Earth Hour ??

[dazzler]

Earth hour is on where you are supposed to turn off your power for an hour to save energy. Apparently last year it reduced demand by 10%.

What I dont get, seeing as Im not Mr Burns nor do I run a power station, but what happens when the demand is reduced.

Does the power get stored?

Less coal is burned?

Each to their own, but I dont understand how it works :?

[Gra]

in theory, less power is required, so less is generated, so less coal is burned...


in theory....

in reality, it takes longer to wind down and the fire up the coal fired power stations, so really bubcuss happens,

[dazzler]

Thats what i thought, a diesel generator could rev up and down, but i thought coal was just like the old boilers where you put coal in, make steam and away she goes.

[Waldo]

Yep Dazzler :2tsup:, I'm with you mate - it's a load of crock.

Can't offend Astrid girl in here, or Astrid seeing as how they didn't start it.

[Lignum]

This just about sums it up as the crock it is.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23443475-25717,00.html

[HappyHammer]

The environmental impact on the day is basically zero as the amount of energy generated will be the same. The aim is to increase awareness of energy consumption with a long term aim of reducing the demand and therefore the coal and water used by the generators.

HH.

[HappyHammer]

This just about sums it up as the crock it is.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23443475-25717,00.html
That sounds more like point scoring between publications to me.....

HH.

[Gra]

That sounds more like point scoring between publications to me.....

HH.

Got to agree there HH, I took that story as just one paper having a go at its rival.

[Lignum]

Got to agree there HH, I took that story as just one paper having a go at its rival.
So that makes it incorrect?

[Gra]

So that makes it incorrect?

doesn't make it incorrect, but does make you question the motives and the "FACTS" listed. both sides will only list the facts that support their argument

[Waldo]

I've got to agree with Andrew Bolt, he makes a lot of sense in the many things he writes, one for example in the Herald article, "Sending up the 32-metre light globe-shaped billboard burned so much gas - and emitted so much carbon dioxide - that we'll have to switch off 10,000 lights tomorrow just to make it up"

I got ignored last night elsewhere for raising a similar thought - funny how the author of the thread doesn't respond when logic prevails and is raised. :no:

[dazzler]

The environmental impact on the day is basically zero as the amount of energy generated will be the same. The aim is to increase awareness of energy consumption with a long term aim of reducing the demand and therefore the coal and water used by the generators.

HH.

Yeah I see that side of it. But wouldnt turning off our hot water systems (gas or electric - you solar freaks can leave them on :wink: ) for a weekend make more sense. At least they could shovel in a little less coal :) and a cold shower makes a bigger impact than no lights. :)

dazzler

[MICKYG]

I think if we peed in the ocean maybe we could see a difference:cool::cool::cool::cool:


Regards Mike

[dazzler]

I think if we peed in the ocean maybe we could see a difference:cool::cool::cool::cool:


Regards Mike

Well I did in the surf tonight and feel much better....:D

[Brickie]

and a cold shower makes a bigger impact than no lights. :)

dazzler

You sound like my missus....:D

[nev25]

http://www.woodworkforums.com/showpost.php?p=709349&postcount=63

[rgum]

Shut the pwr stations dwn for an hr. They are still burning coal whilst we turn off for an hr.
Earth hr is a waste of time.