Earth Hour: a dissent

I thought this essay deserved a wider audience. I have added some paragraphing to aid readability but changed not a word. Reprinted with permission.

– John A

The whole mentality around Earth Hour demonizes electricity. I cannot do that, instead I celebrate it and all that it has provided for humanity. – Ross McKitrick

Earth Hour: A Dissent

by Ross McKitrick

Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics, Univer...
Image via Wikipedia

In 2009 I was asked by a journalist for my thoughts on the importance of Earth Hour.

Here is my response.

I abhor Earth Hour. Abundant, cheap electricity has been the greatest source of human liberation in the 20th century. Every material social advance in the 20th century depended on the proliferation of inexpensive and reliable electricity.

Giving women the freedom to work outside the home depended on the availability of electrical appliances that free up time from domestic chores. Getting children out of menial labour and into schools depended on the same thing, as well as the ability to provide safe indoor lighting for reading.

Development and provision of modern health care without electricity is absolutely impossible. The expansion of our food supply, and the promotion of hygiene and nutrition, depended on being able to irrigate fields, cook and refrigerate foods, and have a steady indoor supply of hot water.

Many of the world’s poor suffer brutal environmental conditions in their own homes because of the necessity of cooking over indoor fires that burn twigs and dung. This causes local deforestation and the proliferation of smoke- and parasite-related lung diseases.

Anyone who wants to see local conditions improve in the third world should realize the importance of access to cheap electricity from fossil-fuel based power generating stations. After all, that’s how the west developed.

The whole mentality around Earth Hour demonizes electricity. I cannot do that, instead I celebrate it and all that it has provided for humanity.

Earth Hour celebrates ignorance, poverty and backwardness. By repudiating the greatest engine of liberation it becomes an hour devoted to anti-humanism. It encourages the sanctimonious gesture of turning off trivial appliances for a trivial amount of time, in deference to some ill-defined abstraction called “the Earth,” all the while hypocritically retaining the real benefits of continuous, reliable electricity.

People who see virtue in doing without electricity should shut off their fridge, stove, microwave, computer, water heater, lights, TV and all other appliances for a month, not an hour. And pop down to the cardiac unit at the hospital and shut the power off there too.

I don’t want to go back to nature. Travel to a zone hit by earthquakes, floods and hurricanes to see what it’s like to go back to nature. For humans, living in “nature” meant a short life span marked by violence, disease and ignorance. People who work for the end of poverty and relief from disease are fighting against nature. I hope they leave their lights on.

Here in Ontario, 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 with all its tradeoffs is something to be ashamed of.

Ross McKitrick

Professor of Economics

University of Guelph

h/t to the Bishop Hill blog for bringing this essay to my attention

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

210 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Julia
March 27, 2011 2:21 pm

get a life
REPLY: Julia, I have one and it’s quite rich and full and happy. But thanks for the suggestion! Must be gloomy on Hudson Bay, so I understand you being in a funk. – Anthony

Julia
March 27, 2011 2:40 pm

“and of course i did not mean literally for him to be fired. it was a joke, just like this essay”
can you read smokey??… the only thing that is scary is your obsession with this highly opinionated pointless article.
“you people” your starting to sound like hate speech.
get a life. get off the computer. and do something good for the world. your probably an old retired nobody that has nothing to do but harass peoples on the internet.

March 27, 2011 4:47 pm

Julia says:
“and of course i did not mean literally for him to be fired. it was a joke, just like this essay… can you read?”
I can read. Julia wrote this about Ross McKittrick:
“I’m surprised Guelph University has not fired you for such ignorant comments Professor McKitrick.”
There was no “[/sarc]” tag at the end, and it’s pretty clear that Julia meant exactly what she wrote. Attempted cover-ups are always worse than the original mistake.
The scary part is the total intolerance of different views by people like Julia in censorship-prone university settings. The 1st Amendment is despised, and groupthink rules the opinions of students and faculty alike. As Julia makes clear, tenure is only acceptable for future like-minded eco-rulers – not for anyone with a different opinion.

John P
March 27, 2011 7:08 pm

funny how smokey didn’t deny his retiree, nobody status.
Canada also has its free speech rights enabled to put limits on these rights from idiots like smokey from spewing hatred against an identifiable group, which happens to be eco-minded people. keep it up smokey. yes “us people” very scary. ooooohhh. just because you have a right to do something. doesn’t make it right.
but anyways, we are way off topic. didn’t know we had to be so politically correct on this site with “sarc” comments and such

Margaret
March 27, 2011 7:22 pm

The only person discouraging people’s thoughts and feelings on this site is you Smokey.
I read all the comments you have posted, and they are all attacking the opposing view. Anyone who thinks differently from you, you have something rather cynical to say. Hypocritical and rather Sad smokes.

March 27, 2011 7:23 pm

John P,
Get a grip. I’ve often mentioned here that I’m retired from a thirty year carreer in designing, calibrating and repairing weather related instruments in a large metrology lab employing over 140 engineers and technicians. I understand the engineering side of the issue. What’s your background?
Sure, I’m a nobody. But I don’t think I’m an “idiot.” I just get irked at free speech censors who have their hands deep in my wallet, and who always want more – based on a bogus AGW scare.
And your judgemental comment needs to be fixed: “just because you have a right to do something doesn’t make it right wrong.”
There. Fixed.

March 27, 2011 7:32 pm

Margaret,
I stand by everything I’ve said. How would you feel if people were attacking you for simply expressing your opinion? Persecuted, I would think. Yet Prof McKittrick simply ignores you. That must burn.

Brian H
March 28, 2011 12:01 am

Margaret, Julia, and Joanne, wallowing in uninformed self-righteousness.
Perfect illustrations/embodiments about what is so repulsive about the Enforced Greenness groupmind.

Fai Mao
March 28, 2011 6:09 pm

I think someone should organize an electrical welding competition on this day

March 30, 2011 8:09 am

Great article.
“I like visiting nature but I don’t want to live there,….”
Going further, geologist Richard Sanford said “I love nature, I don’t worship it.”
(He once had the Society for Objective Science, which nailed environmentalism on fundamental grounds.)

1 7 8 9