Getting A Jolt From Global Warming

By Meg Wagner

Published: Aug 22, 2007

With each passing day the issues concerning global warming and the planet's health become more and more pressing. It is a deeply controversial topic. Some people refuse to believe that anything is happening, while others run around as if the apocalypse were here today.

While the severity and importance of the issue at hand is debatable, in the past year or so, ideas about cutting back on energy in order to reduce our impact on the land, water and animals have gotten the limelight.

From Hollywood to Washington, D.C., public figures are promoting a greener way of life as celebrities and politicians alike ban together to get the word out about global warming.

Now, I am not the poster child for conservation and natural living. While I recycle and try as hard as I can to buy eco-friendly and organic products, I still love to drive my non-hybrid sedan and wouldn't even think about turning off the AC in the Florida heat.

So I have little room to criticize others' efforts to save the world, but I do find it more than a little ironic that the methods used to spread awareness about the planet's deteriorating condition end up using so much energy.

Take last month's benefit concert, Live Earth. It was an amazing concept: hundreds of the biggest names in music playing on every continent, while also giving the public ideas to cut their impact on the globe.

But as much as I applaud their efforts, from stages made of old tires to the biodegradable corn-based plastic plates and cups used for refreshments, I can't help but notice the glowing stage lights, countless wires plugged into microphones and cameras, and the massive crowds that probably came to the venues in thousands of fossil fuel burning cars.

Even Al Gore's critically acclaimed documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" was a bit hypocritical. Personally I loved the film, and the fact that it brought environmental issues into the spotlight, but the energy used to power the theatres and DVD players that showed the film didn't fit into his argument.

I know that if the documentary hadn't been produced, their would be another energy-wasting flick to fill it's spot on the big screen and on store shelves, but the recycled packages the disks were sold in were little compensation for the electricity used to view the film.

Then you have the heart-wrenching commercials aired on prime time, warning viewers about the devastating consequences of not converting to more natural ways. Once again, the power used to fuel the television sets that broadcast these public service announcements can only hurt the environment further.

It is true that the problem really isn't what is playing on the television; it is the fact that the electronics are running non-stop.

-

And it is better to see an ad promoting eco-friendly living than most of the terribly directed commercials on the air.

It's also true that there are few Americans who would be willing to throw out their plasmas and wide screens in order to help the global effort.

I for one would rather live in the dark than give up nightly fixes of "The Colbert Report."

So maybe America is not ready to go completely green. It's going to take baby steps to curve our addiction to oil and electric power.

And, as much energy as all the campaigns use, they do inform the uninformed and remind us that we must take action against global warming and various other environmental issues.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure how they could get as much public attention without using the power they do.

I only hope, as America becomes more eco-friendly, we will find ways to broadcast and entertain without the huge amounts of electricity and energy.

But until then, I will continue to do what I can to reduce my impact, while the TV stays plugged in, preferably tuned in to channels promoting that all-important green life.

Meg Wagner is beginning her junior year at Chamberlain High School.