Lee

It’s nice to see someone elegantly articulate their considered thoughts on such an important issue.
Some food for thought. Whilst I strongly agree that everyone should be more considerate and not needlessly waste energy, I would urge caution in the tone of your message. I think what’s most important is that people do become more efficient and ultimately use less energy BUT aren’t made to feel that they can’t still enjoy themselves whilst frivolously using energy on the odd occasion. After all, what’s the point in living if you give up all fun activity? I think you’re New Zealand adventure was worth the environmental impact, but some die hard environmentalists would surely disagree. Would such derision of an otherwise thoughtful individual be helpful?
Education NOT Dictation.
Example: I own an energy inefficient TV (Plasma). I don’t leave it on standby, I don’t leave it on when I’m not watching it, and I did consider the environmental impact of my purchase before hand. However, I enjoy watching TV (and movies) and believe that LCD is an inferior technology. Hence, I feel I’ve reached an acceptable balance, and until such time as this TV breaks I’ll not buy another. Is this wrong or selfish?
A new topic for you to explore. How much energy does the internet currently consume? I imagine many servers sit dormant a great deal of the time. Would internet users put up with a short wait for a web page to load if it meant that many servers could be kept in a deep sleep state until absolutely needed? If web page designers and coders were to tidy code, use less JavaScript and Flash, would fewer resources (energy) be needed to view web pages? How much energy could be saved? Google for one, have invested in solar energy at their headquarters, how about large server farms in the UK, tidal powered internet?
P.S. iPhone analogy. How about rather than all web designers upgrading to the latest MacBook, accept what you have and make the most possible out of it until it no longer works?