If I turned you off back there

[j4]

"On televisions, for example, we would like to see labels saying 'if you watch it, it will cost x pence per hour, if you leave it on standby, it will cost y pence'. Then you can present the environmental cost in monetary terms"

But that's not actually presenting the environmental cost at all, really, is it? Unless you add "WHICH MEANS that when you sink into drooling oblivion in front of the flickering forms of minor celebrities bonking in a bath of baked beans you are not only wasting the product of several thousand years of human evolution but also SYSTEMATICALLY RAPING THE PLANET and leaving it an UNINHABITABLE WASTE LAND, you selfish cretin." Really. Is it. I mean.

That's before we get to the question of how in the name of -- well, frankly, anything you care to name -- an electric toothbrush can be regarded as "essential".

I think I'm just in a bad mood today.

Comments

[ewtikins.livejournal.com]

*nod*

It might be valid if the cost of electricity actually reflected environmental costs, but currently it does not.

[j4.livejournal.com]

Yes. Exactly. (Note to self: Next time, just make the point; don't try to come at it obliquely or rant about it. Saves so much time.)

[ewtikins.livejournal.com]

My brain is more than a little slow today, so point-missing may well have been down to my comprehension rather than your writing.

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

it might be valid if the cost of electricity actually reflected environmental costs, but currently it does not.

And environmental costs aren't always easily comparable; the kinds of impact of the hydro plants that provide 96% of Quebec's electricity plus a bunch more we sell south of the border are quite different from the costs of fossil fuels or whatever, which is something that's been brought to my attention quite a bit more by living here.