A few days ago, my eight-year-old grandson Liam initiated a conversation about the future. He asked if there would be any cars next year and why food will cost so much. I offered the optimistic view, that there would be cars but they would be less environmentally destructive and that backyard and community gardens not only help reduce food cost, but are also environmentally compatible.

He was worried that changes were happening too quickly, not that there shouldn’t be change.

I don’t think he has to worry. Change on the environmental front seems kind of glacial. Still, I took some hope from news this week that a majority of Canadians believe governments shouldn’t back off efforts to improve the environment just because we’re in recession.

Not that we should expect government to move quickly on anything. Or that governments should carry the burden of fixing what many believe we’ve messed up. Individuals working harder at changing their consumptive habits will likely have the largest effect.

Like governments, I’m probably as guilty as anyone of talking a good game, but slow to act. I can accept that I use a car too much and resolve to walk and ride a bike more. Government can facilitate that by making a city more user-friendly to pedestrians and cyclists and less car-focused. Governments can lead, but often need a push.

 The local government’s visioning exercise continues this fall, asking what we’d like the city to be in 2050. It’s a simple and noble exercise, but doesn’t hint at immediate action.

We’ve been hearing for the past 15 or so years about our individual and collective ecological footprint. It’s kind a buzz phrase, suggesting we are each aware of our impact on the environment and that the Earth can’t sustain our North American lifestyles.

The city’s website refers to the footprint, listed under the Office of Environmental Services. I tried to call the office, but no one at City Hall was aware of it and I was passed on to Infrastructure Services. City numbers in the phone book list Horseshoe Pitches and Filming Inquiries, but no Environment.

When I continued my search, I found an online quiz. Not surprisingly, my lifestyle, based on answers to 27 questions about my home, power and food consumption, transportation, water and energy conservation habits and consumption of goods is not environmentally sustainable. In fact, if everyone on Earth lived like I do, we’d need the resources of 4.9 Earths.

And I thought I was making progress. But, I continue to grumble about packaging that comes home with the stuff we buy. Even though we try to buy less and recycle lots, I can do more with less, as governments have been known to ask of us.  I can turn off my computer instead of letting it sleep. And, since energy consumption habits account for about half the ecological footprint, one day, we’ll have one vehicle instead of two.

And much more. Or less.

We can all get involved in discussing a city 40 years away. But if we want to see noticeable change sooner, we’ll have to take more steps ourselves to reduce our footprints, I’m guessing.