Earth Hour:

[Shady]

I was thinking more along the lines of Braveheart's.

Yeah, but Braveheart was fighting for freedom. You'd be fighting to curtail it. Notice the irony?

[eyeball]

Yeah, but Braveheart was fighting for freedom. You'd be fighting to curtail it. Notice the irony?

No but your usual ass-backward ignorant way of looking at things stands out as usual. Degrading the ecosystems people rely on for their livelihoods is just about one of the least democratic things you can do to them.

It stands to reason given how habitat destruction is also the biggest contributor to species extinction.

[bush_cheney2004]

....It stands to reason given how habitat destruction is also the biggest contributor to species extinction.

...and one of the most destructive practices is commercial fishing.

[eyeball]

...and one of the most destructive practices is commercial fishing.

No, it's the mismanagement of commercial fishing that's so destructive - when managers allow economics to trump virtue things are guaranteed to go to hell.

[bush_cheney2004]

No, it's the mismanagement of commercial fishing that's so destructive - when managers allow economics to trump virtue things are guaranteed to go to hell.

Nice try....commercial fishing exploits the resource to extinction and lays waste to marine ecosystems. It is by far the most destructive "protein harvesting" industry on the planet. To add further insult and destruction, bycatch and high-grading kill wastes the resource even further, tossing lower grade catch overboard as "waste".

[eyeball]

Nice try....commercial fishing exploits the resource to extinction and lays waste to marine ecosystems. It is by far the most destructive "protein harvesting" industry on the planet. To add further insult and destruction, bycatch and high-grading kill wastes the resource even further, tossing lower grade catch overboard as "waste".

That's right, commercial fishing does this when the officials responsible for not allowing it put economics ahead of virtue.

[The_Squid]

Nice try....commercial fishing exploits the resource to extinction and lays waste to marine ecosystems. It is by far the most destructive "protein harvesting" industry on the planet. To add further insult and destruction, bycatch and high-grading kill wastes the resource even further, tossing lower grade catch overboard as "waste".

It is not the fishing itself that allows this to happen but a lack of regulation and a lack of enforcement of those regulations.

Fishing, like any resource extraction, is fine if properly regulated.

Edited April 1, 2012 by The_Squid

[bush_cheney2004]

That's right, commercial fishing does this when the officials responsible for not allowing it put economics ahead of virtue.

No, the officials are not bottom trawling, over-fishing, and laying wholesale waste to the marine environment. It's the commercial fishing industry doing it. It's like not blaming dope dealers for overdoses because government doesn't stop them from selling heroin.

At least the gulls are happy to eat the bloody destruction.

Edited April 1, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[eyeball]

No, the officials are not bottom trawling, over-fishing, and laying wholesale waste to the marine environment. It's the commercial fishing industry doing it. It's like not blaming dope dealers for overdoses because government doesn't stop them from selling heroin.

At least the gulls are happy to eat the bloody destruction.

Well, that's about the worst caricature of an environmentalist who doesn't have a clue that I've ever seen.

[bush_cheney2004]

Well, that's about the worst caricature of an environmentalist who doesn't have a clue that I've ever seen.

I agree...it was stupid when you first typed it, and it still is.

[Guest Derek L]

Tell you what, I've thought that there should be an actual CREDIT for people who use less energy. If you drive less mileage, use less electricity, have a lower heating bill you should be eligible for a tax break. That gives an incentive to the masses, where even a small amount saved per household becomes a substantial amount for the system.

That’s actually not a bad idea………With that said, there are obvious financial benefits for those that reduce their energy consumption……..

How would you develop this idea further?

Edited April 2, 2012 by Derek L

[TimG]

That’s actually not a bad idea……

I disagree. It is a really dumb idea - as bad as those carbon credit scams because you are giving people money for achieving "savings" against a hypothetical baseline. The problem is who decides what that baseline should be? Your last years consumption? Why? What if you move? That discourages people from moving. What if you get married or get a roommate? Wouldn't we want to reward people who save energy by running one household instead two?

Basically, any scheme that requires some bureaucrat to be passing judgement on what your "target" should be or whether you met that "target" is a bad idea.

Edited April 2, 2012 by TimG

[Moonlight Graham]

The planet we live on gets .. 1 hour of attention a year? Did it not used to be Earth Day??? Scaling back?

Doesn't make any sense to have an "Earth Hour", people should put up or shut-up and do whatever they think they should do every minute of every day. It's symbolic nonsense to show 1 hour of empty support so people can "feel good" and then trash the planet the rest of the year.

[Guest Derek L]

I disagree. It is a really dumb idea - as bad as those carbon credit scams because you are giving people money for achieving "savings" against a hypothetical baseline. The problem is who decides what that baseline should be? Your last years consumption? Why? What if you move? That discourages people from moving. What if you get married or get a roommate? Wouldn't we want to reward people who save energy by running one household instead two?

Basically, any scheme that requires some bureaucrat to be passing judgement on what your "target" should be or whether you met that "target" is a bad idea.

Selective editing? I thought only Waldo did that……..Anyways, in my post, I did ask of Manny to expand on his/her idea further……..At least hear them out.

How would you encourage energy conservation?

[Black Dog]

The planet we live on gets .. 1 hour of attention a year? Did it not used to be Earth Day??? Scaling back?

Earth Day is April 22.

[TimG]

Selective editing? I thought only Waldo did that..

Sorry - it was not my intent to change the meaning of what you said.

How would you encourage energy conservation?

What is the matter with a simple price signal? i.e. increase the price of energy?

[Boges]

What is the matter with a simple price signal? i.e. increase the price of energy?

I think we've seen a whole bunch of that in Ontario.

[Guest Derek L]

Sorry - it was not my intent to change the meaning of what you said.

What is the matter with a simple price signal? i.e. increase the price of energy?

Who’s going to increase the price of energy? The Producers? The Government via a tax?

To me, that seems like another smash and grab financial policy……That said, one that will have a greater effect on low and middle income earners.

[TimG]

Who’s going to increase the price of energy? The Producers? The Government via a tax?

You asked how I would encourage energy conservation. My response is the only way to do this is with a price signal (most likely a tax).

If you had asked if I think we should "encourage energy conservation" I would say it is a waste of time. Energy already comes with a cost - If people don't already conserve energy it is because the cost of conserving it exceeds the cost of not conserving it and that is fine with me as long as cost of energy is not being artificially lowered.

Edited April 2, 2012 by TimG

[Guest Derek L]

You asked how I would encourage energy conservation. My response is the only way to do this is with a price signal (most likely a tax).

If you had asked if I think we should "encourage energy conservation" I would say it is a waste of time. Energy already comes with a cost - If people don't already conserve energy it is because the cost of conserving it exceeds the cost of not conserving it and that is fine with me as long as cost of energy is not being artificially lowered.

Fair enough, I too would question how valid a “green tax” would be.

[GostHacked]

You asked how I would encourage energy conservation. My response is the only way to do this is with a price signal (most likely a tax).

If you had asked if I think we should "encourage energy conservation" I would say it is a waste of time. Energy already comes with a cost - If people don't already conserve energy it is because the cost of conserving it exceeds the cost of not conserving it and that is fine with me as long as cost of energy is not being artificially lowered.

Those smartmeters were to be installed to help save us money. And now rates are going up regardless. When will people realize and understand it's not about saving the planet. Discourage using energy during the day because the rates are higher. It's been artificially increased .

Increasing the taxes or prices won't solve the issue in my view. If I need to do laundry during the day, then no problem, that will be reflected on my bill. Funny thing is that the apartment I live in does not have these restrictions. Most corporations don't have those restrictions either, all that garbage is for the average end consumer like you and me.

[Shady]

Those smartmeters were to be installed to help save us money. And now rates are going up regardless.

Exactly. It's similar to the scheme used to have people use less water. So what do people do? They follow instructions and use less water. But what does that mean? Less money for municipalities. So now what are they doing? Raising water rates.

Only the government can make the cost of a product increase when the demand for said product decreases.

[Boges]

They're still doing it. It's this week.