Image from ECOCRED blog
There has been considerable debate over the effectiveness of Earth Hour. From my own perspective it merely raises awareness rather than actually doing something physical. Everybody who participates turns off their lights, then they light candles or use some fossil fuel lamp for illumination. Does the production of carbon not remain roughly the same?
Certainly as a publicity campaign it must be rated as a success.
A good post on the subject from ECOCRED about sums up Earth Hour.
Update:
I forgot to add the link to ECOCRED’s current post.
Eco-Crap 
Posted by Alex Jones on March 24, 2013 at 8:15 am
Better to do something longer lasting in my opinion.
LikeLike
Posted by argentumvulgaris on March 24, 2013 at 8:25 am
>Alex, that was the theme on the links.
AV
LikeLike
Posted by Lottie Nevin on March 24, 2013 at 10:03 am
I liked the link too!
LikeLike
Posted by argentumvulgaris on March 24, 2013 at 11:24 am
>Lottie, to be honest, the post was written so I could refer to the link, I thought it was important.
AV
LikeLike
Posted by Lottie Nevin on March 24, 2013 at 11:29 am
It was a great post and so was yours. I really enjoy reading your Eco-Crap – it all makes good sense to me!
LikeLike
Posted by argentumvulgaris on March 24, 2013 at 12:41 pm
I came over all goosey when I read that, thank you.
AV
LikeLike
Posted by livingsimplyfree on March 24, 2013 at 1:03 pm
While a good thing, I find it’s not something everyone even hears about. Those around me had no idea what Earth Hour was or when.
LikeLike
Posted by argentumvulgaris on March 25, 2013 at 11:20 am
>lsf, I can’t believe that anyone who has the net doesn’t know about Earth Hour… People like my late mother, perhaps, but then she still lived in the age of the typewriter.
AV
LikeLike