Earth Hour has come and gone in California (8:30 to 9:30 PM PDT) for 2010 without so much as a blip. In fact the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) power usage graph looks much like last year when there was also no discernible difference.
Using the graph provided by CAISO, here’s what Earth Hour 2010 looked like in California, can you spot where everybody turned off their lights?
FYI CAISO says on the graph page that: Sudden spikes in resource curve graph may indicate false data briefly reported by system
Here’s what Earth Hour in California looked like in 2009:
Note the the drop in power you see just prior to Earth Hour is normal. As proof, have a look at the Sunday after Earth Hour from last year:
Some said last year that Earth Hour made a difference. Well Treehugger doesn’t know how to read the graph, and assumes the drop they saw was not business as usual. See that little blip around 0700 on all three graphs? That’s the signature of streetlights all around California automatically shutting off because the photocells get enough light:
From the NOAA sunrise/sunset calculator, San Francisco sunrise on March 27th is: 7:02AM PDT. In Southern California, Los Angeles has a sunrise time of 6:47AM, which is why the “streetlights off” power drop is gradual for about 30 minutes starting before 0700 on the graphs.
If there was a big effect from Earth Hour, you’d see a step event like the street lights at 7AM as everybody turned off their home lights in California at 8:30PM (2030). Plus, the greens don’t seem to realize that no power plants get switched off, so there’s really no CO2 savings. The power plants are run based on demand forecast. Short term spikes from well intentioned stunts really don’t make a blip of difference to CO2 emissions.
Earth Hour is a failure in California and according to Richard North at the EU Referendum, a failure in Britain too.
Feel free to post any power use graphs from other parts of the world in comments.
From commenter Bahumbug in the previous thread:
Here is a wonderful short article by Ross McKitrick regards Earth Hour via Donna Laframboise at nofrakkingconsensus
“The whole mentality around Earth Hour demonizes electricity. I cannot do that, instead I celebrate it and all that it has provided for humanity…. It invites people to become sanctimonious do-gooders by turning off trivial appliances for a trivial amount of time, in service of some ill-understood abstract concept of “the Earth,” all the while hypocritically retaining the real benefits of electricity.
…….
I don’t want to go back to nature. Haiti just went back to nature. For humans, living in “Nature” meant a short life span marked by violence, disease and ignorance. People who work to end poverty and disease are fighting against nature. I hope they leave their lights on.
……
…through the use of pollution control technology and advanced engineering, our air quality has dramatically improved since the 1960s despite the expansion of industry and the power supply. If, after all this, we are going to take the view that the remaining air emissions outweigh all the benefits of electricity, and that we ought to be shamed into sitting in darkness for an hour, like naughty children who have been caught doing something bad, then we are setting up unspoiled nature as an absolute, transcendent ideal that obliterates all other ethical and humane obligations. No thanks. I like visiting nature but I don’t want to live there, and I refuse to accept the idea that civilization is something to be ashamed of.
Ross McKitrick
Full article in pdf (single page) here
WWF would be better off preaching year round energy conservation than publicity stunts, but unfortunately publicity stunts are what wow the gullible and fill the till.
Just ignore them and they will go away.
As much as I don’t buy into the whole thing, it is nice to have a dark sky. Too many people spend too much time indoors staring at the tele or the computer and not looking up to the sky. Too many hours spent wasting time at the screen and not enough time outdoors breathing some fresh air.
Earth Hour – organized by WWF; figures.
It’s a symbolic feel-good gesture, more form than substance. They’re not interested in facts, just publicity and guilt inducement.
Womder how folks would feel if they knew that the group hiding behind that cute little panda is just another big business, acquiring non-productive assets and using them as profit engines harnessed to guilt.
But wait..Wasn’t the purpous to reduce CO2? http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/World/Story/STIStory_507641.html. To me it seems like a lot of candles and fire acrobats does the opposite?
Enlightment seems needed more than ever.
Someone said: “A difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has it’s limitations.”
The people who did turn out their lights (undetectable number per the graphs/pics) must have previously taken the blue pill. “You take the blue pill – the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe.” They seriously believe, apparently, the ideas that are the basis for earth hour. I am not cynical enough yet to think they were all hypocrites.
Watts is the antidote for the people who took the blue pill. Go WUWT
Apologies to ‘The Matrix’.
John
If people really cut all their power usage for an hour – there would be looting and riots.
Those people participating in earth hour remind me of the people at the top of a skyscraper in the move Independence Day yelling and screaming “welcome” to the aliens, just prior to being exterminated. Stupid is as stupid does.
Loony is a good word. It really just about sums it all up. I notice on the news this morning that many “right-on” UK councils are naming roads and streets after the current AGW frenzy – “Eco Way” being one. Well, I live on Sceptic Street….
One of the most dangerous man-made devices present in almost every home and office is the electical outlet. It takes less than an Earth Hour to get warm if you stick a metal knife into a toaster, or if a child sticks a wire into a wall socket (as I did when 4). I raise this to demostarate peculiarities in human risk aversion. People who were genuinely frightened for the future of their loved ones woulf shun electricity to the home. They would do this in preference to the plastic approach of earth Hour social engineering. The reason they act this irrational way is because they are stupid enough to respond to years of thought conditioning.
The original poster as well as Philip t. Downman have not understood the purpose of Earth Hour:
– the purpose is not to achieve reduced electricity consumption for one hour each year (hence the ‘ineffective’ statement in the original header is incorrect)
– the purpose is not to reduce CO2 emissions for one hour each year (hence Philip T. Downman’s statement is incorrect)
What do you expect to see? Your graphs have a Y axis in units of 1000 of megawatts. Take a lesson from temperature anomoly graphs and the use of the microscope. You need milliwatts ((1/1000W) for the Y axis. Then you’d spot the kettle in San Francisco being turned off ;>)
REPLY: Actually, no, then the noise level would be so high you couldn’t spot anything individually. thousands of devices are being switched on/off every second- A
The significance of Earth Hour is that it’s a most effective and a very dirty propaganda tool comparable with the “torch marches of the Brown Shirts”:
it’s pushed by the political establishment to soften people up for policy measures and price hikes and it creates the false idea that Climate policies have massive public support. The event would not have the publicity and impact in terms of propaganda if the lights of famous land marks like the Eiffel Tower, Big Ben etc. did not go out in the presence of the “green”crowds and the tv camera’s.
The wide publicity, the meetings and events, the promotion of the AGW hoax and the brainwashing of our kids.
Earth Hour is cleverly exploited in schools.
The kids have their projects how to save energy (at home) and the schooling material is all about AGW propaganda WWF style.
Earth Hour does not make a dent in the energy use but as a propaganda tool it is most effective. With hour kids that is.
Only for this dirty aspect it should be forbidden!
The irony is that on Saturdays many people leave their homes for the evening and the use of domestic power drops consequentially.
Hey jerryb. I’m kinda with you on that. Mind you, Gixxergirl and I were booked at a swanky restaurant that night and she had to ring up and check in case they’d be turning the lights out. (Gixxergirl foresaw swearing and ‘a scene’.) Turns out the guys describe themselves as ‘activists’ and they turned the lights up. The grill, too, if the duck was anything to go by.
Anthony,
Spain is the best example of how to commemorate Earth Hour: By consuming the most in the day! The maximum energy consumption was at 9:05PM! Energy rising from 8:30 PM till 9:20 PM. I’ve put the graph data for Spain at http://ecotretas.blogspot.com/2010/03/dia-da-terra-em-espanha.html
Ecotretas
Hi all,
Here is a link where you can have the French daily electricity consumption, in real time.
It seems the Earth Hour had no impact, even if they switch off the Tour Eiffel!
http://www.rte-france.com/fr/developpement-durable/maitriser-sa-consommation-electrique/la-consommation-en-temps-reel
I live in regional New South Wales Australia and went for a drive at 9 pm. As far as I could tell everybody was doing what they always do: watching TV with lights on.
I then drove into town and found the same: lights on and people watching TV. As well the security lights on the Catholic church were on and the town’s bowling club was ablaze with lights.
Yet today’s MSM are crowing that Earth Hour was a success! Maybe it was in the cities. Dunno.
The piece from Ross McKitrick is absolutely spot on.
And if we weren’t all diverting our intellectual energy and financial resources into this ridiculous and pointless alarmist hoax, how much good could we do in the world?
Just imagine if all the money being poured just into the construction of useless windmills in the UK alone (over £100,000,000,000 in the next decade) was instead used to provide reliable, affordable energy in Africa (not to mention in the UK!).
How many lives saved? How many lifted out of poverty? How much hope granted?
If all the greenies had an ounce of humanity – and common sense – they would be deeply ashamed.
You have to understand one aspect in regards to events like this “Earth Hour” fiasco. It’s not about lowering carbon emissions, Earth Hour is about “feeling” like you have made a contribution. Earth Hour participation is showing everybody else that you “care” more that they do. Earth Hour participation is bona-fide proof positive that he participant is “Right Minded” and “Progressive” and generally smarter than the people that do not participate.
Facts are immaterial to these people. There’s a lady at our church that has single handedly banned the use of styrofoam cups at the church. The fact that there are four seperate microbes that have been found to metabolize styrofoam and are regularly “seeded” into landfills in order to reduce styrofoam is immaterial to this woman. It’s all about whining and crying. The fact that all that is left of a three thousand year old Greek or Roman shipwreck is the porcelan cargo is immaterial and that the porcelean “Green” coffee cup that she insists that everyone use is not biodegradable and that the styrofoam cup is. The fact that you can have several hundred biodegradable styrofoam coffee cups for the power requirement needed to machine (or even hand wash) a dishwasher full of coffee cups is immaterial.
This “Green” mentality, like liberalism/progressivism is more akin to a severe mental disorder than a political ideology.
I know that the subject is off topic but if what the enviro-mentalists were telling us about plastics were to be true then by now you’d be able to walk from New York to London on a ten foot thick mat of plastic trash floating on the water of the Atlantic Ocean.
In California, there was a call a long time ago for consumers to conserve. And we obliged them. Time and again, they asked, and Californians anwered the call.
Left our of those requests were Big Business and Utility.
They don’t march to anyone’s drumbeat, green or otherwise.
Examine those graphs, and note the median usage.
See the lowest usage in the wee hours that accounts for roughly 80% of daily demand?
That’s how much is either hardwired or the result of late-night commerical/industrial activity.
Good luck making a meaningful difference in consumption with a puny Earth Hour.
HOT TIP:
Go to the CAISO site and run 03/12/2010 through 03/16/2010 and check out the huge savings due to Daylight Saving Time that began on the 14th or March.
One massive exercise in futility.
DST is a Dinosaur.
Inquiring minds have figured out that reversing the march of Entropy requires energy INPUT, not subtraction.
My favorite Earth Hour was in Toronto. The organizers ran a concert for the faithful of the Church of Global Warming. I took the electric subway to the city hall. There the bands were trucked in with all there audio and lighting equipment. There was a concert before and after the powerless hour. I am sure the nuclear reactors were generating a fraction of the CO2 they usually put out.
jerryb (23:21:00) :
As much as I don’t buy into the whole thing, it is nice to have a dark sky.
They could turn off the electricity here all night long and the sky wouldn’t get dark.
Too many flares burning the waste gas off the oil wells…
” jerryb (23:21:00) :
As much as I don’t buy into the whole thing, it is nice to have a dark sky. Too many people spend too much time indoors staring at the tele or the computer and not looking up to the sky. Too many hours spent wasting time at the screen and not enough time outdoors breathing some fresh air.”
Jerry, The real problem is… too many do gooders worrying about how much time I’ve decided to watch television or sit at my computer. You go out an stargaze. It turns out that I stargaze too…
Thanks for your concern, but what I do is really none of your business,
Mike Bryant
Last night I commented on a blog about the obvious dangers of campaigns like Earth Hour. Unfortunately the risk of accidents and even deaths is no longer just a risk.
http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/artikkeli/Mies+kuoli+moottoripy%C3%B6r%C3%A4n+alle+pimeystempauksen+piment%C3%A4m%C3%A4ll%C3%A4+tiell%C3%A4/1135255005911
A very clumsy translation (sorry):
A man born in 1939 died late on Saturday in an accident in Uusikaupunki when a 17-year-old woman hit him with a motorcycle.
The road was slippery and the lights were turned off because of the Earth Hour campaign organized by WWF.
The motorcyclist hadn’t seen the pedestrian before the impact. There was a path for pedestrians running along the road, but for an unknown reason the man was walking on the road instead.
The motorcyclist had a valid licence. Police alcotest indicated zero promilles. Speeding is not suspected.
There was also a passenger on the motorcycle. Neither of the persons riding the motorcycle were injured.
Looking at all these power generation charts over the past 24 hours, it’s striking that on average over the course of a day, the available megawatts exceed the expected usage by an average of 40% or so. The greatest gains in energy efficiency would seem to come from tightening that gap (without, of course, running into brownouts). You’d think the power companies would be all over that, since it would save them tons of money.
Out walking the Springer at 8:30 last night, nothing doing in La Grande,
Or. local track well lit as was the University and Hospital….
This rattled the BIG Power companies.
I turned on most of my lights during earth hour…
I’m so freaking sick of these leftist control freaks.
I did my bit. I turned my outdor floodlights on for the hour.
IanM
Corporations will jump on any bandwagon they think is popular. Some of them need to hear from us or they will think these stunts are non-controversial public-interest efforts. I am sending the following to Wells Fargo:
Dear Sirs,
Regarding last night’s earth hour, I was disappointed earlier last week to see that you are using your ATMs to publicize climate alarmist propaganda. Our mutual interests will be better served if you stick to banking.
Sincerely,
etc
Mark (07:25:40) :
I did too. My wife asked me why all the lights were on outside.
“Hour of Power celebration” I replied.
“Oh”, she replied, knowing that us old hydro guys tend to be a bit weird.
earth hour must have been offset by Human Achievement Hour:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/03/turn_on_your_lights_and_celebr.html
During *spit* earth hour *spit* I turned on every light I could find, opened the windows and doors, turned the heat up. When it was over I turned off some of the lights, and turned on the air conditioner. Take that, gaia!!
It should be clear enough by now.
What matters today is not the truth, but what the media proclaim.
Sorry it didn’t. I think I’m to blame. Went on a bike ride last night and left the porch light on. My bad.
The defiant public with their bright well-lit homes offsets the ridiculous
big business/government enviro-stunt….once again!! Virginia was pretty well-lit, too.
My Mom is spritely 70 years old and lives next to a superhighway…and she had every light and floodlight on…she says from 8:30 to 9:30 you could “see her property from Space.” LOL
Great advertisement to passers-by as they whizzed along in their evil fossil fuel machines!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Too bad Anthony does not bother to live in his own community, rather than this cyber community, because if he talked to his neighbors, he might know why they were turning off their lights in Chico.
But I do understand why he spends all his time here on the net.
He is a joke at home.
REPLY: Thanks for stopping by with that zinger Mark. Professor Mark, from CSUC, is one of our most prominent and vocal sustainability gurus. Mark, two can play at suggestions. If you bothered to talk to people outside of the liberal bubble that is downtown and the university, you might learn why many people in town think some of the sustainability efforts you and the City Council push are a joke.
Since you didn’t comment on the facts from CAISO presented here, I assume then that your view is that the “feel good” portion of the event is the only thing that matters, not results? If so, I’m disappointed, since sustainability should be about results, not feel good hype.
– Anthony
I have no problem with the concept of Earth Hour as a symbolic gesture of caring for our planet. I am a skeptic and still I encouraged my children to participate by reading books for one hour. The message I gave them was of conservation, not curbing CO2 emissions.
With that said I am perplexed by comments that turning off the lights for an hour shows a willingness to change in order to save the planet. I am curious how people fared without their electricity for the hour. Did boredom set in by the end of it? Did they miss their electronics? Were they filled with pride for their service to humanity or did they stop and think about what life would be like for days on end without their stuff, sitting in the dark.
How about an Earth Day instead of an Earth Hour? And, why don’t they schedule it in the middle of winter so people also get to experience a nice, crisp day without a running furnace? I don’t think the good-intentioned understand what would be required to make a real “change,” not just a symbolic one.
Mark (08:41:21) :
Too bad Anthony does not bother to live in his own community…
————————
Reply:
Ah, Professor Mark… A member of the “Ivory Tower” set that live in an intellectually gated community and have never ventured beyond their own thought processes.
There’s a great big world to see and enjoy outside of your mental fences, Mark. You really should try to get out more. It will be far more enlightening that an hour in the dark, I assure you.
Al’s Global Warming (AGW) :
AGW’s Juicy Suzicide Note:
Killed by Reality.
>>> “The thermometer read 10 degrees colder than in 2009, which meant more juice to heat homes, says the provincial Independent Electricity System Operator.”
Translation: Canada has a cold climate.
…-
“Toronto stays bright for Earth Hour
When Earth Hour came to Toronto this year, many of the lights stayed on.
Most of the downtown skyline was still ablaze, many of the bank buildings and the Rogers Centre. The CN Tower extinguished its colourful lights display, but safety lighting remained on.
According to Toronto Hydro, fewer people participated this year —”
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/786543–toronto-stays-bright-for-earth-hour
http://www.bluelikeyou.com/2010/03/27/in-the-twisted-world-of-suzuki-logic/#comment-78472
From WWF Finland’s press release on March 11: “For example the city of Uusikaupunki which aims for carbon neutrality will participate the event for the second time by turning off some of its street and exterior lightning, and by asking its residents to participate.”
An elderly man died in a traffic accident, directly because of the darkness. A taxpayer who was denied the lightning he had paid for. Because the city wanted to participate a stupid and meaningless ceremony, without asking the residents’ opinion.
Will WWF put out a press release about the first concrete result of their campaign – a dead human being?
I wonder if Uusikaupunki will still participate next year or was this death an acceptable cost of … what? An hour of partial darkness for cheap righteousness points?
Remember when we used to turn our porch lights ON for a cause? Like child abuse, date rape (or any kind of rape), neighborhood watch, the plight of the hungry, pandemics, etc? What? Has CO2 now become more important than my child or my personal safety? Gee thanks. I feel ever so much more cared for now.
Since Earth Hour is only symbolic anyway, wouldn’t it be easier if they just shut their eyes for an hour?
Rocky Road,
You are obviously not from California. The ivory was looted from the educational towers here long ago.
I am very much an active member of my community, with all the give and take that goes with that human interaction.
Anthony, however, is a quitter. He quit the school board. He quit the task force. Rather than engage his neighbors, he hides in a cyber world and throws stones at the people who are doing actual work.
I have to admit he is pretty good at watching paint dry on Stevenson stations
REPLY: My my, such anger, and wrongheadedness. Ann Schwab booted me off the sustainability task force, I’ll be happy to show you the letter. And, I was not re-elected to the school board, I did not quit that either. Have you recently invited me to any of your sustainability events? Maybe to talk about my electric car or the LED lighting I recently put in my home? Can’t engage the community if nobody invites me. I do admit though, that due to my progressively worsening hearing loss, public events are more difficult for me than they used to be.
Let’s talk about hiding though. Since you use your CSUC email address which is public, one wonders why you can’t use your name with your comments? “he hides in a cyber world and throws stones at the people…” could very aptly apply to you. – Anthony
Mark (08:41:21) : “Too bad Anthony does not bother to live in his own community, rather than this cyber community, because if he talked to his neighbors, he might know why they were turning off their lights in Chico.”
I think the role that this mighty blog [uncovering scientific scams and and the people who advance them] speaks very well for itself.
Res ipsa loquiter.
And it might explain why Anthony may have joined the rest of us in turning our lights ON last night in a big, well-lit, defiant giant middle finger.
Except Anthony’s lights burn cooler and with less energy as retrofitted LED’s….a salient fact that everyone else seem to catch, except you and your condescending circle of friends.
And ON THE BIG FAT CONTRARY to your observations about Anthony “not living in his community”.
He’s not just hiding behind his computer developing or propagating climate model nonsense and the politics that go with it.
He’s a proponent of taking real-time, real-world, direct observations.
Ever heard of surfacestations.org??
In OTHER words, he is very much out in the real world, thus has EARNED the right to have a platform on the internet, and has a damn good excuse for being there.
What’s yours???
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Earth Hour is a failure in California
Opps,that didn’t go according to plan. California is the greenest State in America.
I am in California. I didn’t see any difference in lighting last night.
I am sorry to read that someone was killed in Finland last night while crossing a dark city street—the motorcyclist didn’t see him, no street lights were on.
“Short term spikes from well intentioned stunts really don’t make a blip of difference to CO2 emissions”
You can hang this around the neck of cap-and-trade, carbon trading and emissions trading.
You can hang this around every wind turbine’s neck
Ross McKirtrick just reaffirmed my belief in human decency.
Mark (09:54:21) :
What puts you in such a good mood this morning Mark?
Taking shots below the belt is the only way you feel you can win? You look desperate and rude.
Do you like that reputation?
Mark (09:54:21) : “Anthony, however, is a quitter. He quit the school board. He quit the task force. Rather than engage his neighbors, he hides in a cyber world and throws stones at the people who are doing actual work. I have to admit he is pretty good at watching paint dry on Stevenson stations.”
If you don’t think that disseminating the truth is not “work”, then it is YOU who have your head in the Cali sand, mister.
WUWT and Surfacestations are a LOT of “work”….and last time I checked much of the work on both of them is ALL VOLUNTEER.
He has done more work than I would venture to guess you will ever do…and you are just unhappy about that fact. Sounds like just bitterness and jealousy on your part. You can’t get a platform like he has established, so your throw ad hominem spears.
Pretty pathetic.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Mark (09:54:21) :
…..due to my progressively worsening hearing loss….
I know a good doctor that uses vitamins, herbs, minerals, etc. for such and has some good success. Everything I’ve used of his has worked so far. If you want I can tell you about him. Might be worth a shot.
REPLY: Thanks for the thought, but my hearing loss is sensory-neural. My cochlear nerve endings are damaged. The only hope might be some stem cell regeneration, but that is way off in the future. – Anthony
April E. Coggins (09:28:27) :
Since Earth Hour is only symbolic anyway, wouldn’t it be easier if they just shut their eyes for an hour?
To me they have their eyes shut all of the time, symbolically. If they would merely open their eyes for an hour then we might make some real progress.
Output and projections for yesterday, today and tomorrow for Ontario:
http://www.ieso.ca/imoweb/siteShared/demand_price.asp?sid=ic#price
Of course the media are rattling on about how it’s a 4% drop during earth hour here in Ontario, but I’m trying to see where it was outside the normalized curve.
http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100328/earth_hour_ont_100328/20100328?hub=Toronto
Mark (09:54:21) :
You might be in a bad mood because Earth Hour isn’t having a real impact on everyday people. Because it seems that if Earth Hour went well in California last night you’d be in a very good mood this morning, optimistic about the future of ‘climate change’, and not caring one bit about what the ‘skeptics’ are doing. But you are in a cross way today. You’re here, spending your time at a ‘skeptics’ blog, posting rude comments. You might be telegraphing your pessimism over the future of ‘climate change’.
BTW, I don’t think the community needs as much input from environmental activism as you think it does. On the other hand, California sure could use minimal regulations and taxes on businesses so that businesses stop leaving. Maybe some of the businesses that have left would come back if they saw California had stopped being antagonistic toward them. I would hope you put doing something about that on your activism calendar and drop this harmful global warming program. Life is precarious enough without all the raising of taxes and regulation for something that isn’t even happening. If you hadn’t noticed California is crippled because of ‘political correctness’ which ‘climate change’ is part of.
REPLY: Thanks for the thought, but my hearing loss is sensory-neural. My cochlear nerve endings are damaged. The only hope might be some stem cell regeneration, but that is way off in the future. – Anthony
Ok.
On the off chance I will call him and maybe he will have something to say about it. But he may also say what you are. I hope you don’t mind that.
absolutely charming the humor within these posts.
as a perfect example I quote
April E. Coggins (09:28:27) :
Since Earth Hour is only symbolic anyway, wouldn’t it be easier if they just shut their eyes for an hour?
thank you all.
You people have it all wrong. We turned everything off and huddled in the cold and dark. We did it for practice. Because if the Loonies In Charge get their way, we will all be huddling in the cold and dark all the time.
PS to Prof Mark. You and your government-paid academic buddies do “actual work”? Hahahahahaha. Thanks for the laugh.
Since Mark doesn’t like to engage factual discussion, I decided I’d try a calculation experiment.
News item from March 7th: Green Party in California trying to stem shrinking numbers
http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_14631028?nclick_check=1
They say there are 111,000 Green party members in California.
Ok let’s run some numbers:
If in the evening at 8:30 PM an Green party member turned off all their power usage what would we get?
This is just a rough estimate, your mileage may vary.
Mac computer and monitor: (PC’s are not PC to greens)- 150 watts, no more Daily Kos
Lights: let’s say 5 lights @ 60 watts each – 300 watts (unless they are CFL, then we are talking about 100 watts total)
Radio: 35 watts (no more NPR)
TV: not sure if greens own any.
So let’s say, computer, CFL bulbs and radio, for greens total: 285 watts, lets round up to 300 watts in case we missed something.
300 watts x 111,000 greens in CA = 33300000 watts or 33.3 megawatts
Even if they got every registered Green party member in the state to do it, hardly a blip, and maybe not visible in the normal downturn in electric usage that occurs at that time.
From Anthony in Amino Acids in Meteorites (10:13:04) :
REPLY: Thanks for the thought, but my hearing loss is sensory-neural. My cochlear nerve endings are damaged. The only hope might be some stem cell regeneration, but that is way off in the future. – Anthony
Both you and Rush Limbaugh- TV/radio careers using earpieces and headsets, both with severe hearing loss. You said before you suspect yours was from a medical-type interaction, it’s a small sample size… except when you consider how many are getting permanent loss from loud music. They still have out the iPod earbud warnings?
He went with a cochlear implant, sometimes you see him pictured with the transmitter part stuck behind his ear to the implanted magnet. As I understand it, the receiver feeds the signal right to the audio nerve, thus the damage to your endings shouldn’t matter. I’ve seen other people on TV with them, obviously with later-in-life hearing loss.
Of course it’s not as good as normal hearing, and there may be a vanity issue if you object to looking Borg-ish, but it’s still worth investigating.
REPLY: I’m not at the point yet where I need a cochlear implant, I still have about 20% of hearing left mostly low frequency, compensated with some of the best hearing aids on the planet that have computer real-time processing built in (Germanium IC’s no less! due to 1.5 volt power source, silicon’s 0.7 volt diode loss makes it impractical). Cochlear implant right now would be worse than I have. – Anthony
As for the reason behind my tone; WUWT shows up as a feed on our daily blog, Norcal Blogs, but Anthony does not participate. So, while he is well versed in the IPCC, he is clueless on CHICO and his neighbors, hence, my disgust.
WUWT started as a scientific analysis of weather stations but it has become an entertainment blog with a bunch of climatic ditto-heads.
Anthony is invited to every public event we hold. He chooses not to speak in to people face to face, but rather hide here is safe company. The few times we have spoken together in public, he is as silent as a rock
I know Anthony, and Anthony knows me. The rest of you, like Mike D. are just whistling in the dark.
REPLY: Mark, I have not seen a single invitation from you or anyone else in the past two years. If there was some and somehow I’ve missed them, please point them out to me, send me a link to one, or show an email where I was invited.
I was invited once to CSUC about 5 years ago and you sat next to me, I ran a 10 minute presentation that even you liked. I’ve done two presentations at “this way to sustainability” by invitation, which were about 15 minutes long each, which you also witnessed. Hardly “silent as a rock” as you say.
But I’m not invited to speak at CSUC anymore, why is that Mark?
Also, I think you misunderstand the blog feed at Norcal Blogs. The ER granted me a move to this new WordPress platform but they retained the RSS link. Plus, if you look you’ll see I’ve made recent comments on Commission Impossible, another favorite blog of yours.
Be disgusted if you wish, but the facts counteract your basis. Also, I have papers coming out regarding the research. You’ll see it on the blog but I’ll shoot you copies when they are ready also.
So far all you’ve made are social allegations, with nothing factual to back anything up. At least I’ve used hard numbers. Looking forward to an invitation to speak at “This way to sustainability” next time – Anthony
P.S. Ask Ken Grossman about my community participation at the last Rotary Club meeting this year which he spoke about sustainability for his brewery. Ask him if I treated him with respect in my question, or if I treated him boorishly as you have me. – A
finn (09:09:14) :
I believe I already answered your motorcycle accident hypothesis.
Your claim rests on the assumption that lights are an idiot-proof safety device.
They can assist in the two-way street of precaution, but they cannot replace it.
The motorist is responsible for the safe conduct of thier vehicle at all times.
The pedestrian is responsible to look both ways before crossing the road.
If the accident is a direct result of Earth Hour lights being out, it also a result of one or both parties not acting in accordance with conditions that changed.
Most street lights that I know of are hardwired. Either the entire section of a power grid is out along with the street lights, or the entire section is on.
Pedestrian are killed every day crossing streets.
Some are killed in crosswalks even when the light says it’s safe to cross.
Why didn’t the crosswalk save the pedestrians life?
Because white paint cannot stop a pedestrian from stepping out in front of a moving vehicle, nor can it stop a speeding vehicle driven by someone who is not paying attention to the light that just turned red.
Now, back to your Earth Hour death claim.
Which party was not paying attention to the changed conditions and/or circumstances on that fateful moment?
Safety is not found in things. It’s a practice that requires participation.
Anthony,
You stopped coming to task force meeting, so you were dropped. You stopped applying to speak at the sustainability conference, so you are no longer on the program. You make presentations but you have nothing to say in Q&A. You stopped engaging. I am not sure why, maybe it was your hearing loss, or maybe you did not like what you were hearing. Either way, you are no longer an active citizen in Chico, but I still have to see your pandering ridicule on Norcal Blogs.
Fact: If you were the least bit involved in the town where you live, you would have known that Earth Hour efforts in Chico were about energy awareness, not energy savings.
I am Mark Stemen and I approve of this message.
Ps. Your comments on CI are limited to lame humor (not commentary), not that my similar lame attempts at humor are any better.
REPLY: Mark, what you don’t understand (and neither did Schwab) was that because the meetings were scheduled when they were, in the middle of the work day, I had to make a choice between running my business and volunteering at a place where people were hostile to my ideas. Lon Glazner, another small business owner, had to make the same choice. I don’t see you dissing him. Schwab even got bent out of shape once when I wanted to pass out a flyer on thermal ground sinks. Baffling.
If the sustainability task force was really interested in input from the business community like myself, they’d have voted for the evening hours so that small business owners like myself and Lon were able to attend more often. That got voted down, mainly due to the large makeup of the CSUC sphere of influence that makes up the committee. If you and Schwab really valued my input, you’d have found a way to help me work through it. As it was, my missing a few meetings was used as a convenient excuse to boot me off at the first available opportunity. I wasn’t even given a warning, just “boom, you’re off the task force”. Such tact.
Mostly, I think you and Schwab just want people that say “yes” and don’t offer challenging ideas or raise issues about bad ones, like the local gasoline tax that was proposed.
In the previous times I have spoken at “This way to sustainability” both were by invitation. Once for the solar system I did on my home, once for the solar system I did for CUSD. I’ve never received another invitation since.
I’m not sure what you are referring to about Q&A, I took questions both times. Did I not take enough?
If you are saying that I’m not invited to the “this way to sustainability” anymore, because now the procedure has switched to a “call for presentations”, then that’s fine too. Please make sure you let me know and I’ll submit one for the next one. The topic will be “LED lighting retrofitting – easy upgrade to efficiency”. I’m counting on you to demonstrate that you aren’t just making lip service here. Would there be a reason to deny such a presentation? We’ll see.
As for commentary, you made no qualifications on the “quality” of participation, you simply said I was in hiding and didn’t participate. Prior to this morning, I could say the very same about you, you haven’t participated in online discourse here.
Here’s another example of my “non active citizen non-community participation” you may have missed. The new CSUC sponsored Gateway Science Museum has a new digital weather station (from my sales stock, real money there), and a new LCD wall display unit also donated by me will be installed soon to display weather info to visitors. Ask your buddy Jim Houpis or Rachel Teasdale if that is true or not. Did you donate anything?
So you really should retract claims that I’m not involved in the community and that I’m “hiding”. Such claims really should not be coming from a Professor at Chico State University, especially when he has no evidence to back it up and I’ve presented evidence otherwise. Why not simply admit you are peeved and don’t like me, rather than spin yarns to make me look bad? It really is unbecoming of a university professional.
It is telling when you drop any pretense of discussing the Earth Hour impact or the data that I’ve presented, and focus exclusively on trying to attack my character.- Anthony
When my wife informed me that the news had just announced a reminder to people to turn off power for an hour (something to do with global warming) she says, my first reaction was “they can go and #$%& themselves.” In retrospect, I had no thought of “saving” anything, nor did I even consider the practical uselessness of the gesture, but was reacting purely in defiance to what has now become a symbol of things untrustworthy (to put it mildly). I believe that they have failed the people so badly with a host of alarmism, inaccurate reports and plain BS that even if they stood on the street corner handing out Dollar bills, I wouldn’t want any – or at least would be mighty suspicious. It’s too bad they have cocked it up so, because there is probably a lot of good in there somewhere.
Its interesting that available resources are so dramatically different 36,000 vs 29,000 Megawatts. Was it that much hotter this time last year or did the power companies choose to observe Earth Hour?
That’s mostly true because the heavy industry went somewhere else. Now those places are heavily polluted. But, since they’re mostly third world countries, no one really cares.
Martin, apparently you’re unaware that the greenies decidedly do NOT want clean, cheap energy. They’ve stated this many times. I think it was the infamous Paul Ehrlich who said such a thing would be like giving a child a machinegun.
Mark (09:54:21) :
Rocky Road,
You are obviously not from California. The ivory was looted from the educational towers here long ago.
Good thing, too.
PETA would be livid if it were still there.
finn (06:41:11) :
PResumably the motorcycle had a headlight. So why would streetlights have made a difference?
If there’s such a risk, then we need to re-enact prohibition.
REPLY: Mark, I have not seen a single invitation from you or anyone else in the past two years…Be disgusted if you wish, but the facts counteract your basis. A
…”biases” mebbe?
…of course, “baseless charges” works, too.
[snip – over the top]
Prof. Mark —-the sound of exploding watermelons.
Oops. My first ‘over the top’ comment. Must have been caused by that hour of darkness… or perhaps the heat that is predicted to make everyone more angry!
Mark,
In my experience, once someone begins resorting to ill-informed personal character assassinations, it is a clear indication that they have lost the debate. Kudos to Anthony for being an outstanding active member of his community in Chico, and here on WUWT.
Earth Hour? What was Earth Hour? What did I miss? Oh, that — it was nothing.
Mark (08:41:21) : “Too bad Anthony does not bother to live in his own community, rather than this cyber community, because if he talked to his neighbors, he might know why they were turning off their lights in Chico.”
————-
At one time academia was the preserve of gentlemen (of both sexes): I guess the 1960s put paid to that.
“PResumably the motorcycle had a headlight. So why would streetlights have made a difference?”
If you have driven a car in pitch dark, you know it makes a difference. Pedestrians with dark clothing etc. may be almost impossible to see before it’s too late. In such case streetlights make an enormous difference. Especially if you’re in a familiar neighborhood and don’t expect parts of it being darkened out.
“Your claim rests on the assumption that lights are an idiot-proof safety device.”
Not really, it rests on the assumption that suddenly turning lights off is bound to increase accidents. According to what I read, darkness was the only obvious factor contributing to the accident. It may also directly explain why the elderly man was on the road instead of sidewalk. Nighttime traffic accident rates are several-fold in areas without streetlights. I suspect that’s mainly because in the dark you can’t see so well. It’s not climate science.
Hmmm…Mark appears to be in the “anger-bargaining” stage.
@Mark
‘So, while he is well versed in the IPCC, he is clueless on CHICO and his neighbors, hence, my disgust.’
Even if that would be true, how much fun is it in caring for self proclaimed important and pompous people who only care for themselves in their own little world safely inside a white picketed fence?
Mark (12:04:39) :
“Fact: If you were the least bit involved in the town where you live, you would have known that Earth Hour efforts in Chico were about energy awareness, not energy savings.”
======
ENERGY AWARENESS???
What is that supposed to mean?
My utility bill raises my awareness every month, I pay it and resolve to commit to ENERGY SAVINGS in the future.
What more do you want?
It’s all you’re gonna get, without a fight.
Mark,
If you have even a half inch of spine left in you… you will apologize to Mr. Watts. Anthony is the embodiment of integrity, as anyone with an ounce of understanding knows. I don’t know you, but I am hoping that you will prove yourself human with a few words of apology.
Mike Bryant
REPLY: Mike, thanks but he doesn’t need to apologize. He came here and voiced his opinion, boorish as it may be, and even put his name to it. If he takes it to a higher level, like writes a letter to the editor, then I’ll ask for an apology. – Anthony
I live in a rural area where there are no streetlights. It’s a matter of not being an idiot, really. And it sounds like there were two idiots involved. The man for walking in the street in the dark, and the motorcycle driver for not being alert enough.
I’m still not sure why the old man would be walking in the street because the lights were out, that part of your argument doesn’t make sense. It sounds like he was an accident waiting to happen.
I’m pretty sure he already knows why. Sheep do what they’re told.
Per Reply from Anthony in kadaka (11:16:55) :
Upper range loss seems quite common, my father had that. He blamed too much shooting when younger, but I was down at the plant where he worked a few times and the loud mechanical din convinced me otherwise. Although that just happened to also be in mom’s “normal” frequency range…
After retiring, he could follow things well enough. Then I became the “translator” who’d repeat things in a lower range, like at a doctor’s office when female nurses and doctors were talking to him. Then he… wasn’t processing info like he used to.
So I got him a Walker’s Game Ear. They’re basically a generic behind-the-ear hearing aid, set to selectively amplify the upper range (self-adjustable frequency range models available), using a modified foam earplug instead of a custom-fit ear piece, said fitting apparently being where a good chunk of the cost of a traditional hearing aid comes from. The batteries turned out to be a standard hearing aid model as well.
The difference was profound. For the first time in ages, he could understand without prompting. It worked good on our outings for about a year, until he started fiddling with it too much and it made more sense for me to go back to translating.
If there is anyone here with an upper range loss who fears the cost of a regular aid and is not that vain, I heartily recommend you try one out. The price is very reasonable. The foam earplug helps make them compatible with gunfire, as it’s a normal sound-reducing one with the aid’s sound tube run through it, the sound going in around the tube is limited. If you’ll be avoiding loud noises, you or someone else could fabricate a less-obvious in-the-ear part that incorporates the tube.
BTW, FWIW, I’m not a totally anonymous poster, as my initials are “spaced out” in my handle. But since I’ve seen my initials used by others in both upper and lower case, as well as my first name by more than one other poster, I’ll stick with what I’ve been doing for now.
The BBC has a photo series contrasting lights out/lights on for some landmark buildings. Actually, nice photos.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/8590756.stm
Both ends of DST in California:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/TempGr/Dst2009_2010.GIF
Despite all the reasons offered to make people feel good for the senseless disruption to thier lives, nothing tangible is gained in the scope of things.
At least not any energy savings in California.
Earth Hour is in the same boat.
The intent is good. There is nothing wrong with conserving energy/saving money.
The vehicle/means to achieve is hopeless, and the data shows it.
And before anyone gets the wrong idea, sending the entire state back into the 1890’s via ‘shut the system down’ is no more of a viable option than is the stupidity of Daylight Saving Time.
At least one state, Arizona, has bothered to understand and do something about it. They dumped DST.
Now, how’s about a poll:
Is the extra hour in the evening worth the disruption of DST?
Chico State University
Sounds more like Groucho State.
That’s mostly true because the heavy industry went somewhere else. Now those places are heavily polluted. But, since they’re mostly third world countries, no one really cares.
The air when entering the Chicago area was visibly Green not too long ago (late 80s). I can’t decide if I like it (cleaner air) or don’t (missing moderate to low skill jobs).
rbateman (03:52:16) :
“In California, there was a call a long time ago for consumers to conserve. And we obliged them. Time and again, they asked, and Californians anwered the call.
Left ou[t] of those requests were Big Business and Utility.
They don’t march to anyone’s drumbeat, green or otherwise.”
Actually, big business (chemicals and refining) did a massive conservation program about 30 years ago per a Federal mandate, following the oil price increases from OPEC in the 70’s. I was a part of that effort in the oil refining business, and we achieved more than the mandated savings. I believe the Federal mandate was for 25 percent less energy consumption per unit of production, and the industry achieved a bit more than 30 percent.
However, energy conservation is not sustainable (read: ongoing job provider), as I wrote here:
http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/energy-conservation-is-not-sustainable.html
Mark (12:04:39) : “Either way, you are no longer an active citizen in Chico, but I still have to see your pandering ridicule on Norcal Blogs.
Fact: If you were the least bit involved in the town where you live, you would have known that Earth Hour efforts in Chico were about energy awareness, not energy savings.”
Geez-us.
This guy sounds like he would be more at home in Beijing or maybe even North Korea….where citizens helps root out other “citizens” who do not pull the party line of the state.
Remind me not to live in his community.
True to form though, Anthony, being the fair man he is, lets anyone post their mind on here…with the idea that reasonable people will see right through the chaff, the misinformation, and the “trollege”.
Next!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Mark. What an appropriate name.
Well enough of the invective. Until the next sentence.
Does your College (would that be Chico, Groucho, or Harpo?) have an IEC Fusion Program? Us rubes (fair is fair) in the Midwest have two of them. U. Wisconsin (Madison) and U. Illinois Champaign. Lots of work being done and progress being made at a fraction of the cost of ITER.
In fact a program could be started for less than the cost of a professor. With all off the shelf parts an IEC device could be built for $100K – instrumentation extra.
The IEC folks have yearly conferences. The last one in Madison at UW.
http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/iec2009/agenda
”””’REPLY: I’m not at the point yet where I need a cochlear implant, I still have about 20% of hearing left mostly low frequency, compensated with some of the best hearing aids on the planet that have computer real-time processing built in (Germanium IC’s no less! due to 1.5 volt power source, silicon’s 0.7 volt diode loss makes it impractical). Cochlear implant right now would be worse than I have. – Anthony”””’
Anthony,
I am near the threshold of needing hearing enhancement (sounds better than ‘aid’). My wife points out to me that i’m way past the threshold, but . . . . it has a self image hangup thing.
Do you have any recommendations on devices?
John
savethesharks (17:21:38) :
Earth Hour is aimless awareness.
Unless it is attached to efforts to cut back/economize on the hardwired portion of a community grid, as in Flagstaff AZ and another in Colorado, there is nothing besides the feel-good hour lost in a sea of megawatts.
rbateman (16:57:44) :
My vote in the poll. DST is worthless. Just another way to control.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
savethesharks (17:21:38),
Exactly right, Mark Stemen trolled and disappeared.
I would like to invite Mr Stemen back, so I can give him my personal response to:
“I am Mark Stemen and I approve of this message.”
Could he be any more insufferable? Being a college professor feeding off the public probably explains his attitude toward people who work for a living.
I found Stemen’s picture. He’s one of the ones to the right of the taxpayer: [snip – Smokey, that’s unfair – Anthony]
Here’s a truly relevant photo of Dr. Stemen in front of a solar power array: http://www.greatvalley.org/energy/docs/article1_files/cover-3.jpe
Roger Sowell (17:08:29) :
Great. Let’s include the glare induced by overlighting since then, along with all the household items big business has contrived to sell that are ‘always on’.
The consumer is at the mercy of utility and product design.
And, on the other end of the spectrum, we can say that endless expansion of lighting and devices sold to consumers is likewise not sustainable.
Question: Will Utility and Manufacturing listen to the call to reduce the hardwired 80% of demand?
And an even tougher question: WIll Utility, if in fact it cuts back on the hardwired portion, resist the temptation to raise rates to make up for the shortfall in sales that will surely follow?
Mark (11:23:41) :
WUWT started as a scientific analysis of weather stations but it has become an entertainment blog with a bunch of climatic ditto-heads.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
So you’ve gone from just insulting, below the belt shots at Anthony to doing the same to the commenters.
I think you are unaware the impact of this blog. And not all commenters agree with Anthony. He clearly allows opposing views here.
You must not read this blog much.
Rebecca C (06:44:42) :
Looking at all these power generation charts over the past 24 hours, it’s striking that on average over the course of a day, the available megawatts exceed the expected usage by an average of 40% or so. The greatest gains in energy efficiency would seem to come from tightening that gap (without, of course, running into brownouts). You’d think the power companies would be all over that, since it would save them tons of money.
One little problem with that. If supply EVER falls below demand – no one gets any power and restarting the grid is REALLY expensive.
You NEVER want to operate the grid too close to the margin. 40% extra is comfortable. 100% extra is probably excessive. 20% is cutting it close. A supply disruption (they happen) could shut everything down.
Mark (11:23:41) :
Again, I have to ask why are you so desperate? You must be feeling terrible disappointment over the failure of Earth Hour in California last night. And maybe ClimateGate is eating at you. And maybe you see all the ‘-gates’ pulling ‘global warming’ down. Or is it something else?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Your comments remind me of this from Melville:
“To the last, I grapple with thee;
From Hell’s heart, I stab at thee;
For hate’s sake, I spit my last breath at thee.”
~~Herman Melville
REPLY: Thanks, but I wouldn’t be quite so dramatic. He’s just a local professor that PO’d at my blog feed showing up in the opinion section of the local newspaper and made a few badly chosen statements in haste he couldn’t back up with facts. -Anthony
@rbateman (17:45:29) :
“Roger Sowell (17:08:29) :
Great. Let’s include the glare induced by overlighting since then, along with all the household items big business has contrived to sell that are ‘always on’.
The consumer is at the mercy of utility and product design.”
I maintain that the consumer has a choice, usually of several products of varying design. Plus, a consumer has the ultimate power over an appliance: pulling the plug. A few people I know plug some appliances in to power strips, then flip off the strip at night.
“And, on the other end of the spectrum, we can say that endless expansion of lighting and devices sold to consumers is likewise not sustainable.”
And why would they not be sustainable? In a non-recycling world, perhaps. But products are recycled these days, and that is likely to increase, not increase.
“Question: Will Utility and Manufacturing listen to the call to reduce the hardwired 80% of demand?”
I maintain that the “hardwired 80% of demand” is not what you might suspect it is. Some operations, industries, and all refineries and continuous process plants, run 24/7 operations. This creates a demand for power, of course. It would be economic ruin for these to stop operations at night (reduce the “hardwired 80%”) then crank up again each day during daylight. That is therefore not going to happen. Those industrial demands far outweigh any residual demand from a tv left plugged in overnight, or a clock radio.
“And an even tougher question: WIll Utility, if in fact it cuts back on the hardwired portion, resist the temptation to raise rates to make up for the shortfall in sales that will surely follow?”
Utilities do not set their rates, a public utility commission does. The factors that the PUC (it goes by different names in different jurisdictions) considers in a rate increase are numerous. A key consideration is the funds required to pay for new generating facilities. Similarly, a utility cannot unilaterally build a new power plant – it must receive a construction permit from a regulatory body such as an energy commission. The projected demand (increase or decrease) over the planning horizon (a few years, usually) has a great influence on both the PUC’s rate decisions, and the utilities’ construction decisions.
The current debate (one among many) is what effect “energy conservation” will have on utility demand in the future. It appears (although it is early in the game) that some PUC’s are not granting rate increases, and energy commissions are not granting new construction permits, because an increase in demand just does not appear likely. Some reasons for this are the economic recession, more efficient residential and commercial appliances (energy star ratings in the US), distributed generation (via solar or wind or small cogeneration plants on-site for small businesses), the much-touted potential reductions due to a “smart grid” and the smart meters associated with that, large industrial cogeneration that removes huge blocks of power demand from a utility grid, and others.
Now, will a PUC grant a rate increase such that a utility maintains a constant revenue even with decreasing demand? Yes, that happens (but not in all utility systems). I wrote about this under the subject Nuclear Death Spiral, where a utility in Louisiana built a nuclear power plant, was granted a large rate increase, and then had many industrial customers build cogeneration plants because they could make electricity cheaper than buying it. The PUC then granted a further rate increase, more customers built cogeneration, and so on. The people most affected were the average Joe and Jane Sixpack, who had no choice but to pay the higher bills. This is but one of many reasons that new nuclear power plants in the USA are stupid decisions.
M Simon, and Rebecca C,
The green line for available power on the graphs is not showing how much power is generated at that time. Power and demand are balanced (equal each other) at all times.
The green line shows the power that COULD be generated, if ramped up to maximum generating capacity.
In California, the ISO tries to maintain a good cushion of 30 to 40 percent to allow for generating stations to trip off line without warning, and still maintain the grid operating. During peak demand periods on hot summer days, the cushion decreases to 10 percent and sometimes 5 percent. At that point, some customers are required to cut back their usage to reduce demand to prevent brownouts or rolling blackouts. These customers know this in advance, and sign up to do this in exchange for a reduced power bill.
The consumer is at the mercy of utility and product design.
You could always make your own stuff. Nothing stopping you. And there is no one forcing you to buy anything at stores or from utilities (at least until the insurance mandate kicks in).
So what is it you have bought that you don’t want? Send it to me. A big screen TV would be really nice. Or one of those polluting big computer monitors. You don’t want to pollute do you? As a service I will do it for you. And best of all my service is free. Just send me your stuff.
Roger Sowell (18:45:35) :
Roger. I’m an EE. I know that generated power must match (within tolerance) required power or the grid crashes. I understand what reserve capacity means. BTW filament light bulbs help absorb some of that tolerance. Getting rid of them may be a good idea re: energy. It is a bad idea re: grid stability. As are all those computer (and other modern) power supplies. They are negative resistors. i.e, as the voltage goes up the current goes down. Very bad for stability.
Roger Sowell (18:38:19) :
“And, on the other end of the spectrum, we can say that endless expansion of lighting and devices sold to consumers is likewise not sustainable.”
And why would they not be sustainable?
——————————-
My bad for not being specific: I was referring to the constant addition of demand, not the recycling of dead products.
I have turned off my power strips also, but it does no good to my bill, which is a set rate + 2 surcharges.
The question to utility is will they cut back on excess lighting?
The question to PUC is will they continue to allow higher and higher base rates as consumers try to cut back?
I prefer to try an alternative to help out my fellow Americans struggling with ever-dwindling pocketbooks rather than stand by and watch them plunged into peasantry by the Cap & Trade bill.
I remember driving from Virginia to Wisconsin with my Dad, to visit my grandpa. We went through Gary, IN and then through Chicago. You could smell Gary about 30 miles before you entered it. It seemed dramatically different last time I drove through in 2002. Seemed like most of the industry was gone or idle.
Oops, the driving to Wisconsin with my Dad was in the 70s…
M. Simon (18:53:40) :
You could always make your own stuff. Nothing stopping you.
Yes, I could always start up No. Calif. Electronics Corp.
Got a couple billion you want to invest??
Nothing stopping you.
But I like your alternative: Send all my devices to you. That’s very Cap & Amish.
You first.
What about the new supplies of Shale Gas? I have a lefty acquaintance who is fearful! of new gas supplies wrecking the Wind power ponzi scheme…
Mods, pls, a repost of the last (mea culpa) … tnx.
Amen. I don’t even like camping … (BUT that’s just me)
.
.
I always turn off things that’re not in use, and only have on the lights I need. Hey, I was born in the mid-70s and got taught by my parents to shut the lights off when I wasn’t in the room. Electricity costs money, y’know.
So, no, I won’t be participating in ecology theatre because they’re asking me to do something I just do all the frickin’ time, not just one hour a year so I can feel good about myself.
rbateman,
I have no complaints about the current situation. I love having a 1,000X more powerful computer on my desk than any even contemplated in 1950.
I have no complaints about what is available in stores or Goodwill for that matter.
I love electricity, too. Because I like talking to you guys. Good show, Ross McKitrick.
“And it sounds like there were two idiots involved. The man for walking in the street in the dark, and the motorcycle driver for not being alert enough.”
The street being dark was not the man’s fault, but Earth Hour’s. Without the campaign he wouldn’t have walked in the dark, but in a normal lighting. Earth Hour was clearly a cause, most likely the principal cause of the accident.
“I’m still not sure why the old man would be walking in the street because the lights were out, that part of your argument doesn’t make sense. It sounds like he was an accident waiting to happen.”
I’m not sure what you mean. Perhaps he was walking in the wrong place because our species CAN’T SEE IN THE DARK. That’s why streetlights were invented in the first place.
Perhaps he was doing his routine evening walk, the lights went suddenly out and he didn’t see where to go. Your argument that he was an idiot who died for his own fault is indeed interesting.
Earth Hour was an accident, and several other accidents, waiting to happen which is exactly what I (and many others) have been saying since the campaign started.
I have often had caused to believe that the kind of people that read newspapers like the Guardian want the rest of us to modify OUR behaviour whilst having no intention of modifying THEIR behaviour.
I guess they have just proved this.
“Looking at all these power generation charts over the past 24 hours, it’s striking that on average over the course of a day, the available megawatts exceed the expected usage by an average of 40% or so. ”
Yes, because once a big power station is up and running it isn’t going to get cold anytime soon, so it can generate power continuously and therefore generates a lot of electricity during the night when its not needed. Nuclear power stations in particular take 6 months to run up to full power – so they tend to be run at full power all the time.
The US has a particular issue with this because it works on a fully free-market approach to energy generation whereas Europe runs on a planned economy model which is less wasteful (but potentially more expensive because you have to make complicate arrangements to encourage load balancing and energy storage). For instance, Europe has 5% pumped storage generating capacity compared to 2.5% in the US.
Finn: I can appreciate your argument. The street lights weren’t put in place to use up electricity, they were installed to help prevent accidents. Turning them off won’t save electricity but the resulting darkness will contribute to the likeliness of accidents. Why not turn off the traffic lights while they are at it?
RE: Motorcycle/pedestrian accident:
Although there is debate regarding the cause of the accident, and that the immutable laws of common sense should apply, there is another reality that is taking place.
Over the past few decades, more and more people are placing their own safety in the hands of others, typically those in authority (e.g. government). It is at the point where any assumed risk is not on the individual and any accident, fault or failure is placed on others; they have assumed said risk.
The local authority assumed responsibility for providing a safe roadway (lit, paved, etc.) We have placed our safety – rightly or wrongly – in that authority to a greater or lesser extent. When the authority fails in that duty, they have failed that responsibility. But cause and blame are two very different things, particularly when it is an authority which has taken responsibility.
The authorities action of removing the adequate lighting – presumably in place to provide a safer roadway – was a contributing factor to the incident. But it is almost impossible to actually *blame* an authority for such.
The laws rules and regulations imposed by authorities are but a thin veneer, an egg shell, that keeps us safe from ourselves. More and moire, these authorities encourage abdication of personal responsibility to the state like a drive-by Volcano Insurance salesman.
WWF Finland just published a press release saying they regret the accident which lead to the death. They say WWF trusts the judgement and expertise of the participating organizations when they choose the lighting to be turned off.
The police of Uusikaupunki is still investigating the accident and circumstances that lead to it.
http://www.wwf.fi/tiedotus/tiedotteet/tiedotteet_2010/pahoittelee_onnettomuutta.html
“WUWT… has become an entertainment blog with a bunch of climatic ditto-heads.”
Hmmm. Mark, I don’t believe we’ve met….
“Looking at all these power generation charts over the past 24 hours, it’s striking that on average over the course of a day, the available megawatts exceed the expected usage by an average of 40% or so. The greatest gains in energy efficiency would seem to come from tightening that gap (without, of course, running into brownouts). You’d think the power companies would be all over that, since it would save them tons of money.”
A lot of that margin is in hydro power. It is not a “true” margin in that you can’t tap into it continuously. Many of the dams have idle generators that can be called to be turned up at any time. But once they are fired up, they can only run a short while because of the limited quantity of water in the reservoir. When they are used, they must then make an offsetting reduction below average to bring the reservoir back to targeted capacity.
finn (02:04:14) :
The street being dark is a natural consequence of Earthly rotation.
The motorcycle is supposed to have a headlight, which allows the operator to see and also the pedestrian to see coming.
You are still dealing with a lack of proper awareness.
The power transformer can fail, tree fall on a line, truck hit a power pole, lightning strike the lines, light bulb burn out, etc.
What was the pedestrian or operator doing besides travelling at the moment?
Texting or listening to ITunes?
Were they in a hurry or were they distracted?
There is much to an accident investigation. It is best to withhold prejudgement until the details of the accident and circumstances are fully known.
OceanTwo (06:11:10) :
Well put. No authority, however well meaning and adept, can replace individual awareness of safety, nor can it ever successfully implement an “Idiot Proof” world.
Where the prosperous West fails, they seem to have managed to do their *bit* in Vietnam.
http://english.vietnamnet.vn/photogal/201003/The-Earth-Hour-in-Vietnam-901371/
finn (02:04:14) :
No, but it was his fault for walking on the street instead of the sidewalk (assuming there was one). And if there wasn’t a sidewalk, it was incumbent upon him to be extra careful and to move off the road when someone approached. It’s common sense, really.
Sure we can see in the dark. It’s dark when I leave my office downstairs at night and walk around the house to the front door. I can see. Not great, but I can see. And again, most areas of the world don’t have streetlights, only urban areas and some suburbs.
You’re making assumptions. I’m trying to take things at face value, lacking more information. As others have pointed out, streetlights don’t always work, and not all streets are lit. If you’re walking IN THE ROAD AT NIGHT it’s your responsibility to not get hit, lights or no lights.
I’m no fan of this stupidity, but blaming the man’s death on the lack of lighting is like blaming accidents on fog. The accidents are due to people not adjusting their driving habits to changing conditions.
Professor Mark Stemen, CSUC
Dear Doctor Mark:
I researched your work on sustainability on the web, and found it to be very interesting. You have obviously put a lot of both thought and energy into the matter. I commend you on the successes you have achieved.
This made it all the more surprising to me that you seem to have come here, not to propound and spread your ideas, but merely to insult Anthony and everyone here.
Surely you must know that this is counterproductive, not to mention childish. Calling people names is so grade school, and you a University Professor … it does your cause no good to behave in such a puerile manner.
If you would like to get some traction here, and to expose your ideas to an audience that might be a bit more inquisitive and less credulous than your average 19-year-old college students, I’m sure that Anthony would be more than happy to offer you a guest post here.
As to people being “ditto-heads”, I am a frequent guest poster here, and despite being very skeptical of the “consensus” I can assure you that there are plenty of people who disagree with me.
That is the nature of science. I put my ideas out into the public arena, and I invite anyone who wishes to try to tear them to shreds. It is alternately a humbling and an inspiring process, a frustrating and a fruitful experience.
Yes, it is raw and ugly at times, but science is a blood sport. It tests the strength of my convictions, stretches my ability to endure insult, and puts my ideas to the most gruelling of tests. I have had my cherished claims totally blown out of the water at times, and had to admit publicly that I was wrong. And at other times, I have seen them fully substantiated, and even expanded.
So I hope you will put your ideas to the same test here at this site. Who knows, we all might learn something, yourself included.
Best wishes,
w.
Tony (19:44:45) :
Where the prosperous West fails, they seem to have managed to do their *bit* in Vietnam.
You might want to take their claim of having saved 500,000KwH with a grain of salt.
Forty years ago, they claimed they’d killed me and my crew.
On three separate occasions.
Willis,
Thanks for your kind offer.
I will limit my contribution to this post because (IMHO) I believe our time is spent most productively working in our local communities, not here posting on the world wide web.
I was dismissive by turn. The original post was rude and condescending toward anyone “gullible” enough to participate in Earth Hour. Anthony takes a www posting from an international organization and uses it to denigrate good people in his home state and his home town. And this is “science?”
His post is followed by the following (excerpted) comments:
“Just ignore them and they will go away.”
“A difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has it’s limitations.”
“The people who did turn out their lights must have previously taken the blue pill”
“Stupid is as stupid does.”
“Loony is a good word”
“The reason they act this irrational way is because they are stupid enough to respond to years of thought conditioning.”
“If all the greenies had an ounce of humanity – and common sense – they would be deeply ashamed.”
“During *spit* earth hour *spit* I turned on every light I could find, opened the windows and doors, turned the heat up.”
If is rants like a ditto head, and spits like a ditto head . . .
I agree, science, is a blood sport; politics even more so, especially in person.
In my opinion, Anthony has withdrawn from face to face interactions and chooses to lob dirt clods like this from the other side of his computer screen. He is right that I am POed his blog appears on the local editorial page, and he is right that I choose to make some ill considered comments.
I have my facts straight about him, however, and will stand by them. As you can sense, this is a long running disagreement. We have had exchanges like this in the past and likely will in the future. In the spirit of decorum, I will keep away from WUWT.
Best,
Mark
Mark (07:49:57) :
In my opinion, Anthony has withdrawn from face to face interactions and chooses to lob dirt clods like this from the other side of his computer screen.
According to Mr. Watts, he didn’t withdraw — he was shut out, and provided background information which varies from your statements. Which information, I might add, you haven’t.
He is right that I am POed his blog appears on the local editorial page…
Why? Not a challenge, I’d just like to know your reason. Or is it personal?
We have had exchanges like this in the past and likely will in the future. In the spirit of decorum, I will keep away from WUWT.
[self-snipped in the spirit of decorum]
Cheers,
Bill
Maybe already posted.
This seems to be true:
http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2010/03/30/Cat-sets-fire-to-itself-during-Earth-Hour/UPI-75261269969857/
Too funny.
Cat sets fire to itself during Earth Hour
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, March 30 (UPI) — A cat belonging to the British Columbia minister of the environment set itself on fire with a candle
during the weekend observance of Earth Hour.
Barry Penner and his wife Daris were having a candlelit dinner in Vancouver Saturday when their 5-year-old cat named Ranger brushed against a flame, the Vancouver Sun reported.
“Suddenly there was a poof of smoke,” Penner said.
Penner and his wife bolted to the cat, but the flames had gone out.
The cat didn’t suffer any serious injuries, but Penner said the fright had an effect on Ranger.
“His hair is a little bit singed and his pride is somewhat affected,” he said.
Rather than use an electric fan to clear the smell of burned fur, the couple said they opened windows until the hourlong Earth Hour observance ended.
Doctor Mark (07:49:57), thank you for your response:
We all put our efforts where we think that they will have the greatest effect, based on our interests, our strengths, and our limitations.
Accordingly, your assumption that “our time” is most productively spent in the arena you favor totally ignores the fact that others may not share your interests, strengths, and limitations. For example, community work is often face to face … and Anthony suffers from fairly severe hearing loss. For me, my strength is writing, so I write, I don’t debate. For you to claim that “our time” is best spent on Dr. Mark’s whizbang community method is sadly reflective of the assumed moral superiority of much of the environmental movement.
I am an environmentally conscious person myself, and I have been since I read “Silent Spring” when Rachel Carson first published it. But that doesn’t give me the right or the knowledge to tell others where they should put their efforts aimed at improving the planet. You want to work in the community, fine, I support that wholeheartedly.
You, on the other hand, abuse Anthony for not following your magic path …
When I was a kid, we used to try this one all the time. We’d say “But mom, he hit me first” … it was as pathetic and worthless an excuse then as it is now.
Doctor Mark, you have been ranting and spitting. You excuse it because in your view, Anthony did it first … but ranting and spitting, by you or anyone, is not pleasant. And yes, some people honestly think turning the lights off for an hour is a stupid waste of time, because nothing is accomplished. They may be wrong, but that doesn’t make them “ditto-heads.”
You make it sound like Anthony has “withdrawn” from real interaction and is fighting from some position where you can’t attack him (“lob dirt clods from the other side of the computer screen”). You say
But when you are offered the same supposed advantage, you turn it down … who is the one who is withdrawing here?
You are withdrawing from his preferred area of work … now, I don’t think that’s a bad thing. As I said, to each his own arena.
But I do think it is a bad thing to abuse someone because they don’t prefer to work in your arena.
Also, I absolutely resent the statement that you are doing “actual work” and that none of us are. A huge part of the actual work is educating people and discussing and learning about the issues and the facts. You are a teacher, how can you claim that what Anthony and I and others do on this blog is not part of the “actual work”???
You say that you “have your facts straight about him” … perhaps this claim of “it’s true because Doctor Mark says so” goes over big with the college kids that you teach.
Here, we have higher standards. We like facts. Evidence. Citations. Anthony has specifically refuted your claims. You saying ‘but I’m right’ adds nothing to the strength of your assertions. At present, Anthony is way ahead in the discussion.
For example, you say he “quit” the school board. Anthony says he ran but was not re-elected. On the web, I find this:
See how it works? Evidence. Facts. Right now, I’d say his claim is winning, and your claim that you “have your facts straight” rings kinda hollow …
Finally, the most upsetting part to me is your assumption of moral superiority. As a committed environmentalist, I find the hijacking of the environmental movement by people like you, people who think that those who might disagree with them are not just wrong, but are “ditto-heads” and the like, to be a tragedy of historic proportions. Lots of people hate anything “green”, and actions and statements like yours are a large part of the reason.
I can’t tell you how much abuse I’ve taken from card-carrying self-professed “greens” because I disagree with them about whether CO2 going from 0.03% to 0.05% of the atmosphere is the biggest challenge of this century. I’ve worked all over the world. I’ve seen poverty and sickness and hopelessness that no one should ever have to witness, much less to live.
In Costa Rica, I talked to a guy who was a firewood cutter. I asked where he got wood. He said “The protected forest”. He said he knew it was wrong, but he had to feed his wife and kids.
That is the biggest challenge of this century, people living on a dollar a day, not whether the temperature during extra-tropical winter nights goes up by a degree or two. Environmentalism is a luxury that the poor can’t afford to waste one moment on. The only way to solve it is through development, which takes energy.
So those who are pushing for increased energy prices through cap-and-tax and the Kyoto Protocol and the like are not helping, they are actively harming the environment. In addition to diverting money from real environmental problems, they are reducing the chances of the third world having enough money to fix up their environmental mistakes.
Now, I know you may not agree with that. And that’s fine, different people have different ideas of how to work for the environment, how to clean up the ecological disasters in the poor countries, how to promote environmental awareness.
But your assumption of moral superiority, that your way of community work is the only way for everyone, that your ideas of sustainability are clearly the right way, that Earth Hour is a patently and obviously wonderful thing, and that those who disagree with you are contemptible ditto-heads, is both sad and counterproductive.
I think that turning off the lights for an hour is a pathetic feel-good exercise that makes absolutely no difference in the world. Electricity is a boon to the world, not a bane. I think it is a counter-productive action, because people think they are doing something when they are accomplishing nothing. And that makes them less likely to actually do something real, something that might make a difference.
Now I could be wrong, I have been many times before. But that is my considered, well thought out, and honest opinion.
But you not only disagree with that idea, you are openly contemptuous of those who might hold that idea, myself included.
Your point of view about those who don’t want to dance to your tune is causing immense harm to my beloved environmental movement. Your actions, your contempt, your cries of “ditto-heads”, turn people away from ecological awareness. You are doing good with one hand … but meanwhile, you are studiously ignoring the harm that the other hand is doing.
Enough with the moral superiority, my friend. The way that you are acting is neither moral nor superior, it is destructively counterproductive. We’re all bozos on this bus, fools whose intentions are good … so cut your fellow humanoids some slack here. I’m sure it doesn’t seem like it when you work with college kids at CSU, but the polls show that support for the ecological “green” movement is at an all-time low … you should consider that fact long and hard before you start with the “ditto-heads” …
I wish you well in your community work,
w.
After another drive-by, that is. How professorial.
Mark’s decision to disengage from discussion here, while at the same time criticizing me for what he claims is my “disengaging from community participation” does little to bolster his claims or his credibility.
Up until I formed this blog, Professor Stemen and I got along just fine. In addition to his being PO’d about my blog feed showing up on the local editorial page, I think’s he’s PO’d about the success of it in reaching so many people.
He did make me curious though, and I asked our local newspaper editor, David Little, if he has received any complaints about WUWT being in the blog feed of the editorial page. His answer: “not a one”.
So it’s just Mark Stemen so far.
Mark says I’m disengaged from my community. He also says “he has his facts straight”. That must mean then that Mark knows all about my participation in the local Rotary Club, the projects and donations I’ve made to the community through it, my time with local cub scouts. and all of the donations I’ve made from my local company to local schools and causes. Like the one to the local Science Museum.
Beyond his sustainability efforts, I challenge Professor Stemen to show his local contributions outside of his safety zone at the university.
It is sad that Professor Stemen has to resort to personal attacks over a simple factual issue, which he still hasn’t addressed, and that is the amount of power Earth Hour saved if any.
Willis,
I appreciate your response. I was trying to get off, but since I launched this thread, I feel the obligation to reply.
Blogs are the realm of opinion. I know that, personally, my time is best spent working in the local community, and it is my opinion that it is true universally. I believe that not because it is my arena, but because I believe that what we say face to face has a much greater impact than the drive by comments you get on the web (and yes, mine have been drive by comments).
Now, I understand that that can’t be true for everyone, and that you have different opinion. I am okay with that. There was no superiority intended, but I can see where you go that impression.
I admit that my comments were boorish and in haste, but also understand that I did not come looking for Anthony or WUWT; it just popped up on my screen. I am not new to WUWT, however. I read it often, and have posted here on occasion. WUWT is the most up to date source on current climate issues, and deserves the acclaim it has received for breaking so many stories. I have also read (what appears to be) an increasing number of hit pieces that have no point other than ridicule. This one hit home and I took the bait.
As I wrote earlier, this is not our first exchange, and I could answer each of Anthony’s comments, but this is his house. I have behaved bad enough as it is, and I have no desire to make myself look even worse by presenting facts citations, etc. in rebuttal. I prefer to cut my losses and concede the argument.
I simply ask that you cut this bozo humanoid a little slack as I slide out the door.
Mark (21:25:24) :
I prefer to cut my losses and concede the argument.
I simply ask that you cut this bozo humanoid a little slack as I slide out the door.
With that kind of an exit, I don’t think anyone will object if you slide back in more often.
The real tragedy in the whole AGW thing is that it has polarized so many good people to pick two extreme sides. There appears to be no middle ground where people can actually talk without shouting.
Most of us actually would like to live reasonably within the idea of being ecology conscious, but we don’t impose our views on others unless there is a compelling reason.
Some believe there is a compelling reason and it boils down to this one : “We’re all going to die unless we bring CO2 concentration down to 0.03%.”
So the difficulty with the AGW movement now is that they are proposing theories that are not supported by what has been uncovered so far. Even people who believe there might be some GW but doubt the A component, or perhaps think that GW might be a good thing (for some, or for most) have to pick one of two extreme camps.
And neither one looks like they are very reasonable.
Ignoring all I don’t know about gap between the AGW statistical postulations to the cause and effect side of these global temperature measurements, I do know this one. A lot of politicians globally from either camps like this Cap and Trade or these carbon tax systems.
We can’t ignore that at the core of Cap and Trade lies a goldmine of tax revenue opportunities. At a time when governments are running their countries to the ground with deficit spendings, opportunities to gain more tax revenues can be irresistible.
When we all believe that paying another 10% in the gas pumps or to run electricity in out homes or to run our factories is necessarily so we won’t get wiped out, we will willingly accept this.
But if the justification is false, then we really should be looking at this for what it is : a cruel hoax borne out of false ideology and outright fraud.