Review: Human Footprint

I recently happened to see a National Geographic documentary called Human Footprint. This was made in 2008, but this was the first time I saw it, so I decided to write a short review. The main idea of this documentary is to show the impact of an average American on the environment visually. The quantities of products consumed over a year or a lifetime are actually physically laid out in various different configurations. Rather than just using numbers, which often be very abstract to many people, this physical presentation is an effective way to communicate the message. It should be noted that this is essentially a remake of a UK documentary with the same name, narrated by David Tennant, which aired a year earlier.

As with An Inconvenient Truth, the documentary does a relatively good job of laying out the problem, but offers only the same trite and insufficient solutions we have heard many times. American consumption of everything from diapers, to food and clothing, and to energy is laid bare. A fair amount of time is used to discuss electricity use (more than half of which is powered by coal) and the automobile. It is pointed out that Americans have more cars and drive further than anyone else in the world, and that the US consumes a quarter of the world's energy even though they have only five percent of the population.

I think the biggest value of the documentary is that it effectively shows not only that American consumption is very high, but it also compares American consumption and carbon emissions to both European countries and the third world. This is important because it demonstrates that this level of consumption is obviously not necessary for a high quality of life. It also makes clear that the third world is not responsible for the bulk of the problem, though it would have been better if the documentary had also mentioned historical consumption and carbon emissions by the West.

Unfortunately, the documentary doesn't spend much time on the effect of this consumption on the rest of the world, though to be fair, this was not its main focus. Still, without the consequences of the consumption being strongly communicated, viewers might not appreciate the full extent of why such high consumption levels are bad. One segment does use the example of coltan mining to show how our consumption can impact people in the third world. Coltan is a rare mineral required for many electronic devices such as cell phones, and Americans throw out millions of these every year. Eighty percent of it is located in the Congo, and efforts to mine it are causing severe environmental and human consequences.

The documentary is at its weakest when it discusses solutions to these problems. The same tired suggestions are presented: Raise or lower the thermostat in your home by two degrees. Install more efficient light bulbs. Consider a hybrid. We have already known for some time that such minor lifestyle changes, while necessary, are far from sufficient. When it comes to cell phones, the suggestion is simply that we recycle more of them. There is no mention of actually reducing consumption in the first place or of conservation in general, never mind suggesting we modify our transportation infrastructure or switch to alternative energies.

For many people, especially Americans, who aren't aware of how high their consumption is, or what effect it has on the environment, this documentary might serve as a useful introduction. However, despite the elaborate displays, it doesn't seem to take the problem seriously enough, and it completely fails to offer any real concrete solutions that might actually make a difference. I would recommend this documentary only as a starter for those unaware of environmental issues, which should be followed up more serious works.