Citrus Growers Forum

dauben · Posted: Sun 29 Mar, 2009 2:00 am

How I celebrated earth hour . . .

1) I went around the house and turned every light on.
2) I powered up my computer (600 Watt Power supply) and listened to "Every Light in the House is on" by Trace Atkins. Loud. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLZ55CiJwmY
3) For fun I listened to "Every Light in the House is Blown" by Cledus T Judd. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_bGXe7TOqM
4) Now the only thing not running is my well pump. Time to go take a shower. . . . Smile

Phillip

Scott K. · Posted: Sun 29 Mar, 2009 11:21 am

If everyone in Cali. did that, It would have blown the power grid. Then you could have Earth Day(s) without power.

Doesn't sound very...........conservative!

Keep inspiring us Phillip!

_________________
Peace, Love, and Citrus

Patty_in_wisc · Posted: Sun 29 Mar, 2009 11:30 am

Phillip, you are a hoot! Laughing

I have all my lights on now cuz it's so dark, cold & gloomy outside, need something to lighten up the day.

_________________
Patty
I drink wine to make other people more interesting Wink

dauben · Posted: Sun 29 Mar, 2009 12:44 pm

Scott K. wrote:

If everyone in Cali. did that, It would have blown the power grid. Then you could have Earth Day(s) without power.

Not me. If the power goes out, I'll have plenty of light from burning a couple of tires left on the property from the previous owners.

Phillip

dauben · Posted: Sun 29 Mar, 2009 12:47 pm

I love Earth Hour. It gives me time to reflect on all of the wonderful natural resources that God has provided for us to use.

Phillip

gdbanks · Posted: Sun 29 Mar, 2009 2:26 pm

If you were on a smart grid the electricity would have been much cheaper to use because the demand would have been so low during that hour.

_________________
looking for cold hardy citrus

http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/6122668-glenn-banks-dds

829 · Posted: Sun 29 Mar, 2009 3:16 pm

Personally, I went fishing in 32F weather during earth hour. For me it was earth hours.

dauben · Posted: Mon 30 Mar, 2009 1:30 am

829 wrote:

Personally, I went fishing in 32F weather during earth hour. For me it was earth hours.

Now that's the type of earth worship worth partaking in. Smile

All kidding aside though, we do have a bounty of natural resources worth using. I even like wind power and thinking about getting a wind turbine for our place. We always seem to have a lot of wind and it would seem logical to use some of it to our advantage. I just got a $700 propane bill so if the economics work out for "green" energy, I'd probably sign up. I just get tired of having it crammed down our throat.

Phillip

829 · Posted: Mon 30 Mar, 2009 12:15 pm

I would like to have wind power, but I live too close to the airport. I am thinking of going solar this year, but it depends on my financial situation after the new baby comes.

Edit: Spelling, air port. HAHAHA, how did I miss that.

Las Palmas Norte · Posted: Mon 30 Mar, 2009 3:22 pm

Millet wrote:

"Earth hour", -----Holiday for hippies - Millet (1,392-)

... or the "feel good hour" as I call it. Ummm, makes you feel like a responsable person for an hour every year.

Cheers, Barrie.

dauben · Posted: Mon 30 Mar, 2009 5:38 pm

Millet wrote:

I hear you Phillip. My 4 least favorite words, have come to be:

Green
Carbon foot print

Millet (1,391-)
"Who painted the Tilma" - H.R.C.

I actually boycott any store or product that uses "Green" in their advertising. If for anything else, just because I dislike gimmiks or slogans that play off of people's ignorance on what really makes their product "green". "My DDT is a green version".

As far as Carbon Footprint, that is now a legal term here in California. My engineering projects now have to address their "Carbon Footprint" under the California Environmental Quality Act. We have to mitigate and purchase carbon credits so that projects will be "carbon neutral". Just remember, what happens in California usualy shows up the the rest of the country a few years later.

Phillip

dauben · Posted: Mon 30 Mar, 2009 5:47 pm

Millet wrote:

My guess would be, if they were economically profitable, and electrically reliable to the owners, they would still be here, and more would have been put up.

That's exactly the basis for why wind/solar energy should to be used . . . If it's "economically feasible". Having it force fed to us if there's lower cost alternatives doesn't make sense (IMHO) unless it was for auxillary power in a remote location.

Phillip

dauben · Posted: Mon 30 Mar, 2009 9:12 pm

Millet wrote:

If your in the market for a black car in California, you better buy it quickly. The California legislature is actually discussing regulating the color of cars, and the reflectivity of paint, to reduce, you guessed it, carbon emissions and greenhouse gasses.

Funny. My boss and I were just talking about that this morning. I thought he was joking.

Just wait until they start mandating the one child policy that China has. We all breathe and exhale CO2, a "known greenhouse gas". In order to be Carbon Neutral, we can no longer have more than 2 children. If we try to remedy the sins of our forefathers, we'll have to start a one child policy. Or better yet, during the next "earth hour", I plan on holding my breath for a full hour. Then again, my decomposing corpse would probably emit greenhouse gasses also.

Phillip

829 · Posted: Mon 30 Mar, 2009 9:40 pm

dauben wrote:

I plan on holding my breath for a full hour. Then again, my decomposing corpse would probably emit greenhouse gasses also.

Phillip

Brancato · Posted: Thu 06 Aug, 2009 2:54 pm

I understand that the Inconvenient Truth was pretty much a scam to market Al Gore (I have only seen clips from the movie). I am curious about some things reguarding this topic though. I know that the whole global warming thing was likely people getting ahead of themselves by seeing only fragments of scientific data and not enough to construct a full and legitimate theory. What I am curious about is if you folks believe in any negative consequnces from anthropogenic carbon emmisions? I mean that question in a serious, scientific (non-political) manor and am not just trying to razz anybody. I know that we all breathe out CO2 and that the average volcanoe eruption puts out carbon levels that compete with the level humans emit but I would have to think there would have to be a link between respiratory problems and the air quality of a place like L.A.? Yet I am also skeptical of the concept of "global warming" as a whole mainly because I do not understand why it has to be sold to me? You really F'd up with that whole polar bear thing Al...

I guess my question is do people reject anthropogenic climate change in it's entirety or just aspects of it? As I do not know worry about the climate changes as much as I do air quality in relation to health later on in life after long term exposure to excessively high carbon levels. That said I am absolutely no expert on the topic and always apreciate everyone's input. I ask this because I know very little of the TRUE scientific basis for any of the arguments. I am not sure what to believe as I have read and been told so many different things reguarding the topic.

As for sustainable techonology I beleive in it from an economic standpoint. The technology will only get better as wind and hydro turbines (and even solar panels to an extent) have become quite a bit more productive and efficient in just the past decade alone. I do not see how any one of these techonologies could power the U.S. but a combination of several seems feasible. True there is more oil out there but I do not want to have to deal with the Middle East and Venezuela to get it or destroy our beautiful land here (we only have very little here as well compared to what we consume). I do not like the idea of the United States having to rely entirely on other nations for something as important as energy (or anything for that matter). There is no reason why we cannot create and manufacture it here. Since it is obviously a finite resource extraction technology will only get more expensive and relying on oil speculators has burnt us before. I feel as though these sustainable technologies could work and be more cost effective in the long run than out current game plan. These technologies will likely hold us over until we figure out how to sustain man-made fusion.

On a side not, has anyone seen the episode of 'That's Impossible' on the History Channel lately about weather manipulation? If not you should check it out as it was incredibly interesting and could possibly play a role in this debate.