Earth Hour
March 30th, 2008 by AndySo the day we turned off our lights for an hour has come and gone. So what? Organizers are claiming Earth Hour to be a huge success, as power usage did drop dramatically in several places (5-8% in Toronto, over 10% in Sydney, 100% in the Phillipine city of
Events like this are too good at letting people pat themselves on the back and move on, thinking they’ve done their part. What does it matter if lights were turned off for an hour if people don’t change the way they live? Maybe, MAYBE, some people will be more conscientious about turning their shit off for a few days or even weeks, but the long-term effects of a day like this are nonexistant. At best, a day like this could increase a bit of awareness (but really, you have to be living under a big fucking rock to not know about these problems). However, being told that we can fix our problems so simply may encourage complacency, or at worst, it may provide fuel for the climate-change burnout and backlash that can’t be too far ahead. As Toronto Hydro supervisor John Fletcher said about Earth Hour, when explaining the slow reduction in power usage over the hour combined with the sharp spike at 9p.m., “People will forget to put out the lights … but they won’t forget to put them back on.”
March 31st, 2008 at 4:32 pm
GOOD THING WE ALL BOUGHT GLOW STICKS AND BATTERIES AND DROVE TO OUR EARTH HOUR PARTIES AND FLEW TO OUR EARTH HOUR CONCERT GRUMBLE
March 31st, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Don’t you understand pav? As long as you really BELIEVE in what you’re doing, your actions are irrelevant. Of course we can consume our way to sustainability. Stop raining on our parade, asshole.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Okay, okay….I really, really tried to like earth hour, because I want to believe that people care. Idealistically floating around with the belief that it was vital - not so much in raising awareness but for getting people to physically become involved - I really wanted to argue with you. I was hoping that it would be important because it showed people how much of a difference a small amount of effort can make, but you’re right (you realist bastards) it’s a double (or triple) edged sword. It’s too late for pat on the back “well, I did my part” solutions and because of this, it could even be seen as somewhat of a regression if it encourages people to be environmentally friendly by participating in earth hour once a fucking year. Also, the hydro stats you posted are quite telling.
Having said this, I’m going to take the stance that its good that the ideas and efforts are there, despite the futility or even regressive nature of this specific action, because I’m a naive pussy and I don’t want to fully recognize the extent to which we continue to fuck up. If Toronto really comes through and imposes deposits on more recyclable things like paint cans and batteries, it will be a different story, and the city will become a leader in policy which many others would soon follow. Until then, we’re probably just wallowing in our own crapulence.
March 31st, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Huh, and here I thought I was the only Earth Hour skeptic.
I agree with pretty much everything that’s been said, from the idealistic to the realistic. The thing that bothered me was all the images of people holding burning candles. I’m sure you’d get more light for less pollution if you turned on a single 40 watt bulb (or a 15 watt flourescent!). Maybe this is another one of those situations where the image is stronger than what it took to get there… but all it really says to me is that people didn’t think things through.
Earth Hour DID garner a lot of attention. There’s gotta be SOMETHING positive there. Somewhere.
April 1st, 2008 at 10:47 am
On a similar note, the Star published a story about some “environmentally conscious” youthful types who celebrated the hour with a bonfire in the backyard. Definitely a case of not thinking things through, from the participants who prided themselves on being progressive to the reporter who essentially views a group like that as the “future”. I could dig up the link for you guys but you could also take my word for it.
April 1st, 2008 at 11:34 am
Man.. reading this thread is making me way too cynical. It really does suck how fighting global warming has been romanticized to such a crazy extent that believing that you’re helping is all that’s required these days. The images of candles and bonfires are certainly appealing, and so much of this movement seems to be a less extreme form of primitivism. It’s hard to convince people that urbanity, with all its congestion, concrete, and pollution, is actually way better for the world than a bunch of people “living off the land”.
On a separate note, I haven’t been able to find out how Toronto’s Nathan Phillips Square acoustic concert was powered. I’m guessing gas generators, so as to not draw electricity. Please, someone tell me this was not the case.
April 1st, 2008 at 11:49 am
Naw man, it was fueled by the noble efforts of 14 central american refugees on power generating bicycles.
For some reason I’m especially interested in this “earth hour” business, maybe because regardless of how effective it is, its the first global(ish) recognition of the necessity for change?
Andrew, I’m surprised you haven’t weighed in yet.
April 1st, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Alright.. refugee-power is pretty sweet. And I agree that earth hour really did cause a lot of excitement around the world, which is damn sweet. And while it may be the first grassroots recognition of the need for change, I’m afraid this was just because it was so easy to participate. I don’t know how popular it would be if people had to do something which would affect their lives.
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:19 pm
yeah it’s caused almost as much excitement as Live Earth. Pretty much the same results, too.
I can’t wait for the next awareness campaign to remind me that conservation is awesome.
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:14 am
Christopher - I’m pretty sure a lot of the sustainability buffs end up being Earth Hour skeptics (or at the very best, cautious optimists). I thought the candle thing was hilarious, too - one of my friends mentioned that, and I felt like saying “I wonder what the carbon footprint of a candle is versus a compact fluorescent…” but didn’t care enough to get into it.
Fuck the image, if I’m doing something for a cause, I don’t want some bullshit symbolism.
If it was refugee powered, that would be awesome. What they really need is one of my thesis blimps…which reminds me - I got kicked out of the school for Earth Hour (they closed it from 6:30-10:00, which I guess is good…), but it was kind of ironic since half of us were working on theses that had something to do with energy or sustainability…
Which is also why I haven’t weighed in yet. Because I have been working on the model for that almost every waking moment.
April 4th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Oh, Andy, as for the concert, the chances are high that it was powered by gas generators. Almost all major events like that need to have generators brought in, for whatever reason. I feel like it has something to do with ease of payment, or voltage, or disruption of the grid, or.. I dunno, something dumb. Every TV and movie shoot has to bring its own generators (to the extent that anyone who works in the biz just calls them ‘jennies’) to power lights and whatever else.
Any time there’s a concert or major event happening at BC place (or is it GM place? They’re right next to each other.. anyway) and I’m biking by, there are always a whole bunch of giant tractor trailers in the nearby parking lot. I’m pretty sure they all have generators in them.
(Disgusting, isn’t it?)