If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Turning your lights off for "Earth Hour" will actually do more to harm the environment than help it   (slate.com) divider line 136
    More: Ironic, earth hour, Project Syndicate, indoor air pollution, National Grid, electricity, incandescent light bulb  
•       •       •

14477 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Mar 2013 at 2:45 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



136 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-17 11:43:47 PM  
Whatever.  Results don't matter!  Only what's in our HEARTS
 
2013-03-18 12:28:24 AM  
How disingenuous is it to treat what is clearly a publicity stunt as if the purpose of it was to actually cut CO2 emissions in-and-of itself? Also, he ends with saying we shouldn't put more money into wind and solar energies, but should instead fund research into green energy sources that can compete with fossil fuels. What the hell technologies does he think those are without wind and solar? The only ones I can think of are fission (which, after Fukushima, is not going to happen), fusion (which has been 25 years away for 60 years), and tidal (which only works if you have waters with tides). Solar is, ultimately, the most abundant power source we have, so it's all going to boil down to that eventually, might as well get the infrastructure in place now. I greatly dislike people who think that because something isn't solving the problem right now in its entirety it's clearly not worth doing and should be abandoned. Turning off you lights symbolically for an hour to show public support and demand for a more environmentally conscious world won't fix pollution? Terrible waste of time. Solar energy hasn't given us emission free jetpacks? Not worth it. The author just seemed like he wanted to be a greener-than-thou prick.

/rant off
 
2013-03-18 01:09:36 AM  
Lomborg is a hack.
 
2013-03-18 01:47:17 AM  
Candles are fossil fuels?  All of them?  Especially the ones for indoor use?

/er, nope.
 
2013-03-18 01:52:04 AM  
Now that I think about it... the last Earth Hour I went to did have a whole bunch of candles burning...
 
2013-03-18 01:56:21 AM  

deffuse: Candles are fossil fuels?  All of them?  Especially the ones for indoor use?


Most of them are paraffin which is a byproduct of oily refining.  So especially the ones for indoor use.
 
2013-03-18 01:58:42 AM  

DON.MAC: deffuse: Candles are fossil fuels?  All of them?  Especially the ones for indoor use?

Most of them are paraffin which is a byproduct of oily refining.  So especially the ones for indoor use.


Hmm, I thought the indoor ones were wax as paraffin made the greasy black smoke.  Either way, not all candles.
 
2013-03-18 02:06:37 AM  

deffuse: DON.MAC: deffuse: Candles are fossil fuels?  All of them?  Especially the ones for indoor use?

Most of them are paraffin which is a byproduct of oily refining.  So especially the ones for indoor use.

Hmm, I thought the indoor ones were wax as paraffin made the greasy black smoke.  Either way, not all candles.


In 1st world countries, nearly every candle will be made from Paraffin Wax unless you get it from a stall at a craft market.
 
2013-03-18 02:10:06 AM  

DON.MAC: deffuse: DON.MAC: deffuse: Candles are fossil fuels?  All of them?  Especially the ones for indoor use?

Most of them are paraffin which is a byproduct of oily refining.  So especially the ones for indoor use.

Hmm, I thought the indoor ones were wax as paraffin made the greasy black smoke.  Either way, not all candles.

In 1st world countries, nearly every candle will be made from Paraffin Wax unless you get it from a stall at a craft market.


Fair enough.
 
2013-03-18 02:20:06 AM  

deffuse: DON.MAC: deffuse: DON.MAC: deffuse: Candles are fossil fuels?  All of them?  Especially the ones for indoor use?

Most of them are paraffin which is a byproduct of oily refining.  So especially the ones for indoor use.

Hmm, I thought the indoor ones were wax as paraffin made the greasy black smoke.  Either way, not all candles.

In 1st world countries, nearly every candle will be made from Paraffin Wax unless you get it from a stall at a craft market.

Fair enough.


There are two different things called "paraffin oil" one of which is also known as kerosene in some parts of the world.  There are also other uses for the word paraffin in places as well.
 
2013-03-18 02:48:59 AM  
Unsupported conjecture and a biatchy tone. Clearly this is a source we can trust.
 
2013-03-18 02:51:29 AM  
Earth Hour teaches us that tackling global warming is easy.

Well, of course.  It's super easy to tackle a problem that doesn't exist.  Just last week I delayed the Ragnarok by five minutes.
 
2013-03-18 02:51:41 AM  
Remember to not buy any gas on Sunday, too. That'll show those mean oil companies.
 
2013-03-18 02:52:27 AM  
We have enough oil to last forever, practically.
 
2013-03-18 02:55:00 AM  

DON.MAC: In 1st world countries, nearly every candle will be made from Paraffin Wax unless you get it from a stall at a craft market.


Mmm. Bacon tallow candles.
 
2013-03-18 02:57:48 AM  
Heh, i recall when this first started the power companies were saying it might cause power plants to explode. Seems they're still trying to talk people out of causing them less profits for one day.
 
2013-03-18 02:59:01 AM  

7KQ201_McKittrick: We have enough oil to last forever, practically.


Seems to me that fracking may be proof that this isn't true. If we had unlimited oil, why are we using such a complicated maneuver to get more out of the ground?
 
2013-03-18 03:00:02 AM  
So the headline doesn't reflect the article or the facts, and the article is whining and pointless, another pretentious imbecile complaining that anyone else does anything.
 
2013-03-18 03:04:46 AM  
Boy thank god the power company is going to lower production for one hour, instead of letting all that unused energy to waste.
 
2013-03-18 03:06:26 AM  
EH has always been a sham rife with sycophantic,misguided/deluded, do-gooders giving each other the warm-and-fuzzies while achieving zip.

This is news to anyone over the age of 12?
 
2013-03-18 03:06:27 AM  
But the reality is that Earth Hour teaches all the wrong lessens, and it actually increases CO2 emissions.

all the wrong lessens

all the wrong lessens

all the wrong lessens
 
2013-03-18 03:07:09 AM  
How about a "Go to bed an hour early" day?

Actually, since sunrise isn't until 7:30am CST here I'd still need light if I got up early.
 
2013-03-18 03:07:19 AM  

nmrsnr: How disingenuous is it to treat what is clearly a publicity stunt as if the purpose of it was to actually cut CO2 emissions in-and-of itself? Also, he ends with saying we shouldn't put more money into wind and solar energies, but should instead fund research into green energy sources that can compete with fossil fuels. What the hell technologies does he think those are without wind and solar? The only ones I can think of are fission (which, after Fukushima, is not going to happen), fusion (which has been 25 years away for 60 years), and tidal (which only works if you have waters with tides). Solar is, ultimately, the most abundant power source we have, so it's all going to boil down to that eventually, might as well get the infrastructure in place now. I greatly dislike people who think that because something isn't solving the problem right now in its entirety it's clearly not worth doing and should be abandoned. Turning off you lights symbolically for an hour to show public support and demand for a more environmentally conscious world won't fix pollution? Terrible waste of time. Solar energy hasn't given us emission free jetpacks? Not worth it. The author just seemed like he wanted to be a greener-than-thou prick.

/rant off


Fission isn't viable because of tidal waves, but tidal energy isn't viable unless you have tides? Either you do, or do-not, have tides, so either way you have a source of energy.
 
2013-03-18 03:09:26 AM  
Energy will be present so long as there is a sun. I don't mean direct photocells. I mean plants.
 
2013-03-18 03:12:57 AM  

VendorXeno: So the headline doesn't reflect the article or the facts, and the article is whining and pointless, another pretentious imbecile complaining that anyone else does anything.


If you are going to make that kind of claim, it helps to actually RTFA because the headline does reflect the article.
 
2013-03-18 03:14:16 AM  

nmrsnr: What the hell technologies does he think those are without wind and solar?


Biofuels? Lots of options there; cellulose to some type of alcohol, oil from algae, landfill and farm-waste methane, etc.
 
2013-03-18 03:16:10 AM  
Something promoted as beneficial for the environment actually harms it? NO! Never!

/recycling (clean metal recycling conditionally excluded)
//hybrid cars
///CFL light bulbs
////etcetcetcetcetcetc
 
2013-03-18 03:16:38 AM  
Your website still does not know how to properly handle mobile requests; your argument is invalid.
 
2013-03-18 03:17:05 AM  

Yes this is dog: But the reality is that Earth Hour teaches all the wrong lessens, and it actually increases CO2 emissions.

all the wrong lessens

all the wrong lessens

all the wrong lessens


Once was enough.  Good job on destroying the planet with needless triviality.
 
2013-03-18 03:19:29 AM  

nmrsnr: How disingenuous is it to treat what is clearly a publicity stunt as if the purpose of it was to actually cut CO2 emissions in-and-of itself? Also, he ends with saying we shouldn't put more money into wind and solar energies, but should instead fund research into green energy sources that can compete with fossil fuels. What the hell technologies does he think those are without wind and solar? The only ones I can think of are fission (which, after Fukushima, is not going to happen), fusion (which has been 25 years away for 60 years), and tidal (which only works if you have waters with tides). Solar is, ultimately, the most abundant power source we have, so it's all going to boil down to that eventually, might as well get the infrastructure in place now. I greatly dislike people who think that because something isn't solving the problem right now in its entirety it's clearly not worth doing and should be abandoned. Turning off you lights symbolically for an hour to show public support and demand for a more environmentally conscious world won't fix pollution? Terrible waste of time. Solar energy hasn't given us emission free jetpacks? Not worth it. The author just seemed like he wanted to be a greener-than-thou prick.

/rant off


Look up LFTR, been around since the 60's but dropped as it doesn't make Pu...which is the primary reason we use the antiquated and unsafe present nuke systems. Solar and wind are trinkets which will become apparent when we need to replace them as their life expectancy doesn't get much past the quarter century mark. Thorium is a safe and viable solution for all our energy needs, flame on.
 
2013-03-18 03:19:31 AM  

Ivo Shandor: nmrsnr: What the hell technologies does he think those are without wind and solar?

Biofuels? Lots of options there; cellulose to some type of alcohol, oil from algae, landfill and farm-waste methane, etc.


After the third paragraph, the article devolved into an unsupported and completely unfocused rant against green anything the likes of which are regularly seen on Fark. Reading the article did not enlighten, rather quite the opposite.
 
2013-03-18 03:20:34 AM  

Yogimus: Energy will be present so long as there is a sun. I don't mean direct photocells. I mean plants.


Everything is solar-powered...
 
2013-03-18 03:29:29 AM  

VendorXeno: So the headline doesn't reflect the article or the facts, and the article is whining and pointless, another pretentious imbecile complaining that anyone else does anything.


What's his Fark handle?
 
2013-03-18 03:32:45 AM  

J. Frank Parnell: Heh, i recall when this first started the power companies were saying it might cause power plants to explode. Seems they're still trying to talk people out of causing them less profits for one day.


Not really about the profits for one day...
For all of the power that is lowered for one hour, we're forced to shut down units for this single hour and then start them back up. This is typically cycled with something fairly easy such as a gas turbine that is used for quicker response times. Now realize that for every startup of these gas turbines, you've got anywhere from 5-30 minutes of unregulated emissions in order to build the temperatures and pressures necessary to sync this unit online. So for your one hour of emissions savings, I get to spend 15 minutes watching the turbines belt out NOx and CO and CO2 to make you feel better about turning off a lightbulb.

/ymmv
//try doing more throughout the entire year, that's how these things can make a difference. If my daily load reduces, so will my power output and daily emissions with planning.
 
2013-03-18 03:33:45 AM  

nulluspixiusdemonica: Yogimus: Energy will be present so long as there is a sun. I don't mean direct photocells. I mean plants.

Everything is solar-powered...


I always figured there were 4 types of energy.

Fusion
Fission
Gravity
Electrostatic

Everything else is just a derivative of these.
 
2013-03-18 03:36:49 AM  

Msol: Now that I think about it... the last Earth Hour I went to did have a whole bunch of candles burning...


afrikent.files.wordpress.com
North Korea is very environmentally-conscious.
 
2013-03-18 03:47:39 AM  
The heading kind of applies to most publicity stunts that the green types do. But lets just ignore common sense because doing something makes us feel special and above others.
 
2013-03-18 03:57:54 AM  

powerplantgirl: try doing more throughout the entire year, that's how these things can make a difference.


I think that's what it's supposed to be inspiring people to do. And i do, myself. I don't even take part in 'Earth Hour' because i see it as an empty gesture. Like so many things these days. Most people just do something on that day and it makes them feel like they did their part, then go back to the routine. I'd agree that is pointless.
 
2013-03-18 04:02:59 AM  

J. Frank Parnell: powerplantgirl: try doing more throughout the entire year, that's how these things can make a difference.

I think that's what it's supposed to be inspiring people to do. And i do, myself. I don't even take part in 'Earth Hour' because i see it as an empty gesture. Like so many things these days. Most people just do something on that day and it makes them feel like they did their part, then go back to the routine. I'd agree that is pointless.


I totally agree with this, do it all year long and not just for one hour. I was also just trying to say it really doesn't matter about one hour of "lost profits", we're making MORE emissions to cover this one hour of an "earthly gesture"
 
2013-03-18 04:13:43 AM  

Ivo Shandor: nmrsnr: What the hell technologies does he think those are without wind and solar?

Biofuels? Lots of options there; cellulose to some type of alcohol, oil from algae, landfill and farm-waste methane, etc.


and none of that will reduce CO2 emissions cause you need to BURN the fuels to extract the energy potential from them. however Wind, Solar, Geo-Thermal, and now Bio-Thermal energy are clean and truly green alternatives.

article was nothing but a sound good whine piece using bad facts (not really facts) to try and get people to stay the course as we have been for decades. only part of it that is actually correct is that Earth Hour is a pointless feel good gesture
 
2013-03-18 04:15:16 AM  

powerplantgirl: I was also just trying to say it really doesn't matter about one hour of "lost profits", we're making MORE emissions to cover this one hour of an "earthly gesture"


Yeah, i got all that. But i still think the brief drop in paying customers, maybe combined with any costs of cycling things down and up, is what motivates power companies to try and deter people from doing it, rather than a concern for the environment.
 
2013-03-18 04:18:19 AM  
nulluspixiusdemonica: Yogimus: Energy will be present so long as there is a sun. I don't mean direct photocells. I mean plants.

Everything is solar-powered...


Deep-sea life at thermal vents disagrees.
 
2013-03-18 04:18:36 AM  
I love their argument "Using less energy doesn't do anything, so keep using lots of energy!" I also enjoy their claim that renewables can't help.

Pretty much the message is "Don't take any personal responsibility, let someone else act."

That certainly sounds like the New American Way (Let someone else fix things)
 
2013-03-18 04:20:24 AM  
Normally we refer to a pointless, feel-good gesture that does sweet FA about solving an actual problem we say that it's raising awareness. Is that what this is all about? I need to know because when people say they are raising awareness it makes me want to punch them in the head and I'm not clear how to resolve my emotional ambivalence on this one yet.
 
2013-03-18 04:22:01 AM  

J. Frank Parnell: maybe combined with any costs of cycling things down and up, is what motivates power companies to try and deter people from doing it

The tail does not wag the dog. Consumption is not driven by the producer.
 
2013-03-18 04:22:43 AM  

powerplantgirl: If my daily load reduces, so will my power output and daily emissions with planning.


That's what I tell my wife...
 
2013-03-18 04:23:30 AM  

ThreeFootSmurf: Ivo Shandor: nmrsnr: What the hell technologies does he think those are without wind and solar?

Biofuels? Lots of options there; cellulose to some type of alcohol, oil from algae, landfill and farm-waste methane, etc.

and none of that will reduce CO2 emissions cause you need to BURN the fuels to extract the energy potential from them. however Wind, Solar, Geo-Thermal, and now Bio-Thermal energy are clean and truly green alternatives.

article was nothing but a sound good whine piece using bad facts (not really facts) to try and get people to stay the course as we have been for decades. only part of it that is actually correct is that Earth Hour is a pointless feel good gesture


Burning of biomass is carbon neutral.
 
2013-03-18 04:25:16 AM  

ultraholland: Deep-sea life at thermal vents disagrees.


So.. these thermal vents... magic? 

Fissionable material produced by... humping rabbits?

everything is solar powered... not necessarily by the same solar source, sure, but it all starts with the star...
 
2013-03-18 04:31:20 AM  

nulluspixiusdemonica: ultraholland: Deep-sea life at thermal vents disagrees.

So.. these thermal vents... magic? 

Fissionable material produced by... humping rabbits?

everything is solar powered... not necessarily by the same solar source, sure, but it all starts with the star...


You forget gravity. And electrostatic. And that "nature abhors a vacuum" thing.
 
2013-03-18 04:35:13 AM  

MrSteve007: That certainly sounds like the New American Way (Let someone else fix things)


No one takes responsibility and it ends up being the government to take care of things.
 
Displayed 50 of 136 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report