SubscribeEarth Hour 2008
Here’s something for the hippies, wanna-be hippies, and hippie-ish amongst us (I fall into the last group): See the difference you can make - Earth Hour 2008
at 8pm March 29, 2008 millions of people in some of the world’s major capital cities, including Copenhagen, Toronto, Chicago, Melbourne, Brisbane and Tel Aviv will unite and switch off for Earth Hour.
Seriously, all you have to do is turn off the lights for an hour. Better yet, turn off the computer and TV too. Anything that reduces energy consumption is going to be good for pollution and the environment. It’s also good for your pocketbook to use less energy. It’s not going to return our vistas to their pristine beauty, but it’s a small action each of us can take.
If you enjoyed this post, share it on StumbleUpon or Health Ranker (or both!)
- Other Stuff You'll Enjoy:
- What I’m Reading: Lights Out: Sleep, Sugar, and Survival
- How Lack Of Sleep Affects Your Heart
- Go To Bed!
- Just How Tiny Are We?
- TV and Behavior in Children
Posts from 1 year ago:
Fructose-sweetened Beverages Increases Risk Of Diabetes In Rats
Print This Post
Filed in Exploring Nature 14 Comments so far
Terry on 15 Mar 2008 at 10:19 pm #
The only thing turning out the lights will do is make it dark in the room.
John Kim on 15 Mar 2008 at 11:47 pm #
“The only thing turning out the lights will do is make it dark in the room.”
LMFAO!
Scott Kustes on 16 Mar 2008 at 8:24 am #
Quite possibly. So turn off the TV and computer too. Try going outside.
Mike OD - IF Life on 16 Mar 2008 at 12:15 pm #
I’m turning off my lights early…like 3pm…so I can still see and go outside.
Terry on 16 Mar 2008 at 4:33 pm #
Scott Kustes Says: March 16th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Quite possibly. So turn off the TV and computer too. Try going outside
How about you try this: You pay attention to your lights & appliances & I’ll pay attention to mine.
It’s called FREEDOM. Try it, you’ll like it.
Scott Kustes on 16 Mar 2008 at 7:09 pm #
Such hostility. I’m a big fan of freedom. In fact, you’re free to come here or not. If you only have negativity to bring, perhaps not is the better option. Or at least offer something constructive.
Terry on 16 Mar 2008 at 7:57 pm #
I’m simply disagreeing with the ludicrous premise of your post. I don’t think that equates to “hostility”.
Turning off one’s lights is meaningless symbolism that only serves to encourage empty headed lemmings into thinking they are doing some “good”. It is tantamount to a pagananism & nothing more.
Turn your lights out if you must but please don’t think for one second that rational people will follow you into the darkness.
Scott Kustes on 16 Mar 2008 at 8:05 pm #
So what should us “empty headed lemmings” do instead? Obviously small gestures are useless. Is eating locally grown food beneficial? What about reducing energy expenditure overall, not just for one hour? I believe in my post I actually acknowledged that it wasn’t going to do much for returning anything to a previous state, though it could be a small step for someone to get started on actually doing something beneficial.
Perhaps you could enlighten the more moronic amongst us?
FYI…”It’s called FREEDOM. Try it, you’ll like it.” and throwing insults like “empty headed lemmings” and implying irrationality are not exactly non-hostile.
Huckleberry on 17 Mar 2008 at 12:46 am #
It’s an interesting idea. I think the potential benefit of something like an Earth Hour is that it may raise awareness of energy-saving and encourage more people to practice conservation. If a significant number of people participate and then see a striking report of resulting energy saving, they might be more conservation-minded in the future, impressed by the impact of one hour.
On the other hand, it does feel a little gimmicky, and I’m wary of gimmicks. Energy conservation is an important issue and this feels so light in the face of what needs to be done. Also, there are some people who will actually think something along the lines of, “Oh, I participated in that [fill in the one-time event here]; I’ve done my part.” People would rather participate in a single event than make lifestyle changes, and the more one-time events we have, the less we send a message about the importance of long-term lifestyle changes.
Of course, something like this could lead to a larger project, like a bunch of large, conservation-minded cities agreeing to a conservation step for one month (lights off in city government buildings at night?) and measuring the results. I could see that being a beneficial trend.
Scott Kustes on 17 Mar 2008 at 7:35 am #
You got it Huckleberry. That’s my take on it as well. One hour isn’t going to do much of anything, but the idea is to raise awareness of energy conservation and having less of an impact on the planet. Those that would think “Oh, I participated in that [fill in the one-time event here]; I’ve done my part.” are mostly lost causes already. If nothing else, conserving energy conserves money…lower energy bill and in the end, it’s hard to get anyone to do anything that doesn’t directly benefit them. Drive less = less gas = less emissions…double benefit. Reduce energy consumption = lower energy bill…double benefit.
Cheers
Scott
Terry on 17 Mar 2008 at 9:38 am #
Just so you all know — I’m a different Terry.
While I agree that it probably won’t do much, my first thought was how cool it would look from space if enough people did it. That would be a much bigger incentive for me personally, than adding my name to a website just to get recognition.
What will get most people to cut energy expenditure will be the economy. When energy costs become too high compared to income and credit becomes harder to get and use, then people will conserve more.
Freedom is a two way street. Slamming others for attempting to do something possibly beneficial is just being a different kind of lemming and you will have a different cliff to jump over. We all have our cliffs.
BTW Scott I like being able to edit after I post. Seems like the typos never show up until after the post button is clicked.
Migraineur on 17 Mar 2008 at 12:01 pm #
Well, I tend to agree that these one-off gestures are pretty useless, just like having one healthy meal is useless if you spend the rest of your time at the BK lounge. Now, if we all agreed that we’d turn off our lights for an hour <i>every Saturday</i> at 8:00 pm, or that we’d turn our thermostats down two degrees in the winter, or ride our bikes to work one day a week, or even just turn off lights when leaving the room, that might make a difference.
Might I suggest, for the sake of civility, that written language, especially one liners, can be open to misinterpretation? That is, I think the first Terry was essentially attempting to make the same point, in a more concise way, that Huckleberry made. I didn’t see anything so offensive in it.
CB57 on 17 Mar 2008 at 8:17 pm #
This will give the power company a real headache if enough people do it. Imagine the sag and surge of a whole bunch of homes turning off then on their power at exactly the same time.I’m not saying any weak links might break or a ripple effect through the power infrastructure might happen (though it might) but events like this are definitely headaches. About a decade ago, when most Internet access in homes happened through phone lines, I lead a technical team on a marketing campaign during a major sporting event. The campaign included an event that was intended to trigger viewers into using the Internet at the same exact time. The phone company got wind of it and we heard from a VP at the phone company begging us not to do this and then intimating all sorts of dire consequences. The world didn’t end but the phone company was not happy.These types of surge events are highly likely to cause technical difficulties if the system isn’t tuned to deal with it. Another case such as this is the cell phone system in Israel. With every bomb detonation, vast numbers of Israelis call each other. When the bombings first became frequent, the cell phone system would crash. Since then, the technical teams at the cell phone companies have learned how to tune the system to allow surge service without dumping the system. I wonder if the power infrastructure is tuned so.
Symbolism aside, there may be unintended consequences…
Terry on 18 Mar 2008 at 8:51 am #
Scott Kustes Says: March 16th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
“So what should us “empty headed lemmings” do instead?”
Freedom is dependent on the free flow of energy. Energy to drive to your job, fly to your destination, drive to visit your freinds & relatives, heat your home, defend your country.
The world’s most efficient energy sources are Oil & Nuclear power.
Therefore, what we should “do instead” is encourage our legislators (via letters & phone calls) to vote for policies that will encourge energy production (i.e., increase the supply): Driling in ANWAR & the offshore contintental shelf, opening the oil shale fields in the western US & Canada, licensing of new refineries, licensing of nuclear power plants, end the senseless ethanol subsidy.
We have enough energy available to us to keep the lifeblood of freedom flowing for decades as we wait for the next big breakthrough in cheap energy (hydrogen?). To do otherwise is to give up our freedom in constantly increasing dribs & drabs & suffer the resulting econmic catastrophe. No trip to Grandmas (Grandma is saddened), no vacation to Disney (the Orlando area goes into recession), stop flying on airlines (the airline industry collapses), stop driving & buying autos (the auto industry collapses), etc., etc.