Live Earth leaves a worldwide “carbon footprint”
by: Jill Martin - Jul 9, 2007 - comments: 4
Al Gore recently told the Washington Post that global warming “is not a political issue; it’s a moral issue.” However, Gore’s Live Earth concerts held across the globe to raise awareness of this “moral” cause were marked by obscenity, hypocrisy, a massive “carbon footprint” and poor attendance.
A number of entertainers and presenters, including Phil Collins and Chris Rock, used expletives during their daytime London performances, sparking dozens of complaints to the BBC.
Rapper T-Pain’s single “I’m N Luv (Wit A Stripper)” was followed by an interview with eleven-year-old actress Abigail Breslin.
Al Gore introduced the Foo Fighters as a “wonderful American rock band” before they performed in London. This same band recently had a hit with a cover of Prince’s “Darling Nikki,” the song supposedly so obscene it prompted Tipper Gore to form the Parents’ Music Resource Center.
In a taped segment, school-age children expressed their concerns for the environment. One girl burst into tears and said, “I’m really afraid of my children growing up and not being able to see like a blue sky or green grass.”
Between performances, various public figures gave their ideas on ways viewers can change their daily habits and choices for the sake of climate change. Both Ben Affleck and Holly Hunter spoke about the importance of buying digital music because it is more environmentally friendly. Al Gore, cofounder of Live Earth, is on the board of Apple, the largest retailer of digital music.
Many criticized the lack of definitive goals of the event—other than “saving the planet”—and the obvious disparity between the lifestyles of the incredibly wealthy performers and presenters and their message.
For example, the total “carbon footprint” of the event in London, including travel and the energy consumption on July 7, was projected to reach 31,500 tons of carbon emissions, according to John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com, who specializes in such calculations.
By including the British television audience, the total emissions neared 74,500 tons. In comparison, the average American produces about 20 tons in a year.
“They would have done a lot more for the planet had they stayed home and done this via satellite instead of gathering in these venues around the world,” said Richard Land, president of The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.
Prior to the event, a Live Earth spokesman said that every effort would be made to minimize the impact of the concerts but that ultimately, Live Earth would probably buy “carbon credits” to offset its environmental impact.
“The idea that you can offset the pollution you cause is just ridiculous,” London’s Daily Mail newspaper quoted Dr. John Barrett of the Stockholm Environment Institute at the University of York as saying.
The New York Times wrote, “Carbon-offsetting . . . may be better than nothing, but to some it sounds too much like rich men paying others to take their place in the draft during the Civil War.”
Although the Live Earth Web site, liveearth.org, reports the global concerts reached more than 10 million visitors online—the most simultaneous viewers of any online concert, actual concert attendance was far less than projected.
Officials at Live Earth Johannesburg blamed their event’s low turnout on the effects of climate change. Organizer John Langford believes extremely cold weather in the region kept people away.
Over a million concert-goers were expected at the Copacabana beach in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, but organizers estimated the actual crowd at 200,000.
In Hamburg, Germany, 30,000 of the 45,000 tickets were sold. However, many people skipped the messy start of the nine-hour show but arrived during the day’s dry spells.
Even the television audience was down. BBC’s evening coverage peak audience during Madonna’s performance at Wembley Arena in London was a dismal 4.5 million.
Multiple press reports contributed to this article.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Citizenship, Human Rights, Science, Environment
4 comments (post your own) feed
1 On Jul 11th, 2007, at 12:47pm, Marcus Dickinson wrote:
I find it interesting that most of the negative comments about the “Live Earth” concerts within this report are aimed at the British audience and the BBC - can you not also include within the negativity a balance between all the countries that took part including your own the USA? Were there not many artists performing in New York and Washington?
I actually think you are onto something with your criticism of the carbon footprint that such events leave but unfortunately all credibility is gone because you are unable to point the finger back at your own country and fellow Americans who took part in the event. What was the total carbon footprint of the American concerts?
2 On Jul 11th, 2007, at 4:22pm, G. Hecox wrote:
I just happened to listen to your broadcast today and felt inclined to e-mail you all. I have never in my life heard so many lies or felt so much evil eminate from one radio program. The “Reverend” claims to be a man of God, however he doesn’t honor God’s wish to have man protect the planet. Your clearly stated addiction to big business propaganda and the accompanying lies, are hypocritical and blasphemous. I strongly encourage the “Reverend” and his followers to repent of their misguided and evil actions. May God have mercy on you poor misguided fools. G. Hecox
3 On Jul 12th, 2007, at 1:45pm, Moderator wrote:
The radio program referred to by G. Hecox can be heard or downloaded here (free of charge). Accompanying (supporting) articles are documented on that page as well.
If one seeks Dr. Land’s general approach to these environmental issues, his book The Earth is the Lord’s (1992) would be a good place to start. Download the first chapter for free (PDF, 592 KB)
Another For Faith & Family radio broadcast on this subject can be heard here.
Further reading can be found in the “Environment" archive.
4 On Jul 24th, 2007, at 8:34am, Greg Zahner wrote:
I didn’t watch Live Earth coverage on T.V., I didn’t go to any concert.
But what I did see was the enviornment take a front seat as one of the major issues that needs to be addressed in this country, and in the world. Doesn’t that make Live Earth a success? Even if the concerts themselves caused pollution, even if attendance was bad, LIVE EARTH got the word out and made the enviornment an issue like it never was before.
Congrats on the effort AL