Earth Hour 2013

[SebC]

Earth Hour increases CO2 emissions. I guess if you really wanted to "spite the hippies", you'd have to join them!

Hypothetically, switching off the lights for an hour would cut CO2 emissions from power plants around the world. But, even if everyone in the entire world cut all residential lighting, and this translated entirely into CO2 reduction, it would be the equivalent of China pausing its CO2 emissions for less than four minutes. In fact, Earth Hour will cause emissions to increase.

As the United Kingdom’s National Grid operators have found, a small decline in electricity consumption does not translate into less energy being pumped into the grid, and therefore will not reduce emissions. Moreover, during Earth Hour, any significant drop in electricity demand will entail a reduction in CO2 emissions during the hour, but it will be offset by the surge from firing up coal or gas stations to restore electricity supplies afterward.

And the cozy candles that many participants will light, which seem so natural and environmentally friendly, are still fossil fuels—and almost 100 times less efficient than incandescent light bulbs. Using one candle for each switched-off bulb cancels out even the theoretical CO2 reduction; using two candles means that you emit more CO2.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health..._not_less.html

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Oi. It's the same thread each and every year. All the naysayers who don't understand the point. So I'm just not going to bother rehashing everything I've posted in years past and just post the links:

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...9&postcount=22
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...2&postcount=26
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...7&postcount=32
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...5&postcount=34
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...th#post2425876

None of those posts were insanely long or had any huge substance. You probably spent more time searching for those old posts then anything.

[Devils'Advocate]

Posts don't need to be insanely long.

Post #1: Proof that it at least did get some people talking about environmental issues.
Post #2: Dig at the "let my car idle" crowd who think they are being funny
Post #3 is worth posting in it's entirety:

However, how do you get someone to START being more environmentally friendly? I remember fighting the fight for recycling in Halifax and people said that recycling was bad for the environment because people would think they were 'saving the environment' with their token measure. Sure, 1 hour is a token measure, but it could lead to something bigger. It's supposed to be a short time in one's life to reflect on what they could be doing in their everyday lives. I've given my laundry list before of things I have done to reduce my global footprint so I won't bother repeating it (some have said it comes off as self-righteous). But I can say that those who have not started looking at their environmental impact, but started last night with Earth Hour, I harbour them no ill will and am happy that they have taken the first step. And maybe next year they will use cloth bags and reduce water consumption. It's meant as a starting point, not an end-all be-all.

Post #4 - addendum to #3
Post #5 -

Again, we're right back at wanting people to *START* at being willing to dedicate a lot of time and energy to the environment and if that doesn't happen, it's a failure. Life does not work like that. Praxis doesn't start on the extreme. You wean people into it. It's like everything else in life. "Bob needs to lose weight. But he's only walking. If he REALLY cared about losing weight he'd be doing the P90x." That doesn't make sense. You start people slow and they will move progressively towards getting more and more involved.

It's easy to be a cynical naysayer. But nobody seems to be coming up with a better means of creating an onramp for people to take their energy use more seriously and consider ways to conserve. The cynicism and hatred towards the World Wildlife Fund and other environmental groups really is depressing.

Chris Hadfield yesterday:
"Good Morning, Earth! I'll try and photograph people's efforts during Eartrh Hour today. It's our planet, let's each help a bit"

What an asshat that Chris Hadfield is.

[MrMastodonFarm]

You didn't want to rehash anything, so you rehashed everything.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

You didn't want to rehash anything, so you rehashed everything.

Mis-worded that. I don't mind rehashing things. It was RETYPING everything every year that gets annoying. Maybe I'll just create a link for myself and cut/paste again next year....

[You Need a Thneed]

Completely forgot about earth hour, but was watching the Gonzaga game for most of it anyway.

[Azure]

I have no problem with efforts being made to educate the population as to how they can be more environmentally conscious. End result = good.

Earth Hour might do that, but as it has been pointed out, the end result equals MORE emissions. So why are we doing it? Why are people promoting it?

[return to the red]

In other news the City of Lethbridge is spending $7.5 million to upgrade all street lights to LED fixtures resulting in 50% energy savings yearly. It's initiatives like this that make a bigger difference then damn Earth day.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by return to the red

In other news the City of Lethbridge is spending $7.5 million to upgrade all street lights to LED fixtures resulting in 50% energy savings yearly. It's initiatives like this that make a bigger difference then damn Earth day.

Is that a financial win as well as an environmental win? (My guess: it is.)

[Azure]

Well, with the lifespan of LED lights, I'd imagine that over time it will indeed be a financial win as well.

[return to the red]

Originally Posted by SebC

Is that a financial win as well as an environmental win? (My guess: it is.)

oh yes for sure, I have been searching for costs comparisons to see how long it will take to see it in the savings but basically the avg existing bulbs last 5 years where as the LED's last 20 years. Factor in the power savings and I imagine within 10 years, maybe even less you see that money recouped.

I sell Landscape lighting and I have a cool little calculator that shows the cost savings between incandescent lighting vs LED. On low voltage landscape lighting (12v) on a 20 fixture landscape if you factor in the cost of power (avg .11/kwh) used and bulb replacement you see the cost savings recouped within 10 years.

Should mention these are specification grade lighting, $175 per fixture so if you used even less expensive fixtures you would see savings sooner.

[Azure]

And by the time they need to replace them again, LED lights and fixtures will be much cheaper.

[return to the red]

Originally Posted by Azure

And by the time they need to replace them again, LED lights and fixtures will be much cheaper.

They really are coming out with some really cool innovations in LED technology on the 12v side.

We now have a controller/transformer that allows you to individually control each fixture on the same run of wire with dimming capabilities and even turning them on and off. Even more power savings when you can dim a fixture which could be applied to the high voltage stuff to still have some light at dusk and dawn but not be fully illuminated until it was completely dark

http://www.fxl.com/introducing-luxor if anyone is interested in the controller/transformer

[V]

Originally Posted by SebC

Is that a financial win as well as an environmental win? (My guess: it is.)

Yes, most definitely it is, as long as the right luminaires are installed. If you buy cheap garbage you won't see any savings on the operations and maintenance side, in fact you'll have to pay a lot more. Buy good lights and they'll definitely pay for themselves.

We've installed over 13,000 LED streetlights up here in Edmonton, and have seen as much as 65% savings in electrical consumption. In addition to that, the manufacturers provide a 10 year warranty, which in theory means we shouldn't expect to visit that pole for 10 years or more. We relamp the old HPS lights every four years.

So far we've seen some pretty good reliability numbers from our lights, with a 0.07% failure rate for all LED lights installed. They've only been up for two years, but still, that's a pretty good number.

It still blows me away that Calgary hasn't gotten on board with LED streetlights yet. With Edmonton installing 13,000 so far and Lethbridge committed to 4500, with the rest of the city about to be committed, it really surprises me that for such a forward thinking mayor they could be so far behind in this regard.

[V]

Originally Posted by return to the red

They really are coming out with some really cool innovations in LED technology on the 12v side.

We now have a controller/transformer that allows you to individually control each fixture on the same run of wire with dimming capabilities and even turning them on and off. Even more power savings when you can dim a fixture which could be applied to the high voltage stuff to still have some light at dusk and dawn but not be fully illuminated until it was completely dark

http://www.fxl.com/introducing-luxor if anyone is interested in the controller/transformer

We have a system for the LED streetlights that will adaptively control the lighting system from a remote location. It will dim the lights when necessary and it will tell us when a light isn't functioning. It hasn't been implemented past a small pilot stage, but it's going to save a tonne of money in maintenance and energy consumption once it's installed on a grander scale.

[return to the red]

Originally Posted by V

We have a system for the LED streetlights that will adaptively control the lighting system from a remote location. It will dim the lights when necessary and it will tell us when a light isn't functioning. It hasn't been implemented past a small pilot stage, but it's going to save a tonne of money in maintenance and energy consumption once it's installed on a grander scale.

I figured if there was something on the Landscape side there would have to be something on a grander scale. Very cool

I'm interested to know what the standard cost of a bulb is compared to the LED fixture?

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

The cynicism and hatred towards the World Wildlife Fund and other environmental groups really is depressing.

I will never forgive them for making the WWF change their name to the WWE.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Oi. It's the same thread each and every year. All the naysayers who don't understand the point.

It takes a special arrogance to think that disagreeing with a stupid idea is the same as not understanding the idea.

Also, re: your previous posts, people talking about earth hour =/= people talking about environmental issues. Especially when earth hour has no lasting real world impact. It is a waste of time, and likely counter productive as most slactivist causes are.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Completely forgot about earth hour, but was watching the Gonzaga game for most of it anyway.

...and it was lights out for them Saturday night anyway! <rim shot>

[Northendzone]

sigh - this is me (except my SUV is a V8). I would ahve turned the lights off, but I was playing hockey and it is dangerous to play in the dark.

Originally Posted by MarchHare