WHO NEEDS TO FLICK OFF?

 

WHO NEEDSWHO NEEDS
TO FLICK OFF?TO FLICK OFF?

 

Easy answer: we all do. Everyone from  Grandma, who leaves the bathroom light on all night, to McInsertBigCorporationHere, who keeps manufacturing without a care for the consequences their profits make on the environment. Or you, getting your take-out lunch in styrofoam containers every day of the week.

 

77% of Canadians are convinced global warming is real. Almost half of us believe we will see the effects in our lifetime. 30% want our leaders to pay as much attention to climate change as to health care.1 So how come many of us are still sitting on our duffers, waiting for catastrophe to strike?!


We need to make choices and hard decisions. Change will start with individuals and our buying power, and trends will lead the way for corporations and governments to follow. It may seem like turning off a porch light is too insignificant to have an effect, but these small acts are the least we can do to counteract the damage we have done to our earth.

 

We've grouped the offenders into three main categories:

INDIVIDUALS, GOVERNMENTS and CORPORATIONS.


1 Angus Reid Strategies. Canadians + Global Warming: Impact on Citizens and Consumers, March 2007.

Submitted by Nicole Ray on Thu, 2008-04-24 16:17.
our class substuted our english and socials to enviromental stuff
Submitted by Nicole Ray on Thu, 2008-04-24 16:17.
our class substuted our english and socials to enviromental stuff
Submitted by Be Green in Toronto on Thu, 2008-04-24 10:21.
After a winter of public transit, have started going one step further and using this beautiful spring weather as inspiration to walk home from work. So far so good! Also changed the timer in my place to come on later and turn off earlier—automatic Flick Off!!
Submitted by i_support_globa... on Tue, 2008-04-22 12:02.
allah will save us don't worry
Submitted by JackieF on Wed, 2007-11-14 12:30.
If you don't "believe" in global warming, here are some noticible changes I got off the internet: -Sea level rise due to melting glaciers and the thermal expansion of the oceans as global temperature increases -Massive releases of greenhouse gases from melting permafrost and dying forests. -A high risk of more extreme weather events such as heat waves, droughts and floods. Already, the global incidence of drought has doubled over the past 30 years. -Severe impacts on a regional level. For example, in Europe, river flooding will increase over much of the continent, and in coastal areas the risk of flooding, erosion and wetland loss will increase substantially. -Natural systems, including glaciers, coral reefs, mangroves, arctic ecosystems, alpine ecosystems, boreal forests, tropical forests, prairie wetlands and native grasslands, will be severely threatened. -An increase in existing risks of species extinction and biodiversity loss. -The greatest impacts will be on the poorer countries least able to protect themselves from rising sea levels, spread of disease and declines in agricultural production in the developing countries of Africa, Asia and the Pacific. -At all scales of climate change, developing countries will suffer the most.
Submitted by jedi34567 on Wed, 2007-11-14 16:11.
Glad to see you put "believe" in quotes, JackieF. Science is not about consensus or belief, but about facts. The science linking man made emissions to global warming is weak and getting weaker all the time. CO2 comprises just 0.034% of the atmosphere and humans are responsible for only a small portion of that. The costs of reducing CO2 levels according to the Kyoto accord will be as high at 180 trillion dollars and will not appreciably affect the climate (maybe, just maybe, one half of one degree over the next 50 years, then the warming starts again, if in fact it is caused by CO2 in the first place).


Sea levels are rising because we are between ice ages. The sea level has risen over 130 meters since the last ice age and will continue to rise until the next one.


Global warming actually predicts more stable weather as there are less cool and warm currents to mix and cause extreme weather. The hysteria over increasing hurricanes has been abandoned by all but the most ardent alarmists at this point.


The risks you detail are assuming an enormous increase in temperature that the facts simply don't bear out. Even the IPCC has cut back on their predictions on this one. In the past, warming has been associated with prosperity, not strife.


I'm glad you mentioned the developing countries, because the costs of fighting climate change will hit them the hardest and the results will not help them appreciably. Instead of spending 180 trillion dollars on reducing CO2 levels, we should be putting those resources into the developing countries so they have the means to deal with whatever climate issues come their way. For example, instead of worrying about trying to control the climate (which no one is certain we can do), we can easily protect vulnerable areas from storms and floods by building the necessary levees and storm walls at a much reduced cost. We can help these people with poverty, hunger, and disease instead of throwing our money away on carbon credits.

Submitted by JackieF on Wed, 2007-11-14 12:31.
I think that maybe the flickoff website should make the screen black instead of white because it can save up to 304,153.544 Watt hours! Just an idea...
Submitted by The FLICK OFF Team on Thu, 2007-11-15 17:01.

The research done on this topic, up to this point, is at best inconclusive.  Some studies even indicate that black backgrounds on flat paneled screens use more energy than their white counterparts.

Read techlogg.com to learn about their testing results.

-The FLICK OFF team

 

 

Submitted by jasono on Tue, 2008-04-22 12:39.
Well for earth hour i think it was google went black it looked pretty bad and was hard on the eyes but i dont think people will be designing all black backgrounds to save energy when just replacing all the bulbs in your house with CFLs will do a lot more. Maybe a checkered background black/white would save half as much but then it would look awkard. It's an interesting concept but i think companies making the displays are doing what they can to save energy. I've replaced bulbs in my house with the CFLs and save almost 20% on each bill, i used double glazing on some older windows since i couldn't replace them right away. As soon as winter is here i'll be seeing some good savings. I doubt i'll start designing with black background though.
Submitted by Brian321 on Sun, 2007-09-30 09:36.
I agree that green house gases need to reduced by the reduction of the burning of fosel fuels. The greatest culprit of this I believe is the automobile, yet how many people on this site live in the city and say they care about the enviroment yet will still climb in their suv or automobile and drive every weekend two hours to the cottage in the Muskoka's, etc. get in their motorized boat, drive that around the lake all weekend, not to mention oh lets have a camp fire. If people in the city or as we call them "cityiots", or else where realy care about the enviroment then on the weekend stay home, go to the park, ride a bike, go for a walk etc but leave the car at home, and give the enviroment a break.