Getting back to the "One hour without lights" notion that started the "Earth Hour", the request was for lighting, not 'power', to be turned off. No 'safety' lighting was suggested to be included but all the 'unnecessary' lighting such as display lights, office lights left on overnight etc.

While Melbourne logged a reduction of 10% in the demand on Victoria's power generation, this was argued to be an example of the savings that 'could' be made if everyone acted in a way that conserved and/or minimised their usage. The main notion was that we, as the community, address an issue has been impeding effective action.

We have been told for a long time that there is no point acting as an individual in these matters, because it is only collective action that counts. The Earth Hour concept was seen as a way for individuals to collectively contribute their "widow's mite", as the song puts it.

Last year and this year, such collective action by individuals at the bottom of the pecking order (with a fair amount of persuasion aimed at those higher up) demonstrated that those individuals can have a serious effect. Reduction of the power demand by 10%, if only for an hour, for the entire state of Victoria would have to be described as "significant".

We, individually, can all think of counter-arguments but we can also think of ways to individually minimise out footprint; that's the real point.

Cheers, Rowan
whose total annual electricity use (according to Country Energy, the supplier) contributes 1.46 tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere, and who went walking in the New England autumn for that hour.