E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Saeed Khan / AFP - Getty Images
Seen here before and during Earth Hour last year, the Patronas Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, are among the hundreds of buildings around the world that go lights out for the annual event.
Earth Hour, the annual event that turns off lights as a statement for cleaner energy, marks its fifth year this Saturday. But a free-market think tank is trying to get some traction with its alternative: the Human Achievement Hour, when people are encouraged to leave lights on to show their appreciation for inventions "and the recognition that future solutions require individual freedom not government coercion."
In one corner is the conservation group WWF, which helped start Earth Hour in 2007 and expects that landmarks that will participate this year will include the Empire State Building, the Eiffel Tower, the Leaning Tower of Pisa and the world's tallest building, the Burj Khalifa in Dubai.
In the other corner is the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which isn't expecting to match Earth Hour's reach but aims to make a point when they battle from 8:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. this Saturday in time zones around the globe.
"Gather with friends in the warmth of a heated home, watch television, take a hot shower, drink a beer, call a loved one on the phone, or listen to music," the institute says on its website.
"If you’re going to vote you need at least two choices," says Michelle Minton, the Competitive Enterprise Institute fellow who came up with HAH in 2009. "While I believe that a lot of people celebrating Earth Hour truly just want a clean and healthy environment for themselves and their families -- a completely reasonable opinion, which I share -- I felt their support was being used by the environmentalist movement to spread a message that is much less positive."
"Many environmentalists see humans as fundamentally destructive and want to force individuals to conserve," she adds. "Earth Hour is an attempt to convince lawmakers that the majority of the population wants them to clamp down on progress."
As for the numbers, Minton figures "between 1,000-2,000 people knowingly celebrate Human Achievement Hour." The HAH Facebook page had nearly 200 people signed up as of Thursday afternoon.
About 60 people watched an in-house party during the hour last year, Minton says, and the event will be live streamed again this year.
Earth Hour, for its part, says it has commitments in 135 countries -- and one International Space Station.
"Earth Hour will extend to the International Space Station for the first time," the organizers said in a statement. "Astronaut and WWF ambassador Andre Kuipers will experience Earth Hour watching over the planet for the the European Space Agency."
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
I suggest a compromise. Energy-saving lights on. The worst of both worlds.
But leaving your lights on doesn't fulfill the daily hipster quota :(
I'll compromise, I'm ignoring them both!
With whoever concocted this "Human Achievement Hour", it's clear that the lights are on but nobody's home.
Hi y'all, I know this is important...not like that FORMER tea party spoksman that just had the charges against him dropped...seems the woman made it all up. Hey where is sharpton on this...oops forgot, its not a black woman falsy charging him with rape. oh well, back to the really important stuff...lights on or off. dipshyts
I sorta like the "take a bath with a friend", however my wife might object if I invited Tempest Storm over.
Good grief......where is the sequel ? Like "turn the lights on".
Trust a Right-Wing Nut Job to turn a voluntary event into some way to promote for-profit 'human achievement'.
Hey, RWNJ, look at this way - most governments REQUIRE you to light public spaces. The Human Achievement Hour is only complying with what governments REQUIRE everyone to do. You won't be celebrating human achievement - you will only be complying with government regulations.
Gotta love it ...
lights were invented become people were tired of living in the dark but all those environmental cases are determined that we all go back to living in caves.
modern inventions came into being because society wanted something better. -indoor toilets, running water, warm in winter, cool in summer. the pooers that be just want to use "we are stealing from mother earth" excuse to control the masses.
to put another spin on using energy.... politicians in their mansions certainly used up waaaaaay more electricity than a person in the projects...and yet these same politicians want everyone to be equal but like in a certain tome called animal farm..."that some animals are more equal than others"
...and it was demonstrated in communist countries were everyone had to give up ease and live with little or nothing for the good of all, except the few in power who lived with all the comforts of life.
Uh huh. Sure. Whatever you say.
A person (or corporate person) voluntarily exercising their right to Liberty (free choice) is socialist.
You know, no one cares if you cram a lump of coal up your backside and light it off. So exercise your liberty and go for it.
I will go lights on, and tv and computer. since I am considered an earth hater by those who are using all of the inventions to get people to sit in the dark.
If they want to live in the dark let them! nobody is making them live in the city or eat food or use anything that has been invented it is their choice.
I believe in what used to be conservationism. use the earth but don't completely destroy it. now environMENTALists . claim that we will end they earth if we walk on it. a bunch of baloney.
The Competitive Enterprise are right wing nuts that measure progress in dollars and cents rather than in human terms. Why not learn how to do more with less and truly be competitive rather than pretending that we can keep doing what we're doing forever and ever and expect that the earth will cooperate. This is right-wing propaganda at its worst. Conserving energy is just common sense. Why do conservatives hate conserving so much anyway. Besides, if every individual would conserve a little voluntarily, government intervention would not be required.
I turn off all my lights for at least eight hours every night.
Big boys don't need night lights ...
It's become a tradition in my household to turn off nonessential power in the house. I like candlelight. Any way, whats an hour without it? I live the other way the rest of the year, except while sleeping. Bunch of cry babies.
Conserving energy is not common sense. It's frustrating to see people so convinced of "something so obviously right" but are completely wrong.
You want to protect the earth, yet when our sun runs out of fuel, our earth will be destroyed anyways. USE ENERGY to solve our problems - energy being one of them. It is absolutely freakin rediculous we are not using energy from gravity, bouancy, light (no, not solar), and reassignment. If you stopped wasting time and money with BS, and just put it towards science, we'd already have more solutions than we'd know what to do with.
Solar and Wind are like a toddler asking for a band aid. Forget the obvious stuff. Ask yourself what will mankind need in a hundred millions years. Wind power? No. Ask yourself, and then drive at the solution.
If you knew anything about energy, you'd know it is all there is. Reassignment. That is the key.
Just what kind of Nut Jobs come up with these ideas. It is not like the lights are from natural gas or that type of fuel. Any moron who belives that you actuall save power by shutting off your lights is just that Igornant. Electricity is produced by large generators and it really dosn't matter wether your actually using it or not it is produced and it can not be saved for use at a later time. In order for these nut job ideas to work you would have to actually shut down the power plants. SO MY VOTE IS TO USE WHATS BEING PRODUCED AND FORGET THE NONSENCE. As far as Nerm and his following regulations issue most places turn off non essential power to save on their bill. Laws don't say you have to light public spaces 24 hours a day only when normally in use. Get your facts straight then get your lump of coal and do what you have stated a desire to do with it. To say big boys don't need night lights is a missnomer Big boys work late into the night with their big toys and require lots of lights look at any highway construction project at night.
Gene, again, an event like this is not actually about "saving energy" during that hour. Its about raising awareness to saving energy in general.
As for what nut jobs do these things, I would like to point out that even the UN in New York participated. As well as major landmarks in cities all over the world.
HAH for me!!
Stop picking on lighting like its the boogey man of energy waste. Lighting does more per watt to create safe and enjoyable human experiences than any other design element. It can make terrible interior and exterior environments look good, make good ones look fantastic - and make great ones look terrible if illuminated poorly. Making everything go dark really says nothing and achieves nothing more than a publicity stunt that simply takes advantage of the low hanging fruit of light fixtures.
You sound like the 'Hank Hill' of lighting sales.......
It's a global thumbs up regarding the environment, that's why they wait until it's dark...... Duh!
Mike...so can paint & a window !
Nobody's is "picking on lighting." People need to grow a thicker skin. Think of it as a moment of silence and respect for getting back to basics. Good lord, it's just an hour and it's voluntary. This whole anti-Earth Hour thing is a sour-grapes crock. God forbid people should think for themselves!
Lights suck, you can't see the night sky full of stars in a city.
Trust.....so? You can't see antelope play in the city either. Go to the mountains, or beach, or rural farms and see all the stars you want. In the city people don't want to walk down dark streets surrounded by dark alleys and foreboding buildings. That's the nature of urban living in this world where people are crammed together. i'm a lighting designer (not a salesman) so it's my job to use it to better the human condition - not stand by and let people lump the use of light as being "wasteful". If there's a benefit, it's not "wasted". Plunging skylines and streets in to darkness accomplishes nothing but a press release and crapily lit buildings.
deleting a double post...
Mike N -
I appreciate what you can do with lighting. I used to use that as the "low-hanging fruit" just because it's so @!$%#ing easy to do.
Change a T12 to a T8 (or even a T5) and immediately see your energy bill decline. Even better, change your T8s to LED, and see the light portion of your energy bill drop to near nothing. Not only that, but stop replacing every 5 years and start replacing every 25 instead. It's picked on simply because it's the easiest. The technology is there, the resources are there, and they are already very cost effective.
I focused primarily on air-conditioning myself. My old company would cut AC bills for some places by 25% or more, depending on how horribly they were run and maintained before we got in there. I've done more to save energy on this planet than most people, even more than a lot of people who try to save energy for a living. It takes a lot of work, but it's worth it, especially if you consider how artificially low the price of energy is and how precariously maintained that low is. Something's gonna give in the future, when the real costs of energy are determined by environmental impact as well as subsidy removal.
Also, who the hell are these idiots trying to fool? Oh, wait, I guess there are a lot of idiots out there who will hear this and think "duh, sounds good, we need to celebrate our human achievement, duh." Like we don't do that every other @!$%#ing hour of every @!$%#ing day. This isn't even for a day, it's for an hour. It's like all those people who ask, "Where's White History Month?" whenever February rolls around. Where's White History Month? Around here, we call that March through January.
Stand up and pay attention. You have plenty of other times to go out and enjoy the fruits of our collective minds, like electriciy, lighting, air conditioning, buildings, etc. Why do you have to take this hour, too? Celebrating human achievement? Bah, just another way of saying, "Nothing to see here, move along."
Damn Mike...really?! The Earth Hour is not meant by any stretch of the imagination to place energy waste blame solely on lighting... nor is it villifing your beloved lighting. The turning off of lights during that hour is a clearly visible symbol of the recognition that we all understand that we need to conserve energy.
Seriously, do you really not understand that or are you just trolling? I would have never thought that anyone would object to something like Earth Hour but along comes some nutcase that sees it as an attack on invention and entrepreneurs and another one that sees it as an attack on good ole lighting in general. Wow...wow
If you really want people to believe you understand conservation please have the power company shut off your power and live what you want people to believe. Shutting off lights for an hour doesn't equate to showing power conservation it tell me you are part of a blind group trying to convince people you believe in conservation but not willing to act on that belief.
gene, get a clue. Its about Awareness. Do you tell people at cancer walks that they are not doing anything? No. Because they are using one day to come together to raise awareness. Just like this group comes together to get major cities to participate in a "lights out" hour.
And whats the big deal? its not like you are being hurt in any way.
Just another one of those "who cares" moments that simply won't accomplish anything other than make people say "who cares!".
I care.
Perfect comment Jim! The only people who will partake in earth hour are already tree huggers. Those that partake in anti-earth hour (like me) do so just to irritate the tree huggers. The rest (i.e. vast majority of people) have been hearing the doom and gloom from the eco-nuts for decades, already know we should save energy, and probably already have done some small things themselves.
The eco-WWF is an evil organization who made the real WWF (i.e. the wrestling guys) give up their famous logo. Down with the eco-WWF!!!! (not really, I just find it funny that they wasted their time to do that, what will all the planet to save and all.)
Why does this have to be a competition or a "vote"? We could all turn the lights out for an hour in support of our own points of view. It could be an environmental statement for some or a reminder of the technology that gives us our modern lifestyle.
agree. No offense but I bet 96% of the population hasn't even heard of this....so I guess those "keep the lights on!" folks are going to win by all accounts right?...It's silly. I'm interested to know how much money would be saved by this global intentional blackout. Whatever the amount is that they calcuated those "lights on" folks can donate to cancer technology research or something that's actually going to beneift SOMEONE.
A few more people than that have heard of this...Reno has dimmed its lights for the hour, and from a vantage point outside the city, the desert sky is gorgeous without the neon skyglow. You could say my family celebrates both -- our lighting is solar-powered, and we leave a few on to "celebrate" TRUE human accomplishment -- developing tech to utilize solar and wind power are great accomplishments, and may in the end (a hundred years from now, when the oil is gone???) be our greatest lifesaver -- but we usually leave most off in solidarity with environmental goals, go outside, and enjoy the sky.
Not to mention the fact that since most people have NO IDEA about Earth Hour, they will leave their lights on anyway. What a nice way for the conservatives to claim victory - "Look! 95% of people left their lights on! The people have spoken! Down with environmentalism!"
I would absolutely LOVE a special day to celebrate human achievements. But is turning on all our electrical devices how we should do that? "Gee, honey - humans have done so many great things. Landing on the moon, curing small pox, and my personal favorite, the movable type printing press. Let's celebrate by taking down the power grid and demonstrating our complete lack of concern for the future!"
Turning off the lights on Earth Hour is not anti-human. Quite the contrary - it celebrates human achievement by saying to each other that we're going to take responsibility for our future so we can continue our great history of achievement and advancement. Conservation and renewable energy, which Earth Hour advocates, would be a BRILLIANT human achievement.
Great post, revel. I try to get the greatest gift-silence-every day at some point. I am noise sensitive and going out in my woods with nothing but the birds singing is my greatest relief.
While I do like the idea of Earth Hour, and I do see that there is a choice to ignore both the Earth Hour and Human Achievement Hour. None the less, again, like typical humans we have such a "black or white" view of life. No wonder we have so many problems. Ideas are either "good or bad." Rarely is there consideration of a moderate path or middle ground.
Most of us would do well to consider for ourselves what is "truth" and stop letting everyone else control what we do and think.
Sharktopussie -
Wow. So totally META. I mean, you just blew my mind. Can I buy some pot from you?
Or, you know, stay on the topic at hand. Besides, you can whine about "truth" all you want, but the real truth is that we're harming the environment through current practices of inefficient energy conversion, lighting, air conditioning, etc., and it would be best if we could all take a step back and find better ways to do it.
Sharktopussie - If there is an attitude toward truth that is the source of all our problems, as you suggest, I think it may be yours. Sure - there are plenty of issues where a middle path is the best way to go. This capitalism vs. socialism thing, for example. The most successful states in the world today are social democracies - governments that employ elements of both with a pragmatic eye toward doing whatever it takes to get the optimal results.
But not every issue can be answered by splitting the difference. Some issues ARE black and white. There is such a thing as truth. Not "my" truth and "your" truth, just TRUTH. Some questions are points of fact with correct and incorrect answers. And just because there are two sides to every issue, doesn't mean that both sides are equally correct or equally deserving of respect and consideration.
The climate crisis is one such issue. It really is happening. It really is caused by human activity. It's a set of facts, well established, not open for debate. Nothing frustrates me more than seeing a nobel prize winning scientist on a cable news show being forced to "debate" a poli-sci major from a coal industry think tank, while the anchor moderates as if there were two legitimate sides to this question. There aren't. As one famous politician once said (Patrick Moynihan?), "You are entitled to your own opinion. You are NOT entitled to your own facts." If Earth Hour does anything to raise awareness on this issue, I consider it well worth my time and effort.
Hey, stupid people, go turn on faux nooz and wallow in the uninformed...
The problem with innovation and achievement is that no matter how noble it may start out it is a profit oriented company that will bring it to market. Companies don't care about the environment or using up the earth's resources. Corporations exist to generate profits and are mostly oriented toward short term profits. We need powerful governments to regulate corporations.
The land, sea and air are becoming more polluted and toxic every day.
Yea, 'cuz governments are run by omniscient, angelic philosopher-kings who would absolutely, positively, never in a million years, seek to lord and increase their power at the expense of individual liberty.
/sarc
Armando
First he didn't say anything like you're stating. Second, if governments aren't keeping corporations in check, what will? Other corporations? HA! That will only lower the bar as to what they can get away with. Putting a corporation in charge of anything will cost us our freedom, our rights, our property, and our lives.
"The land, sea and air are becoming more polluted and toxic every day." As are most governments.
Alverant, please explain that statement! I don't trust govt or corps totally, they both have their problems. Govt spends without care, Corp watches every dollar and is willing to skimp on safety to make another buck. IMHO we need them to work together to achieve what is best, as decided by the voter/consumers. I've never seen a corporation take away our freedoms, rights or properties - but I have seen govts do that. And they have both cost lives.
Who said anything about putting a corporation in charge of everything? All I'm saying that that governments, like corporations, are run by human beings...fallible, petty, power-hungry, and greedy human beings.
C'mon, don't tell me you're comfortable with Bush's and Obama's cronyism and attacks on civil liberties.
This proves to me that the Fundamentalist Reconstructionist and the Tea Baggers feel they have to challenge anything under the sun that even appears to be an attack on their Filthy Rich Billionare and Trillionare Friends in Big Oil and Big Coal.
Shame on the Competitive Enterprise Institute Shame on them to the Nth Degree!!!
And thats my Opinion.
Armando - I hate to break this to you, but this really is an either/or proposition. Someone will have control of things. And it's not going to be individuals like you and me. (Russia tried that in 1917. It didn't work.) Maybe things will be different in the future, but for right now, we have to choose -- Do you want your life and your future in the hands of corporations? No? Then you need government.
And to PittDeacon - whatever corporations have NOT done to make a buck, they've only been prevented from doing by government. A corporation exists for one reason only - to make profit. It is not a person, with morals and self restraint. It is a machine. And it will eat you alive if it boosts the bottom line. Yes - governments are full of problems. But I submit to you that the chief problem of goverment is its infiltration by corporate money. If you've got a fox in the henhouse, the solution is not to tear down the henhouse and give your chickens to the foxes. The solution is to fix the henhouse. We don't need less government, we need better government.
I scoped out Competitive Enterprise Institute's site, checking first who they are, then followed a couple referenced links.
Well, technically there's nothing new about Wall Street, Big Oil, and the Heartland Institute having yet another Institute and website to persue their agenda. However, to foster off the idea of instant gradification and the 'me-me-me' mindset as being altuistic is a bit insulting to those who appreciate all the wonders of science, but do not feel compelled to flaunt their uses so carelessly as to 'use' them to take a side in some global warming debate.
This is just another poorly vailed 'shop now, save never' attempt to undermind conservation.
Would someone please let me know how this turns out? At my age, I can't stay up late at night any more. I guess that makes me the real conservationist around here.
Have them shut off all the lights in Las Vegas for an hour and I might take notice. Otherwise, (shrugs), ehhh...
Actually... on the strip WE DO turn our lights off for an hour. (at least the lights that wont compromise guest safety) I work in the IT Department of a Las Vegas Strip hotel and our corporate office has jumped on the "green" band wagon and are constantly cramming the environmentalist agenda down all our throats.
We also get boxes free energy saver light bulbs from time to time. I have so many of them stockpiled at home that I will never need to buy a light bulb again. (Or perhaps I could extract the mercury and start a thermometer factory...)
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/mar/23/las-vegas-strip-casinos-mark-earth-hour-saturday-n/
Well shut my mouth and call me Betty. Sorry man, I did not realize they did that.
why do people have to hate any time someone tries to make a difference in the world?
Wahhhhhh, they're MAKING me use less energy!!! Waaaaaaaahhh, I don't want to be environmentally friendly!!! wahhhhhH! I don't care about my children's future! I'm going to turn on all of my lights to spite them!
Seriously. Grow up Redwizardoo.
Some people have the mentality of Hey there is enough to last my life time so why should I care
People trying to make a difference can do it with out taking away good things. but you want to go back to livining in the dawn to dusk life of the caveman ages.
Why is it that energy saving lights are so environmentally bad. and very expensive also. why does Obama and environMENTALists want to shut down oil when there is no replacement.
Its not about taking away anything. Its about being aware of what you are consuming.
The home energy saving bulbs have Mercury in them I do believe. There are no longer incandescent bulbs for general home use being made.
I like the LED's, especially the ones that can change color.
Little costly but cool!
going down in price quickly. I just priced out some full range, DMX controlled, LED strips, cost has dropped in the last couple years. from about $1000 to $800 a foot, which is pretty significant if you're buying a lot of them.
doesn't it make more sense to turn lights off to support appreciation for inventions? People usually don't appreciate what they have until they loose it.
I'd like to see most cities cut way back on their lighting causing so much light pollution. If they could cut back just 20% and hopefully more, we'd see more stars and people would start spending more time outside looking at our incredible sky. Peaking interest in stargazing would get more people out into all hours of the night in places all over which would counteract the fear of the threat of more crime due to everything not being as bright as daylight all the time. Newer security cameras also don't need to have anywhere as much light as the old ones did, so we be just as safe and nights may even be a little more romantic again.
You sure about that?
mike-464493. I'm sorry but you don't see black bears strolling around urban environments either. Making urban environments feel uninviting at best and dangerous at worst is not a worthwhile price to pay to see stars. I can go to the farm fields, or mountains or beaches, and see them all night long, but when I'm in the city I want to see a safe and inviting nightscape.
Armando - nice cut and paste hack job from Wikipedia.
Perhaps a little context with your comment would have helped. What you posted refers to the NYC blackout of 1977.... I doubt anyone is advocating going completely dark, but, rather, cutting back on unnecessary lighting.
And FYI - NYC had two other blackouts (1965 and 2003) that did not result in such widespread looting and mayhem. '77 was an aberration.
This "greed is good" faction is really out of control. This is such a harmless and voluntary event and somehow they've even managed to make it about taking away people's liberties.
These people are pretty revolting. They just don't seem to get that their right to do as they choose ends where my(or anyone elses) nose begins.
Greed is such a tacky loathsome trait. What has ever become of noblesse oblige?
There are ways to light the streets and back allies for safety AND keep the sky dark. All it takes is 'shades' over the tops of the lights, but, again, that adds cost and they often are not too attractive. Now if the lighting designer who wrote above (and made some excellent points about the asthetic value and safety of lighting) would concentrate on lighting the sidewalks, etc., while attractively shielding the sky, we could walk safely AND see the stars..... see, there is a win/win solution.
This is true of a lot of problems. There are ways to enjoy modern conveniences, entertainment, etc. while conserving energy. We all have to live on this planet and, hopefully, share with the other creatures. And, of course, we would all hope there would be something left for future generations.
So, let's stop arguing about whether we should be forced to conserve, just do a little every day and it will add up to tremendous savings of resources and YOUR money in the long run. This discussion does not have to be political. Have a great day, go outside and enjoy watching Spring arrive! (Pick up a little trash, make your space a little more beautiful, it's good exercise, too!)
Mary is right. Using properly shielded lighting that isn't any brighter than necessary saves energy, improves the view of the night sky (both inside and outside the city itself due to less "stray" light), reduces bird and other wildlife deaths, and may even improve your sleep and your health. For private property security, consider using lights on motion sensors rather than having lights on all night.
Mary - Luckily most lighting designers, both theatrical and architectural, are favoring LED's, and the LED industry is booming, so his argument is really somewhat invalid, because not one of those designers in their right mind will argue for standard incandescents.
LED (light emitting diode) gives off a more intense clear light and the colored ones are more true color and they last longer using less power.
Good points about LEDs, but it's still important to have shielding (of exterior lights) so as not to light up the night sky directly. With shielding, only light reflected off the ground (typically about 20%) goes up into the sky.
LED gives a straight forward light, not much goes side to side unless a "bowel like fixture was used with LED going up the side to give a side to side light. Cover the area between posts. At this time it would be very expensive for an LED fixture for that purpose. That's why a bulb in a fixture works for it gives light off the entire bulb 360 degrees. An LED though would have less glare.
Nah, roc, a simple lens fixes that problem :-)
Where you would have light shining in a 180 radius? Wouldn't that cut down on the brightness of the light?
Yea, a wider lens decreases the intensity, but LED's are easily in the 100-200 lumen output range right now.
Reason I ask was a last summer a small town near by (I live in one also) got with a couple of other small towns and bought and installed two LED street lights. Very expensive but overall cost effective in long run. Kind of a joint project. They installed them side by side and then the people from the other towns could check them out. Low glare, nice bright direct light but the side to side lighting was a little weak. Left a little "grey" area between lights was the complaint. Still all up for consideration tho.
I suppose thats partially due to how close the lights are together and such. What the beam spread is on the lens.
Lots of factors could go into why there was that grey area.
They just took two existing street lights and changed them out to LED. I'm sure as with other technology there have been a lot of change in almost a year. It hasn't been dropped yet totally from consideration. I spoke last night with a council member and they are waiting to see new designs and costs etc.
Earth Hour is a statement of the human movement. I celebrate technology and the power we have to create solutions to the environmental challenges of seven billion plus people all needing energy. America has always been the land of big dreams and solutions. Holding on to dirty power is a call for the decline of this great nation's historical drive for greatness, and ultimately the decline of the nation. We are better than this as a people. Turn your lights out for an hour as a message to yourself and others. Then turn them on, look around at the technology that has been created by humans, and celebrate the ability we have to change the world in a positive way for ourselves, our children, and our descendants.
It easy to find a$$holes in America. Too easy. They should rename it "A$$hole Achievement Hour". Then finding the a$$holes will take even less energy.
What I think is most amusing about Earth Hour is its pointless nature, because as soon as you turn around and turn those lights back on, you've just eaten up the power you would have used leaving them on, ESPECIALLY if you turn on devices like the TV or a computer. Me personally, nature and I have a hate hate relationship, so I'd be more likely to sit outside during earth hour, spraying cans of aerosol into the air while running 6 generators and an old Cadillac
Sucking down quarter pound cheeseburgers from McDonalds in the old fashioned non-biodegradable styrofoam containers, no doubt..... ;)
Are you sure you go outside?
And again there are some who just dont care!
Lights on for mans achievement and spirit.
Oh come on! I love human achievements as much, and more, than the next guy. There's nothing more beautiful and inspiring than a mega city skyline, especially at night. But this think thank's claim that this is an "election" is laughably false. It's not an "either-or" proposition! Let's have earth day every year at this time and human achievement hour every fall, exactly six monts from now. It's fitting since human achievement has allowed us to survive, and thrive, during cold winters.
This is a cheap PR stunt in poor taste.
We would nothing without cheap and plentiful energy. No modern medical care without electricity and plastics from petroleum. No way of keeping food refrigerated and safe from spoiling without electricity. No modern sanitation without electricity. More people would die from cold and heat without cheap and plentiful electricity for central heat and air.
There are those that would like nothing better than to send mankind but to the days of suffering and disease by ending use of the fabulous gift of coal, gas and oil that the Earth provides for our use. Coal is compacted plant material. It is nothing more than stored solar energy from when the Earth had much more CO2 in the air than it does now. Plants were able to grow faster and stronger with those higher levels of CO2. Oil from the compacted marine creatures that also thrived when CO2 levels were higher. They lived and died and then were transformed into oil for our use. The oceans were teeming with life when CO2 levels were higher but now the cry is that the ocean has too much CO2.
Enjoy the incredible gifts we have been given and are able to use. The plant life on Earth with benefit from the increase of CO2. Plants grow stronger and faster with more CO2. Plants also become more drought tolerant and more water efficient with more CO2. A new study shows that rain forests benefit from more CO2 and can grow with less water.
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2012/03/22/tropical-forests-rejoice/
Dream on.
Oh... My... Goodness... are you kidding me? I'm not an environmental nut by any means... I love my paper and my car gets 20MPG on a good day... but this is just reckless ignorance. Plants benefit from higher CO2 levels? As an agrument to continue pumping CO2 in to the atmosphere? Really?
Ok, plants need CO2, and logically some plants may grow better with more of it in the atmosphere. I will give you that. But what you fail to realize is that not only are we pumping more and more CO2 in to the atmosphere every second. But we're also destroying plant life on this planet at record rates. The rain forests you quote are being destroyed, they're practically extinct in some places where they used to be prevalent. Various types of polution are killing plant life on land and in the water. What people always fail to realize is that in history when CO2 levels have been very high there has never been a species on the planet that 1. Destory all of the plant life around it and 2. Burns massive amounts of fossil fuels that release even more CO2 in to the atmosphere. There are no historical models we have to refer to in this instance... we're in new territory here.
So, while your argument is logical, and makes sense on a very basic level... The question you really need to ask yourself is: What happens when there is more CO2 in the atmosphere then at any point in recent geological history, and there are fewer plants to absorb it than at any time in recent geological history? The answer is it accumulates in the atmosphere and reflect heat that would typically escape to space back to the Earth's surface. Hence, global warming.
Spent jet fuel and car exhaust are not plants but contribute to CO2 in the atmosphere.
There is not enough arable land to grow all the plants you refer to in order to provide energy for 7+ billion people, and the wait of millions of years for those plants to breakdown into more energy is not practical for our needs now.
That could be why fossil fuels are referred to as finite resources.
name like that ur name must be GEORGE BUSH
Did they say Earth Hour vs. Human Achievement Hour on the same date/day/hour?It should not be allowed,if only to keep people from irrational bickering over something that's not worth the stress,whether fighting for or against either of the two.Democracy let's us do things freely,so it's up to all participants to choose to turn the lights on or off on each of it's designated date/day/hour.My suggestion is,why not do HAH on a winter day and Eart Hour on a summer day?Ever heard of the word compromise?
Their intent is to make a mockery of Earth Hour, period.
It makes me laugh to read the self-serving, wasteful, mockery that is the CEI campaign. Sure, tell everyone that because this stuff exists they should abuse it by making a point to over-use them. The point of Earth Hour is largely to make people aware that they can and should conserve in every way they can. Does CEI really think that everything is hunky-dory and we should not be concerned for our environment? If so, get your collective head out of the sand, CEI. You're part of the problem when you should be a huge part of the solution.
Why don't they have EH on January 8th? Then maybe the econuts could understand what a wonderful world we live in with cheap energy. CO2 is good for our agricultural production. You know. All that food you drive miles to get at the wasteful fast food joint as you sit in the drive through waiting with your car emitting all that green plant food.
I laugh at people that turn off their lights on Earth day but then text and surf the web on their computer telling everyone how "green" they are. Ride a bicycle for a week everywhere you go. Turn off your refrigerator for a month. Then you can be "proud" of "saving the earth." Otherwise you're just another hypocrite trying to show people how "green" you are.
The joke is on you because all those evil businesses make your life better everyday. Are you using a computer? Thank a business. Are you eating fruit regularly. Thank a transportation company. Are you getting to work on roads, then thank a company that uses petroleum products. Do you have relatives needing medical assistance, Thank an evil health company. Do you have a job? Thank an evil millionaire that is willing to pay you some money instead of just hoarding it for themselves.
I will celebrate itby renting some "search lights"!
Every hour of every day is "Human Achievement Hour". Just turn off the lights, take a deep breath and take a break from all this mighty achieving that we are doing.
I going to celebrate "letting my lightswitch decide" hour.
It seems like I'll be safe either way.
I believe this would be an oxymoron! Are they really the pompous asses they appear to be? Shall we pretend that we aren't in the worst Depression in history? This sounds like a 1%'r call to me to pretend millions aren't suffering right along with our environment. I refer to them as the 'Earth is Flat' crowd. Their ignorance of the definition of 'free market' is astounding. Paris Hilton mentality coupled with Bush Jr. brains.
Our ancestors would have given their right arm to 'suffer' as we do today with our cable TV, cell phones, bottled water & 20 extra pounds of fat around our bellies. Yea human achievement! I do however believe that HAH is a silly concept and hope to never hear of it again.
OWS has no clue about the "free market". Ask them how wealth is created and you'll get some crazy answers. I don't know whether to blame the degree in Art History or the pot.
The USA doesn't exactly have a very free market. Companies are heavily taxed (On this Sunday, the USA will be #1 in corporate taxes in the entire world). The government then gives tax breaks to some, subsidies to others. That's not a free market.
Heavy regulation tends to keep competition out of the marketplace so there will just be a couple of giant companies running the show.
...
I'm going to call Earth Day "North Korea Appreciation Hour".
So, how many have you gone and asked? ;-)
One time. I don't like being around dirty, stinking losers. They smelled horrible.
I'm sure at one point in my life I smelled that bad myself. But that was after a couple weeks of living in the desert in Iraq. That first shower was really nice... when I went to change into clean clothing I made the mistake of smelling my old clothing (which I didn't notice stunk prior to the shower). That was a mistake.
Anyway, they couldn't give legitimate responses to my questions. But I'll cut them slack because it was obvious many of them were really high. I guess I should have approached them at noon instead of 4:25, eh?
Tip to all: If you don't know the answer to a question, just say "I don't know."
So you have asked one person and got a cray response. Ok. You should really be honest then when you make statements about all people being crazy or not knowing what is going on because "one" is not "all."
As far as smelling bad, well, that just happens. Humans are naturally fairly smelly creatures, and if they are living in tents, yea they'll smell bad.
Again, by "they" you mean "the single person I asked" And by "obvious many were high" you mean "I am trying to use some sort of prejudice that I'm hoping you will jump in on in order to justify my terrible arguments"
We can't be in a serious recession/depression. The President and his wife (part of the 1%) take a vacation every other week. Who is hurt most by high gas prices? The government or the poor? The poor. What has the president said is his deepest desire? To increase gas prices to $10 a gallon USD. God save the poor, because the president sure doesn't want to help them.
Considering their vacation days are far less than Bush's, I highly doubt that. You can feel free to provide a source though.
Source and context?