NationStates Jolt Archive

Did anyone else know that the Live Earth concert for Global Warming was today?!?

I was watching cartoons all morning then I was surfing this here series of tubes, later when my cousin came over He told me about it...

...Did anyone else know or not know that the concert was today??

...so to incite some sort of debate or something...What do you think of having a big concert for Climate Change...is it a good idea or a bad idea...will it raise awareness and help find a solution or is it in vain...or all we all already doomed...

???

DAMMIT..typo in the title...:( :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Earth

I wonder what the carbon footprint of that concert was.

I didn't know, but then I've been in on holiday without any news in Newquay for a week.

I hate Al Gore, he is such a phony...and a liberal

I wonder what the carbon footprint of that concert was.

I was thinking of that too

and I found this on Wiki

Then there is the criticism that the events hypocritically are wasting energy, such as the criticism over the use of private jets. One of the people criticizing the concerts is Muse frontman Matthew Bellamy, who told BBC 6 Music, that it seems hypocritical to support an event that could have an opposite effect on the climate. "Private jets for climate change, not sure about it that seems to be a bit on edge really – that’s an issue really, so we need to think about it!" Organizers have defended the use of jets on the music events by saying that the concerts will have eco-friendly electricity and sustainable lighting. Ashok Sinha, the director of Stop Climate Chaos, a group involved in the event, said that criticizers should not put the finger of blame towards the music stars taking part in the event. "They have to reduce carbon emissions, we have to reduce carbon emissions, and in just the same way that we may look at a pop star and say, ‘you use more carbon than I do,’ then people from Africa could look at us and think we don’t go flying around everywhere, I have met people in Africa who haven’t even made a phone call let alone get on a plane."

At the London Live Earth Concert, Simon LeBon asked the audience to raise their hands who had not flown there by private jet. The crowd, as well as Duran Duran all raised their hands.

At least two of the artists appearing at the event have left themselves open to potential media criticism due to their involvement in commercials advertising SUVs. R&B singer John Legend is featured in a new Lexus SUV commercial while Sheryl Crow's song Everyday Is A Winding Road is heard playing in an advertising campaign for Subaru SUVs. Furthermore, Madonna is estimated to have a carbon footprint of 1018 tonnes, 100 times the British average

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Earth#Controversy_and_criticism

Does the use of Private jets balance out an "eco-friendly" concert?

All the musical talent sucks. *nod*

I was watching it today in Hamburg:headbang:

I was thinking of that too

Does the use of Private jets balance out an "eco-friendly" concert?

Also, what affect does a concert like this have on the local environment?

I wonder what the carbon footprint of that concert was.

I wonder what Al Gore's carbon footprint is.

I wonder what Al Gore's carbon footprint is.

He doesn't have carbon footprints, he pays other people to pollute less so he doesn't have to.

He doesn't have carbon footprints, he pays other people to pollute less so he doesn't have to.

He has a carbon assprint. :)

He doesn't have carbon footprints, he pays other people to pollute less so he doesn't have to.

So, overall, he's super cereal about taking care of ManBearPig, um... Global Warming. :D

So, overall, he's super cereal about taking care of ManBearPig, um... Global Warming. :D

Oh totally, I mean you just cannot buy this kind of ceral.... *cough*

He has a carbon assprint. :)

He's a politician, what did ya expect? lol.

I wonder what the carbon footprint of that concert was.

If only to be fair towards the capitalist hippies the idea of whom these concerts were, having it multiple places instead of just one does reduce the need to travel to some extent. Or, it would if the residences of the artists participating in the event were evenly distributed across the globe, which I somehow do not think is the case.

So, overall, he's super cereal about taking care of ManBearPig, um... Global Warming. :D

Uhm, what's with the cereal and, err... that? I feel like I might have missed out something :confused:

Also, what affect does a concert like this have on the local environment?

I believe the logic is 'spend money to make money'.

Also, Gogol Bordello just showed up on stage with Madonna. Weirdly cool.

Also, Gogol Bordello just showed up on stage with Madonna. Weirdly cool.
Those kerazy gypsy-punks! :)

Man, I tried to watch the Australia part online last night but MSN wouldn't load. :(

I really wanted to watch Wolfmother. Anybody know where I could get a copy?

Now there has been a big concert people will stop caring.

Uhm, what's with the cereal and, err... that? I feel like I might have missed out something :confused:

It's a reference to a South Park episode

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manbearpig

Live Earth seemed like a waste to me. It could have used the oppurtunity to have 'green' sponsers. So that it would provide huge marketing benefits for green companies and additional revenues for whatever aid program they've got planned.

Like a national green energy company could have been the 'official supplier' to the concert, and then get its name plastered all over everywhere. That way people know which company they can go to to reduce their carbon foot print and it increases demand for green products.

To me it just looked like they were using the 'live' brand to sell a tickets for a gig.

Live Earth seemed like a waste to me. It could have used the oppurtunity to have 'green' sponsers. So that it would provide huge marketing benefits for green companies and additional revenues for whatever aid program they've got planned.

Like a national green energy company could have been the 'official supplier' to the concert, and then get its name plastered all over everywhere. That way people know which company they can go to to reduce their carbon foot print and it increases demand for green products.

To me it just looked like they were using the 'live' brand to sell a tickets for a gig.

That was a good idea...unlike the concert itself...It was just an excuse for everyone to have a big party, while pretending they're making a difference...

Live Earth seemed like a waste to me. It could have used the oppurtunity to have 'green' sponsers.

To me it just looked like they were using the 'live' brand to sell a tickets for a gig.

Everyone was in it for one purpose and one purpose only...to make money $$$$

On this day 7th of July 2007 at 10:31 pm EST LIVE EARTH FINALLY ENDED!!

now we can go back to not caring right?

On this day 7th of July 2007 at 10:31 pm EST LIVE EARTH FINALLY ENDED!!

now we can go back to not caring right?

Did we care when the event began?

Everyone was in it for one purpose and one purpose only...to make money $$$$:rolleyes: and? That's why people make concerts in the first place. The important aspect is what they do with the money.

:rolleyes: and? That's why people make concerts in the first place.
Not Monterey Pop in '67. All of that money went to charity. Except they had to actually pay Ravi Shankar.

Now Woodstock, don't get me started on Woodstock. Live Earth was a waste, too. Gotta agree with Daltrey and Bob Geldof.

I wonder what the carbon footprint of that concert was.

Oh god no, I guess your one of those 'Al Gore is wasteful!!!' people, I think the general answer is, if they got enough people active through the event to take action on an individual level to CC, then the carbon footprint of it would be infinitesimal to the extreme. It's always the crazy conservative people who say these things, they don't have a valid point so it's just 'I'll throw a spanner in the works'.

Not Monterey Pop in '67. All of that money went to charity. Your second sentence contradicts your first :rolleyes:

while everyone's playing mumblypeg over some silly rock concert, that undoubtedly raised a certain amount of cash, that will unlikely contribute to anything that will honestly address the problem, did anyone notice a couple of weekends ago, or was it only last week, there was a world social summit, that among other things actually addressed actually DOING something about sources of problems, instead of conning a bunch of people into paying to feel good?

if i'm not mystaken, the website might still be up, let me check and see, with all the logs of many of the meetings, networkings, confrences, OF REAL PEOPLE, not just politicians and entertainers.

the solutions to global warming aren't complicated. the politcal and cultural impediments to implimenting them are.

(solutions: stop using combustion in any form to generate energy and propell transportation (and yes, there damd well ARE alternatives, real, reliable and proven), and lower all human firtility accross the board without bias or exception. and i doubt very seriously any amount of money raised by any concert is going to be applied toward any of that, or even to lobying for any of that. and the reason i doubt that it will is the cultural resistence to doing any of those things that really have anything to do with addressing the real causes of the problem. not so sure that the other get togather will either, but at least it was about trying to raise some kind of awairness. i'm sure fundraising concerts make a show of being to. but do they? really? and what really does, is, will be done, with the funds that were raised by it? will they really go anywhere besides the pockets of the 'nonprofit' bearuocrats of supposedly cheritable institutions?)

yup; the site IS still up!

https://www.ussf2007.org/

=^^=
.../\...

I wonder what the carbon footprint of that concert was.
Arround 34,000 tones (Acording to the Sunday Times).

Last hight I realised how wired this was, faced whith a potentialy enormous global crisis, what do we do, we have a concert.

Arround 34,000 tones (Acording to the Sunday Times).

Last hight I realised how wired this was, faced whith a potentialy enormous global crisis, what do we do, we have a concert.

precisely!

like what they say about the difference between "new age" and "alternative" being, to paraphraise, the price of a concert ticket.

you know if the costs of setting up a concert like that, and the costs to people of going to it, and of getting there, and to the environment of their getting there, were spent on solar and wind power systems, that would still only make a dent, but it would be doing, i'm sure, AT LEAST five times as much good. maybe a good deal more then that.

dollars to doughnuts too, the percentage of people who took amtrack, greyhound or vanpooled to go to the social summit, were either a majority or close to it. while those going to the concert, what percentage does any one suppose didn't drive?

=^^=
.../\...

Arround 34,000 tones (Acording to the Sunday Times).where does that figure come from? what does it include?

Of course it was.

I was busy, so I only saw the clips the news stations showed of Austraila and Japan.

And that's more than I was planning on watching..

where does that figure come from? what does it include?
Travel for both the artisits and spectators + energy consumed on the day (presumably for lighting etc.).

EDIT: But don't worry. The burger boxes were made from sugar cane(a realy eco friendly crop) and the wate fat will be turned into BioDesil.