Hooray for Earth Hour!

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Well, the data are in. There was no measurable drop in electricity use during Earth Hour. Plus, candles cause more carbon emissions than light bulbs. Not to mention the environmental impact of glow sticks (tubes of hydrocarbon-based plastics filled with toxic chemicals). Overall, it's entirely probable that, through the use of candles and glow sticks, we actually made things worse during Earth Hour.

Way to go guys!

ZV

Since you don't get this, obviously, i'll fill you in with the details of demonstrations, or maybe i won't, look it up on google.

It's real simple, a demonstration isn't meant to make an immediate impact but to influence leaders and provide a point.

If you can't understand how this works, hand in your brain, you've got no use for it.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: sandorski
It's not done to cause some major Environmental Benefit. It's done to remind people of an Issue. By your standard Veterans/Remembrance Day is just as pointless as it doesn't bring back the Dead.

Cause everyone forgets about global warming

Probably not, nor do people forget the dead or veterans.

It's a STATEMENT to show SUPPORT.

I... i really don't know what to say, how the fuck did people get this stupid and when did it start?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: sandorski
It's not done to cause some major Environmental Benefit. It's done to remind people of an Issue. By your standard Veterans/Remembrance Day is just as pointless as it doesn't bring back the Dead.

Cause everyone forgets about global warming

Probably not, nor do people forget the dead or veterans.

It's a STATEMENT to show SUPPORT.

I... i really don't know what to say, how the fuck did people get this stupid and when did it start?

So if I fly a flag on veterans day, but support cutting benefits to veterans.. Thats ok? Because I showed my support? Others have stated this, actions speak louder than words. And consistent actions, not just a 1 hour action, speak every louder than that. Earth hour is retarded. Besides the fact that I didn't even hear about it until after it was over, which means nobody was really getting the word out anyway.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
The backlash against the global warming clerics and enviro-nutters in general can take the form of cynical, spiteful actions that serve no practical purpose other than to inflame.

Earth Hour: Spread the word and give people a chance to pause and reflect on how they can more earth-friendly. OK, fairly harmless... all you'll do is make people wonder what's up your butt by attacking it. The reality is we can all be better stewards of our resources.

If you want to expend some time and energy, I would focus on the extreme groups that are clawing their way into our laws to advance their quack agendas.

Fair enough. Still, I dislike it because I see it get used as a way for people to feel superior ("I participated in Earth Hour, what did you do.") or as a means to assuage guilt over not taking actions in other areas ("I don't need an adjustable thermostat, I participated in Earth Hour"). Stipulated that those are the faults of people rather than of the event itself, but, by and large, the event does not make people "pause and reflect on how they can be more earth-friendly" even if that was the original intent.

I still think that the time and effort expended on this event would have been put to better use elsewhere, though the media coverage would have been less.

ZV

 

[Pocatello]

I grilled up some hamburger and steaks with my charcoal grill instead of cooking using electricity, I did a good thing .

 

[KentState]

The only thing that Earth Hour demonstrated to me was that in typical fashion, we realize that we may have a problem, but can not offer a solution. Great, we turn off the lights for another, but replace it with something else harmful like burning a candle. We build a Prius, but create hundreds of thousands of batteries that have to be dealt with. That's fine, we can always recylcle the battery, but how much energy was put into this entire process and how much waste did we create. Many years back, it only made sense to line the walls of our schools and homes with asbestos to prevent fire. Now we know that it can cause cancer and is expensive to remove. I wonder how much of these changes and proposals will come back to bite us in 50 years.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: KentState
The only thing that Earth Hour demonstrated to me was that in typical fashion, we realize that we may have a problem, but can not offer a solution. Great, we turn off the lights for another, but replace it with something else harmful like burning a candle. We build a Prius, but create hundreds of thousands of batteries that have to be dealt with. That's fine, we can always recylcle the battery, but how much energy was put into this entire process and how much waste did we create. Many years back, it only made sense to line the walls of our schools and homes with asbestos to prevent fire. Now we know that it can cause cancer and is expensive to remove. I wonder how much of these changes and proposals will come back to bite us in 50 years.

Some might, but will they be worse? Maybe. If we want to maintain our standard of Living, there are going to be problems, change or no change. The bigger problem is that we must change to maintain that standard of Living. Becoming paralyzed by fear of the upcoming problems is the same as choosing to give up.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

The logical fallacy that I pointed out in your own previous post was that you chose to discount the validity of an observation on human nature (namely, that people like others to know about the good they do anonymously) simply because of the person from which the observation came. It's the basic form of ad hominem. The observation has nothing to do with global warming whatsoever.

ZV

Forget it, you're dealing with Democrats in P&N. They're emotionally driven animals with no sense of logic.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: sandorski
It's not done to cause some major Environmental Benefit. It's done to remind people of an Issue. By your standard Veterans/Remembrance Day is just as pointless as it doesn't bring back the Dead.

Veterans/Remembrance Day doesn't make things worse, which Earth Hour very likely did. Burning candles and using glow sticks for Earth Hour celebrations is like throwing rocks at soldiers for Veterans Day celebrations. It goes against the whole point.

ZV

kinda pushing it with that analogy there. so does anyone who use candles hate the environment now?

 

[DealMonkey]

This has got to be the stupidest thread I've seen in a while. So let me get this straight:

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Well, the data are in. There was no measurable drop in electricity use during Earth Hour.
ZV

First, you pronounce that there was no measurable drop during Earth Hour. Meaning, you studied the "data" and found that nowhere on the planet was there a drop in electricity.

So I call your BS with data from Wikipedia that demonstrates there were plenty of regions on the planet where the electricity usage dropped because of Earth Hour. So in response to that, you show that NY and CA didn't experience an appreciable drop in usage, and again claim that you "fact checked."

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

California and NY energy usage graphs. No exceptional declines, just normal late-night drop-off.

Oops, guess I did fact check.

ZV

I can't be the only one asking "WTF?!?"

NY and CA represents data for the entire planet now? Come on, Z. Get real. You didn't fact check jack shit. You posted up your little ignorant rant and now you're backpedaling.

Lame. :thumbsdown:

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
This has got to be the stupidest thread I've seen in a while. So let me get this straight:

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Well, the data are in. There was no measurable drop in electricity use during Earth Hour.
ZV

First, you pronounce that there was no measurable drop during Earth Hour. Meaning, you studied the "data" and found that nowhere on the planet was there a drop in electricity.

So I call your BS with data from Wikipedia that demonstrates there were plenty of regions on the planet where the electricity usage dropped because of Earth Hour. So in response to that, you show that NY and CA didn't experience an appreciable drop in usage, and again claim that you "fact checked."

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

California and NY energy usage graphs. No exceptional declines, just normal late-night drop-off.

Oops, guess I did fact check.

ZV

I can't be the only one asking "WTF?!?"

NY and CA represents data for the entire planet now? Come on, Z. Get real. You didn't fact check jack shit. You posted up your little ignorant rant and now you're backpedaling.

Lame. :thumbsdown:

Yes, your wikipedia "proof".

- A decline in India that was caused by a sharp decline in temperature.
- A usage drop in Toronto that is conspicuously not compared to the normal usage falloff that occurs at that time of night every other day.
- A difference between a projection and the actual use in Sweden that is no larger than might normally be expected given the fact that projections are notoriously inaccurate.
- A note from Vietnam that "demand fell" but no note over whether that is different from the normal demand falloff at night (note that the graphs I linked also showed demand "falling", but that was only the normal decline in demand as night approaches).
- A purely calculated "savings" in Ireland that is not based on actual energy usage data, but simply on an estimate of how much energy those light bulbs would have used had they been on.

There is precious little empirical evidence to suggest that there was any meaningful decline in energy use during Earth Hour. All of the "proof" you provided is only "proof" if one falls into the common delusion that correlation implies causation.

ZV

 

[WelshBloke]

It didnt make me happy

I was at work (hospital) and tried to do my bit :thumbsup:

Apparantly I'm not welcome in the ICU any more

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
This has got to be the stupidest thread I've seen in a while. So let me get this straight:

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Well, the data are in. There was no measurable drop in electricity use during Earth Hour.
ZV

First, you pronounce that there was no measurable drop during Earth Hour. Meaning, you studied the "data" and found that nowhere on the planet was there a drop in electricity.

So I call your BS with data from Wikipedia that demonstrates there were plenty of regions on the planet where the electricity usage dropped because of Earth Hour. So in response to that, you show that NY and CA didn't experience an appreciable drop in usage, and again claim that you "fact checked."

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

California and NY energy usage graphs. No exceptional declines, just normal late-night drop-off.

Oops, guess I did fact check.

ZV

I can't be the only one asking "WTF?!?"

NY and CA represents data for the entire planet now? Come on, Z. Get real. You didn't fact check jack shit. You posted up your little ignorant rant and now you're backpedaling.

Lame. :thumbsdown:

Yes, your wikipedia "proof".

- A decline in India that was caused by a sharp decline in temperature.
- A usage drop in Toronto that is conspicuously not compared to the normal usage falloff that occurs at that time of night every other day.
- A difference between a projection and the actual use in Sweden that is no larger than might normally be expected given the fact that projections are notoriously inaccurate.
- A note from Vietnam that "demand fell" but no note over whether that is different from the normal demand falloff at night (note that the graphs I linked also showed demand "falling", but that was only the normal decline in demand as night approaches).
- A purely calculated "savings" in Ireland that is not based on actual energy usage data, but simply on an estimate of how much energy those light bulbs would have used had they been on.

There is precious little empirical evidence to suggest that there was any meaningful decline in energy use during Earth Hour. All of the "proof" you provided is only "proof" if one falls into the common delusion that correlation implies causation.

ZV

I'd also note that the pro-earth hour folks should make up their minds which point they're arguing. Was the intent to (a) save energy in a mass collaborated effort? Or to (b) not necessarily save energy but make a visible worldwide statement for the leaders to pick up on?

Generally most people in this thread have agreed that the goal was B. However, as long as you have people arguing about whether A was effective (or was supposed to be, or was represented accurately, or etc.) I think you've partially failed in the success of goal B.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: WelshBloke
It didnt make me happy

I was at work (hospital) and tried to do my bit :thumbsup:

Apparantly I'm not welcome in the ICU any more

You, sir, have won the thread. :thumbsup: :laugh:

ZV

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Yes, your wikipedia "proof".

- A decline in India that was caused by a sharp decline in temperature.
- A usage drop in Toronto that is conspicuously not compared to the normal usage falloff that occurs at that time of night every other day.
- A difference between a projection and the actual use in Sweden that is no larger than might normally be expected given the fact that projections are notoriously inaccurate.
- A note from Vietnam that "demand fell" but no note over whether that is different from the normal demand falloff at night (note that the graphs I linked also showed demand "falling", but that was only the normal decline in demand as night approaches).
- A purely calculated "savings" in Ireland that is not based on actual energy usage data, but simply on an estimate of how much energy those light bulbs would have used had they been on.

There is precious little empirical evidence to suggest that there was any meaningful decline in energy use during Earth Hour. All of the "proof" you provided is only "proof" if one falls into the common delusion that correlation implies causation.

ZV

Rant against Wikipedia all you want, which I never called "proof" by the way, but you've still failed to prove anything. Your data from NY and CA does not begin to represent data from a global effort.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
I'd also note that the pro-earth hour folks should make up their minds which point they're arguing. Was the intent to (a) save energy in a mass collaborated effort? Or to (b) not necessarily save energy but make a visible worldwide statement for the leaders to pick up on?

Generally most people in this thread have agreed that the goal was B. However, as long as you have people arguing about whether A was effective (or was supposed to be, or was represented accurately, or etc.) I think you've partially failed in the success of goal B.

http://www.earthhour.org/home/

It's fairly obvious after about five seconds of reviewing the site, that the stated reason is to raise awareness ... a show of hands, if you will, who is in favor of doing something about global warming.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: WelshBloke
It didnt make me happy

I was at work (hospital) and tried to do my bit :thumbsup:

Apparantly I'm not welcome in the ICU any more

You, sir, have won the thread. :thumbsup: :laugh:

ZV

this :laugh:

 

[RKDaley]

Originally posted by: WelshBloke
It didnt make me happy

I was at work (hospital) and tried to do my bit :thumbsup:

Apparantly I'm not welcome in the ICU any more

LOL

 

[Capt Caveman]

You created a topic about it, so it appears to have done it's purpose - Raise Awareness.