The Al Gore discussion, split from GOP/DEM

[Texsox]

The earth isn't fragile. We'll be destroyed long before the earth.

 

Economic ruin, the first line of GOP defense and a damn good one. We do have to respect that. We do need jobs. We can't reach perfection and pay for everything. So we do a little at a time.

[EvilMonkey]

[mr_genius]

You should make a movie about it so that we may worship you!

 

 

[FlaSoxxJim]

Although nationally it was the falsely inflated electric bill of $1,300+ per month that got press, the Tennessean managed to clarify the matter a week-and-a-half ago.

 

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...NEWS01/70226055

 

Electric bills obtained by The Tennessean, however, showed that Gore is paying a premium on his bills to be part of the “green power” program. Gore purchased 108 blocks of “green power” for at least each of the last three months, according to a summary of bills from Nashville Electric Service.

 

That’s a total of $432 a month spent to pay extra for solar or other renewable energy sources.

 

That article didn't entirely explain whether the $432 a month was the entire bill or just a portion of it – the portion to let the Gore's ease their guilty consciences as some of you are insisting. But a representative from TVA Green Power Switch, the company Gore buys his electricity from, has confirmed that is the entire monthly electric bill – even when paying a premium for the green electricity.

 

Al Gore buys only the Green Power, his bill is entirely made up of the $4 units of Green Power.

 

WARNING: DKos link not to be used by anybody hoping to perpetuate the Wasteful Hypocrite Gore mythology.

 

I'd say the real story is that the Gores manage to live in 10K square feet and have an electric bill that is less than $500 even when the cost of premium green is figured in. My meager 1800 square feet costs me $150-200/month (though our house is electric heated which ups it in the winter), so I'd say the Gore's are doing pretty darn well.

 

Maybe all the compact fluorescents and the newly installed solar panels on The Goracle's Castle Keep are really doing the trick after all, eh?

[Texsox]

Mine is over $300 monthly average for 2,000 square feet and we have electric choice.

[Balta1701]

About $15-$20 a month for 900 square feet here, if we're comparing. Those fluorescent bulbs work like freaking gangbusters, I swear. (And about $7 on average for gas, but I have very little heating needs)

Edited March 8, 2007 by Balta1701

[FlaSoxxJim]

maybe mr_genius and EM will share their bills as well and we'll see how we all stack up against big ol' hypocritical Al.

 

About $15-$20 a month for 900 square feet here, if we're comparing. Those fluorescent bulbs work like freaking gangbusters, I swear. (And about $7 on average for gas, but I have very little heating needs)

You may take the prize. I'm replacing bulbs with compact fluorescents a room at a time or as the incandescents blow. I'll probably have to get them all in and then compare the same months in consecutive years to see the savings.

 

I also need to replace the cr@ppy old windows with energy efficient ones but they are crazy expensive to redo an entire house.

[Balta1701]

maybe mr_genius and EM will share their bills as well and we'll see how we all stack up against big ol' hypocritical Al.

You may take the prize. I'm replacing bulbs with compact fluorescents a room at a time or as the incandescents blow. I'll probably have to get them all in and then compare the same months in consecutive years to see the savings.

 

I also need to replace the cr@ppy old windows with energy efficient ones but they are crazy expensive to redo an entire house.

I'll take the prize probably, but I think I have a ton of stuff going for me. No kids, almost no reason to heat the place, the fact that it's an apartment and not a house so I don't use my own electric for things like washing clothes.

 

That said...When I first switched from normal bulbs to the compact fluorescents, I literally cut my electric bill in 1/2 (at the time, it was about a $30 a month cut. Saved more later by switching air filters to an ionic breeze and buying an oscillating fan to use in the summer, but those bulbs paid for themselves in like 3 months as far as I was concerned)

[Texsox]

I should lose but would win on a casual inspection. I close up this house a couple times a year and go camping. I have done most of the "home depot" projects to lower electric usage. But, I am 100% electric and a/c 11 months a year and use a very inefficient heater the other times. When it is 103 for the 90th consecutive day I like a frosty 75 in the house. I like my margaritas frozen so I need plenty of ice and a blender.

 

The electric company I use is rated "green" and has rates higher than the average. So I guess I am buying some "street cred".

 

But you know what? I clean up miles of beaches and trails and participate in more environmental projects than I can count. If someone wants to judge my environmental impact solely on my electric bill, I fail, but will hold my head high and believe in my heart I am doing more than the average American.

[EvilMonkey]

maybe mr_genius and EM will share their bills as well and we'll see how we all stack up against big ol' hypocritical Al.

You may take the prize. I'm replacing bulbs with compact fluorescents a room at a time or as the incandescents blow. I'll probably have to get them all in and then compare the same months in consecutive years to see the savings.

 

I also need to replace the cr@ppy old windows with energy efficient ones but they are crazy expensive to redo an entire house.

Wife pays the home bills, so no idea what that is. But on my 2400 SQFT store, my electric bill is less than $300. And that is with 7 computers on for 12 hours per day, 4 copy machines on 12 hours per day, a power hungry direct-to-plate system, an AB Dick press, 2 laser printers, a Dell server, stereo, space heater for my always-cold designer and numerous bindry pieces, all electrical.

 

And FWIW, I never said he wasn't using energy saving methods, etc. i said that the buying of carbon credits is just plain bull, ESPECIALLY since he buys them from his own company. Nice how noone responded to that little bit of info there, just went right on by that, as if it didn't matter at all. Nope, nothign for Al to gain personally by people going green, nothing at all. Move along, nothing to see here, it's always different.

Edited March 8, 2007 by Alpha Dog

[FlaSoxxJim]

an AB Dick press

 

ouch.

 

[/11-year old sense of humor]

[Texsox]

Wife pays the home bills, so no idea what that is. But on my 2400 SQFT store, my electric bill is less than $300. And that is with 7 computers on for 12 hours per day, 4 copy machines on 12 hours per day, a power hungry direct-to-plate system, an AB Dick press, 2 laser printers, a Dell server, stereo, space heater for my always-cold designer and numerous bindry pieces, all electrical.

 

And FWIW, I never said he wasn't using energy saving methods, etc. i said that the buying of carbon credits is just plain bull, ESPECIALLY since he buys them from his own company. Nice how noone responded to that little bit of info there, just went right on by that, as if it didn't matter at all. Nope, nothign for Al to gain personally by people going green, nothing at all. Move along, nothing to see here, it's always different.

You do realize he's buying from his own companyn with real dollars that cost him real $$? It's like saying that EvilMonkey doesn't support the printing industry because he owns a printing company. Isn't owning a green company important?

[FlaSoxxJim]

You do realize he's buying from his own companyn with real dollars that cost him real $$? It's like saying that EvilMonkey doesn't support the printing industry because he owns a printing company. Isn't owning a green company important?

 

Not if you're trying to paint the guy as a hypocrite, silly.

[mr_genius]

d we'll see how we all stack up against big ol' hypocritical Al.

 

 

i destroy him

 

my entire mansion is powered by soy and hemp oil.

 

[EvilMonkey]

You do realize he's buying from his own companyn with real dollars that cost him real $$? It's like saying that EvilMonkey doesn't support the printing industry because he owns a printing company. Isn't owning a green company important?

NO, a more accurate description would be for me purchasing outside bindry services from a company I own for the print company that I own. he is moving money from one pocket to another. Tax credits for green energy, a lifting of his liberal-guilt for buying credits, and a shift of that money to the carbon credit company he owns. Stock goes up in the carbon co, his net worth goes up, he gets good pr for trying to be carbon neutral, and in reality, it didn't end up costing him a thing. And did you even look at the current holdings list for his company? There wasn't much 'green' on there. It's not TRYING to paint the guy as a hypocrite, he is.

[Texsox]

So now he's a hypocrite for investing in the green energy industry. And if he didn't there would be articles and comments on how he has this investment portfolio and he isn't investing in green energy.

 

A better analogy would be, I'm a huge supporter of the printing industry, I believe printing is the future and necessary for our lifestyle and well being. Therefor, I am going to buy/start/invest in a binding company in addition to the print shop I already own.

 

In your example it would be:

 

I'm a huge supporter of the printing industry, I believe printing is the future and necessary for our lifestyle and well being. Therefor, I am going to ask everyone else to buy/start/invest in a binding company but I'm not. (Then according to you he wouldn't be a hypocrite because he wouldn't be buying from himself.

[FlaSoxxJim]

okay, then, now it seems I've fallen into much the same misinformation trap I've felt others have on the opposite side of the pro/con Gore debate.

 

The piece I jumped on yesterday wit the $430/month total Gore utility bill was wrong, which is of course why it was so amazingly low. That is just the premium he pays to cover the cost of going green on his total consumption which is, alas, about $1200 per month much like previous reports have claimed.

 

Egg on my face

 

I'm quick to jump on people knowingly perpetuating misinformation, so I need to point out my own mistake in running with unconfirmed numbers. My apologies.

 

Until last night I stayed away from this thread because while I do think Al Gore is far and away a net positive effect for change regarding human contributions to global climate change I also thought he could do with some consumption belt tightening like all of us. I agree with those that say the carbon offset business can be a shell game, but I also believe that when we take a global view to curbing emissions they play a role. Much like environmental mitigation projects designed to offset habitat loss to development, it can be done on the level or not.

 

I still think there is some misunderstanding about Gore 'paying his own company' for the offsets. Gore and Blood's Generation Investment Management is a private socially responsible investment firm and not a company that sells offsets. If he is buying offsets form one of the companies in that portfolio then I agree with Tex, he's trying to practice what he preaches. Generation itself espouses a philosophy of "making investments only when we have high levels of conviction." The way I see it, Gore's investment in green energy and zero footprint offsets is evidence of his personal conviction.

Edited March 8, 2007 by FlaSoxxJim

[Texsox]

BTW, I asked the head of staff of a 8,000sq ft Gulfside home what their utility (electric bill) is and they said it was in excess of $2,000 per month. Their home is occupied by their staff during the week for part of the time, but only really in operation during weekends when they are down from Dallas. I'm not certain how that fits in. They have a lake they call a pool, lots of glass, big old wood doors salvaged from 200 year old estates in Mexico, the home was built in the 1980s by a Texas oil man.

 

BTW, some of y'all would have been jealous of the photos of fellow Texas oilmen that were tucked away in various corners, Bush, Bush, etc. Some very current.

[kapkomet]

Until last night I stayed away from this thread because while I do think Al Gore is far and away a net positive effect for change regarding human contributions to global climate change I also thought he could do with some consumption belt tightening like all of us.

 

I agree, to a point. My personal hangup was/is that we hear all the time about how we need to change, and you know what? Yes, we do. However, to me, all this is a mechanism to interfere with free enterprise and get a cut of the profits for the government to regulate environmental controls. The government doesn't belong in it, period. That's where I have major disagreements with the Goracle crowd. I do believe that MNE's need to be socially responsible when given credible evidence that there is environmental damage being done that they need to fix it right away. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen near as often as it should.

[Texsox]

I agree, to a point. My personal hangup was/is that we hear all the time about how we need to change, and you know what? Yes, we do. However, to me, all this is a mechanism to interfere with free enterprise and get a cut of the profits for the government to regulate environmental controls. The government doesn't belong in it, period. That's where I have major disagreements with the Goracle crowd. I do believe that MNE's need to be socially responsible when given credible evidence that there is environmental damage being done that they need to fix it right away. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen near as often as it should.

.

Starting on April 22, 1970, do you think we would have cleaned up the environment as much without stricter government laws and involvement?

[FlaSoxxJim]

.

Starting on April 22, 1970, do you think we would have cleaned up the environment as much without stricter government laws and involvement?

 

"We had neither the time nor resources to organize 20 million demonstrators and the thousands of schools and local communities that participated. That was the remarkable thing about Earth Day. It organized itself."

 

-- Senator Gaylord Nelson, Earth Day founder

 

With the subsequent passage in 1970 of the Clean Water Act, that was a big year. And no, the free market would not have regulated itself as well in the absence of federal involvement. Without the NAAQS standards set by law, the leaded gasoline phase-out probably would not have begun for another decade.

[NorthSideSox72]

The GOP as a party seems to OK with massive funding and complete federalization of the military and all security apparatus', under the argument that they have to be handled at that level for national security and welfare. And yet, when it comes to problems with the environment (pollution, warming, etc.), which are frankly much more prescient and are having a much greater effect on our lives than either terror or Iraq, they are apparently unwilling to allow federal control.

 

It seems to me that in both cases, due to their very nature, they need to be federal or even international concerns.

[Texsox]

The GOP as a party seems to OK with massive funding and complete federalization of the military and all security apparatus', under the argument that they have to be handled at that level for national security and welfare. And yet, when it comes to problems with the environment (pollution, warming, etc.), which are frankly much more prescient and are having a much greater effect on our lives than either terror or Iraq, they are apparently unwilling to allow federal control.

 

It seems to me that in both cases, due to their very nature, they need to be federal or even international concerns.

 

As I was reading your post I was thinking, those are the big things that should also be above partisan b.s.

[Balta1701]

The question is...does Mr. Gore purchase enough carbon offsets to also cover his own flatulence?

[Jenksismyhero]

We gotta start this discussion back up. Never enough bashing on Gore for me.

 

This article pretty much sums up my view of the whole global warming thing. Yes there is a problem that needs to be addressed. But it's not happening tomorrow. He's a fear mongeror, just like Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield were to the left a few years ago.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/science/...and&emc=rss