I love it: we had an email recently from the Union at the university encouraging people to get involved, and berating the university itself for not being more proactive about it (any stick to beat the mean university administration). They quoted a figure from last year's power out in Sydney, where apparently the hour of lights out, if continued for a year, would save something like the emissions from 48000 cars for a year.
Of course, if Sydney actually turned out their lights for an entire year, that might be worthwhile. On the other hand, if you take the greenhouse gas emissions saved in that hour, that equates to a whole 5 cars. (I can't remember the exact figures, but these are close)
Sorry, but I see it as a pretty fruitless gesture.
If all that lighting equates to such a few vehicles, perhaps they'd be better targeting something worthwhile (like vehicles). (Same thing applies to changing everyone's lightbulbs to the more expensive, less versatile power savers. I use them where appropriate, but they don't suit all my lighting requirements. Bureaucracy gone mad).
Don't get me started on plastic bags. How much worse the actual packaging of the items I carry home in those bags. And just ensure they are bio-degradable - I had one in my backyard, and it was breaking down very quickly, so where is the problem.
(And yes - it is BIO-degradable, not just degradable like so many people mistakenly call it - many many things are degradable, but we want the right mechanism (ie breaking down in the environment). I can degrade a plastic bag quite successfully with fire, and that means it is also degradable, but doesn't mean it will break down in the trash!)
I'm not against environmental initiatives, I've put a few into place myself at work, that have been picked up by the whole university, but put the effort into something that will actually achieve a decent outcome. I'm not intending to step on idealism, but the same effort more directed could have significantly more impact for no additional effort.
