wil: Yes, new machines like a washing machine.
Daan: We weren’t aware of that, especially not because we were childs. Our parents were busy with working, so they could buy supplies for us. They didn’t enlighten us.
Do you think your ecological footprint was big?
Daan: Our ecological footprint was not that big. In our household, most of it was simple. Because people just had to recover from the damage after the second world war. Then the households were bigger, there were no contraceptives, not a lot of family planning. A friend of us had seventeen brothers and was the youngest of all them. He even had a brother who was almost 20 years older. In Brabant, they were more religious, catholic. Big families had no time and no priority to think about our environment.
Wil: Our parents controlled most of it, they didn’t tell us much about it.
Would you like to do a test about your ecological footprint?
Both: sure
Thank you for your time and answers.
Conclusion
Mark: Is it possible to reduce your ecological footprint or the ecological footprint of my family by more than 20%? Yes, because after ticking all boxes of energy saving fixtures that are feasible to accomplish, ticking the box of using more public transport by making an realistic estimation of how many times I can use public transport instead of using a car or airplane and ticking all options of recycling I could manage, I was able to cut my ecological footprint in half form 2.54 earths to about 1.25. I was shocked by this result because I didn’t expect that it was feasible to decrease my ecological footprint by so much. Seeing this result I am quite motivated to decrease my ecological footprint and I will try to decrease it as far as I can without extremely changing my lifestyle.
Mark: Is it possible to reduce your ecological footprint or the ecological footprint of my family by more than 20%? Yes, because after ticking all boxes of energy saving fixtures that are feasible to accomplish, ticking the box of using more public transport by making an realistic estimation of how many times I can use public transport instead of using a car or airplane and ticking all options of recycling I could manage, I was able to cut my ecological footprint in half form 2.54 earths to about 1.25. I was shocked by this result because I didn’t expect that it was feasible to decrease my ecological footprint by so much. Seeing this result I am quite motivated to decrease my ecological footprint and I will try to decrease it as far as I can without extremely changing my lifestyle.
Videoconference evaluations
Lindsay: At Wednesday 13 December the first videoconference took place. In the previous economics lessons we prepared questions to ask the Indian counterparts and designed a sign displaying our topic. It was quite fun.
The video conference started at around half past eight in the morning. Miss de Grip gave the introduction and introduced herself, miss Folkerts and miss Spee. The Indian pupils looked impeccable in their red school uniforms and their teachers very colourful.
Although there were some problems with the sound, the communication between us and the Indian kids wasn’t that bad. Sometimes someone had to speak up, but that was all.
Our group was one of the last ones. Therefore some questions we had were already used so we altered ours. We made a plan it which order we we’re going to introduce ourselves and ask questions. First it was my turn, then Yoram, then Mark and last but not least Julia. It was also the order we answered their questions.
To be honest, I wasn’t really excited about the video conference because of the trouble there might be with the communication. I was relieved this wasn’t the case when it was our turn. I discovered it was actually amazing to talk to the Indian people about our summer holiday plans, our favourite holiday and our favourite food.
I noticed their English was way better than ours and I caught a glimpse of what their lives look like. I found myself looking forward to the next video conference, just like the others of my group.
Lindsay: At Tuesday 23 January the second videoconference was held. Because it was the second time we knew how to act and what to expect.
We used the iPad of miss de Grip, which was very kindly, to talk with the Indian pupils. Although we had some difficulties with the sound, they proved to be very creative and came up with the idea to send a text message when they couldn’t hear us or the other way around.
Before the videoconference started our group prepared some questions about the ecological footprint. Our group was one of the last ones again. We spoke with the waterfootprint group, since there is no group from Hiranandani with the same subject was we do. Therefore, we couldn’t use our questions since they were mostly about the ecological footprint and not applicable for the other group. The Indian pupils asked about what we had already done and we told it to them. In return we asked them what their plan of research was. They told us that they had been working on the subquestions but still had to do the interview.
When all the groups were finished, both schools sang a song. The Indian school chose “Havanah” and our school “Lang zal ze leven” (a song we sing at someone’s birthday).
I preferred the first videoconference because we talked more with each other. The second time the amount of time we had was slightly shorter.
Lindsay: At Wednesday 13 December the first videoconference took place. In the previous economics lessons we prepared questions to ask the Indian counterparts and designed a sign displaying our topic. It was quite fun.
The video conference started at around half past eight in the morning. Miss de Grip gave the introduction and introduced herself, miss Folkerts and miss Spee. The Indian pupils looked impeccable in their red school uniforms and their teachers very colourful.
Although there were some problems with the sound, the communication between us and the Indian kids wasn’t that bad. Sometimes someone had to speak up, but that was all.
Our group was one of the last ones. Therefore some questions we had were already used so we altered ours. We made a plan it which order we we’re going to introduce ourselves and ask questions. First it was my turn, then Yoram, then Mark and last but not least Julia. It was also the order we answered their questions.
To be honest, I wasn’t really excited about the video conference because of the trouble there might be with the communication. I was relieved this wasn’t the case when it was our turn. I discovered it was actually amazing to talk to the Indian people about our summer holiday plans, our favourite holiday and our favourite food.
I noticed their English was way better than ours and I caught a glimpse of what their lives look like. I found myself looking forward to the next video conference, just like the others of my group.
Lindsay: At Tuesday 23 January the second videoconference was held. Because it was the second time we knew how to act and what to expect.
We used the iPad of miss de Grip, which was very kindly, to talk with the Indian pupils. Although we had some difficulties with the sound, they proved to be very creative and came up with the idea to send a text message when they couldn’t hear us or the other way around.
Before the videoconference started our group prepared some questions about the ecological footprint. Our group was one of the last ones again. We spoke with the waterfootprint group, since there is no group from Hiranandani with the same subject was we do. Therefore, we couldn’t use our questions since they were mostly about the ecological footprint and not applicable for the other group. The Indian pupils asked about what we had already done and we told it to them. In return we asked them what their plan of research was. They told us that they had been working on the subquestions but still had to do the interview.
When all the groups were finished, both schools sang a song. The Indian school chose “Havanah” and our school “Lang zal ze leven” (a song we sing at someone’s birthday).
I preferred the first videoconference because we talked more with each other. The second time the amount of time we had was slightly shorter.
Reflection
Julia: If I look back on this project, I think we have done quite well. We have finished everything in time and there was clear communication between the four of us. We divided the sub questions over the four of us and we all answered them separately. Also did we all do the test on our ecological footprint ourselves. When we had some time at school to finish the project, we worked together on the lay-out, the main question and we corrected each other’s mistakes. I don’t think there was one aspect in particular we could improve a lot on.
Julia: If I look back on this project, I think we have done quite well. We have finished everything in time and there was clear communication between the four of us. We divided the sub questions over the four of us and we all answered them separately. Also did we all do the test on our ecological footprint ourselves. When we had some time at school to finish the project, we worked together on the lay-out, the main question and we corrected each other’s mistakes. I don’t think there was one aspect in particular we could improve a lot on.
Evidence of communication
Julia: The communication with the Indian groups was not very good, but good enough. We have had a few video conferences, which had some problems, especially with the sound, but we did like to communicate with the Indian student and to get to know them a little bit. I made some screenshots of the whatsapp-chat we have together with the Indian pupils:
Julia: The communication with the Indian groups was not very good, but good enough. We have had a few video conferences, which had some problems, especially with the sound, but we did like to communicate with the Indian student and to get to know them a little bit. I made some screenshots of the whatsapp-chat we have together with the Indian pupils:
Comparison
Julia: In this year, we don’t have a group which has got the same topic as we do: the ecological footprint. I’ve searched through the files of the former year but I couldn’t find another Indian group which had the ecological footprint, and also enough information which we can compare our results with.
Final conclusion
We started this project last year. We thought it would be nice to learn some stuff about India. It turned it was nothing but educational! What we learned was way beyond our expectations. We learned so many new things, including the cultural differences with India, how we influence the environment and how to reduce our ecological footprint. All that information is combined in this report, that you just finished reading.
This project even left us in astonishment: we didn’t know it was feasible to decrease our ecological footprint by so much, without extremely changing the way we live. Yes, it is possible to reduce your ecological footprint or the ecological footprint of your family by more than 20%. Though it might seem difficult, we encourage you to give it a try and to go green!
It was great to have a chance to talk with the Indian pupils, to cooperate with them. We are very grateful for that, it was a new experience for all of us. We’ve never been to India, this is the closest we’ve ever got!
We hope you as reader enjoyed reading this report, learned something from it and are now aware about your ecological footprint and the consequences.
Group 2
Julia, Lindsay, Mark and Yoram
We started this project last year. We thought it would be nice to learn some stuff about India. It turned it was nothing but educational! What we learned was way beyond our expectations. We learned so many new things, including the cultural differences with India, how we influence the environment and how to reduce our ecological footprint. All that information is combined in this report, that you just finished reading.
This project even left us in astonishment: we didn’t know it was feasible to decrease our ecological footprint by so much, without extremely changing the way we live. Yes, it is possible to reduce your ecological footprint or the ecological footprint of your family by more than 20%. Though it might seem difficult, we encourage you to give it a try and to go green!
It was great to have a chance to talk with the Indian pupils, to cooperate with them. We are very grateful for that, it was a new experience for all of us. We’ve never been to India, this is the closest we’ve ever got!
We hope you as reader enjoyed reading this report, learned something from it and are now aware about your ecological footprint and the consequences.
Group 2
Julia, Lindsay, Mark and Yoram