Hollywood Among World's Biggest Polluters

Ironically, the climate-change disaster warning film The Day After Tomorrow was a big contributor to actual climate-change disaster.

Special effects explosions, idling vehicles, teams of workers building monumental sets -- all of it contributes to Hollywood's newly discovered role as an air polluter, a university study has found.

The film and television industry and associated activities make a larger contribution to air pollution in the five-county Los Angeles region than almost all five other sectors researched, according to a two-year study released Tuesday by the University of California, Los Angeles.

Although Hollywood seems environmentally conscious thanks to celebrities who lend their names to various causes, the industry created more pollution than individually produced by aerospace manufacturing, apparel, hotels and semiconductor manufacturing, the study found.

Only petroleum manufacturing belched more emissions.

...

Movie production tops hotels, aerospace, and apparel and semiconductor manufacturing in traditional air pollutant emissions in Southern California, according to the UCLA study, initially prepared for the Integrated Waste Management Board. The industry is probably second only to petroleum refineries, for which comparable data were not available.

In greenhouse gas emissions, the entertainment industry ranks third, The Times reported.

Speaking of a lack of grown-ups. It's time for the childish eco-dolts to realize the simple truth is that any economically-productive activity consumes energy -- since machines and transport aren't human- or animal-powered anymore -- and the creation of energy produces dreaded greenhouse gases.

It's amazing to me that Hollywood-types actually believe that people are just consuming energy (which costs money) for shits and giggles.

My favorite rebuttal to eco-morons on the Internet was simple: Turn off the computer, you're using unnecessary electricity created from fossil fuels and thus contributing to a worldwide catastrophe by arguing with me.

For some reason, they always resisted this advice.

Could it be that energy, which produces electricity and easy travel and powers machines that spare human beings back-breaking or tedious labor, is a good thing?

Apparently not. Or rather, it's a good thing for a select group of people. One gets the sense that, in order to stave off "global warming," these idiots are willing to give up our use of energy, reducing us to pre-industrial substennance farming and the attendant increased mortality, leaving them to use all the energy they like without the guilt.

Thanks to RobG.

posted by Ace at 03:31 PM

| Access Comments