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 27
    More: Ironic, earth hour, Project Syndicate, indoor air pollution, National Grid, electricity, incandescent light bulb  
•       •       •

14480 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»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-03-18 12:28:24 AM  
8 votes:
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 02:48:59 AM  
7 votes:
Unsupported conjecture and a biatchy tone. Clearly this is a source we can trust.
2013-03-18 03:32:45 AM  
3 votes:

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 03:04:46 AM  
3 votes:
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 01:56:21 AM  
3 votes:

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 03:36:49 AM  
2 votes:

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 03:06:26 AM  
2 votes:
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 03:00:02 AM  
2 votes:
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 02:57:48 AM  
2 votes:
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.
jvl
2013-03-18 02:11:07 PM  
1 votes:
Want to save some power? Go BB gun a few streetlights. If it's really so damn important to save electricity, let's be like Flagstaff and eliminate streetlights except in high-crime areas.
2013-03-18 02:09:02 PM  
1 votes:
* No references to show you're causing more pollution by turning off your lights for an hour
* Confusing the point of Earth Hour's increasing-energy-awareness with a-pointless-effort-to-reduce-power
* If we can't solve the energy problems for everyone in the World then we shouldn't even try
* Confusing a waste of effort with a waste of electrical energy
* Promotion of the electrical generating industry

I'm calling it...
farm9.staticflickr.com
2013-03-18 11:25:17 AM  
1 votes:

RabidJade: The heading kind of applies to most publicity stunts that the green types humans do. But lets just ignore common sense because doing something makes us feel special and above others.


FTFY

Seriously, if you're trying to make some wry comment on human nature, great.  If you're seriously trying to point out something specific about "the green types," then all you're really doing is screeching "People who don't agree with me are stupid," which, somewhat ironically, makes you look really, really stupid.
2013-03-18 10:02:21 AM  
1 votes:
The messaging of Earth Hour is so awful, because it lets assholes like this say, "See? Environmentalists are just Luddites!".
2013-03-18 08:39:32 AM  
1 votes:

manimal2878: Translation: only invest in technologies that involve fossil fuels.  I was paid to right this article by an oil company.


Wind-farms: Costly, high maintenance, susceptible to extremes in weather and represent an intermittent supply spike problem when plugged into the national grid. Most studies seem to indicate that these projects are designed from the ground up to farm subsidies, not produce power.

Geothermal provides a more manageable source of energy with the infrastructure cost challenge to overcome unless you happen to be near a major plate boundary... which means some maintenance cost following any tectonic upheaval... which such projects are known to cause... also the the not insignificant environmental risks...

Solar is challenged by weather, storage and delivery, (also intermittent). Not forgetting the energy sink represented by the actual panels, (it could take anywhere up to 9-11 years for a panel to pay back the energy cost raised in its fabrication)

So is it delusional or realistic to look at making more efficient use of the current supply chain?
2013-03-18 08:07:15 AM  
1 votes:

swahnhennessy: The real benefit of Earth Hour is being able to see the stars.


images.wikia.com
2013-03-18 06:02:56 AM  
1 votes:
Tesla is not amused.
http://showdownatunobtainium.com/teslaedison/wp-content/uploads/2012/ 0 7/nikola-tesla-and-his-wardenclyffe-tower-and-laboratory41.jpeg">http ://showdownatunobtainium.com/teslaedison/wp-content/uploads/2012/0 7/nikola-tesla-and-his-wardenclyffe-tower-and-laboratory41.jpeg showdownatunobtainium.com
2013-03-18 04:02:59 AM  
1 votes:

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 03:57:54 AM  
1 votes:

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 03:19:31 AM  
1 votes:

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 03:19:29 AM  
1 votes:

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 03:12:57 AM  
1 votes:

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 03:06:27 AM  
1 votes:
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 02:20:06 AM  
1 votes:

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 02:06:37 AM  
1 votes:

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 01:58:42 AM  
1 votes:

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 01:09:36 AM  
1 votes:
Lomborg is a hack.
2013-03-17 11:43:47 PM  
1 votes:
Whatever.  Results don't matter!  Only what's in our HEARTS
 
Displayed 27 of 27 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report