Defending the Truth

Good lord, Jaxian! How can you be so dense?!?!

Al Gore buys the electricity for his sprawling mansion from Nashville Electric. It is NOT coming from "green power sources". It's coming from the SAME DANGED PLACE AS EVERYBODY ELSE'S ELECTRICITY.

The difference is that Gore uses as much electricity, in one month, as most people use in 2 years. IT ALL COMES FROM THE SAME PLACE!


Al Gore lives in a HUGE MANSION, he burns up more electricity and natural gas, in a month, than most people use in 2 years. Al Gore flies all over the world in private jets - blasting pollution into the atmosphere. Al Gore rides in limousines that get 5 mpg - blowing ungodly amounts of pollution into the atmosphere.

Al Gore is a rich HYPOCRITE, who is saying "Do as I say, not as I do!".

Gore pays for his share of the electricity to be pulled from green power sources. If Gore were to stop using all of the electricity in his house, he wouldn't be doing a thing for the environment: the same amount of carbon emissions would be generated. The green power he pays for would never be generated.

It sounds like you're trying to say, "The green power gets mixed in with all of the bad power, and who knows who gets the green power and who gets the bad power? It all comes from the grid!" That is a red herring.

It is the generation of the electricity that causes pollution: not the power grid. Most people pay to have their portion of the electricity generated by environmentally unfriendly sources, while Gore pays for his portion of the electricity to be generated by green sources.

It's like I said: if Gore uses less electricity, the environment is no better off. So what should he do? Conserve for the purpose of saving himself money?

If you are going to say these things, then say them in full. Don't leave out the parts that make you sound wrong.

Gore uses up vast amounts of electricity, but he pays for his electricity to be generated by green power sources which don't hurt the environment. Gore uses a lot of natural gas and fuel, but he pays for carbon offets to mitigate the effects on the environment. That is the full truth.

I realize that Gore does some things which release carbon emissions, but he also reduces carbon in our atmosphere by an amount greater than he increases it. The net result: Gore's actions seem to be good for the environment. How can you say otherwise?

This is not true. Gore is asking people to do exactly the same thing he's doing: reduce carbon emissions where it is convenient, and use green power and carbon offsets to take care of any carbon you still generate. He's saying, "Do exactly what I do."

If everybody did the same thing Gore did, the earth's atmosphere would deteriorate at a rate 50 times faster than it already is.


I fail to see how you can NOT comprehend the fallacy and hypocrisy of it all! Really, you dumbfound me!

If everyone used green power, all electricity would be generated by windmills, solar panels, and landfill gases. This means that no electricity would generate carbon emissions, which would be a vast improvement over what we have today.

Further, if everyone used green power, carbon offsets could not exist as they do today. A large part of carbon offsets is replacing electric power with green power, and if everyone already used green power, there wouldn't be any bad electricity left to replace.

Carbon offsets could still be used for reforestation, but if everyone bought them, then that reforestation would have to be enough to compensate all of the natural gas and fuel usage in the world. There simply might not be enough land to forest. So natural gas and fuel usage would have to be reduced.

But in our current situation, carbon offsets can exist, and so Gore's contribution seems to be a positive one.

Well, I must admit that I am failing to see your side of things. Surely you agree that the net effect of Gore's actions is a reduction in carbon emissions, right?

Are you saying that Gore should reduce his electricity and fuel usage, then use the money he saves to buy even more carbon offsets?

It would definitely help me understand you if you can specifically state what changes you'd like to see Gore make and how they benefit the environment.

Good grief, how many times do I have to go over this?

1. You have NO IDEA what these "credits" Gore buys, do. Basically, they pay for further Global Warming propaganda. They don't DO anything.

2. Gore should move into a modest, earth-friendly house that doesn't leave such a HUGE "footprint". I've been to Nashville - my two sons lived there. HAVE YOU SEEN GORE'S MANSION?

3. Gore should erect a wind-generator tower (or two or three) on his property to produce all the electricity he needs. No more of this buy power "off the grid" that is just produced at the local coal-fueled generating plant.

4. There should be solar panels covering the entire southern exposure of Gore's home - tilted at 63 degrees in order to optimize heat retention. This should be THE source for his home's heat - not $30,000 worth of natural gas each year (and that in a moderate climate!).

5. Gore and his entire family should drive small electric vehicles - regenerated by the electricity produced from his wind generators. No more of these giant SUVs and Limousines.

6. Gore should either stop flying entirely, or fly commercial - on planes that are already making the fights anyway. No more of this "party-circuit" crap in a private jet - burning up over 65,000 gallons of jet fuel to promote his film on being environmentally friendly!


I could go on and on. But what, about any of this, do you fail to comprehend?

The man is a reeking hypocrite!

Hmm, as I understand these credits, they are used to replace energy in the community power grid with green energy, and they are used to fund reforestation. These efforts do not seem like propaganda to me. Am I mistaken about what these credits do, or are these actions somehow only propaganda?

I have not seen Gore's house, but based on its electricity and heating bills, I imagine it to be very large. It is true that Gore could conserve more by moving into a smaller house, however it seems clear that Gore believes he can offset the cost of living in a large house by using green power and carbon offsets. It does not seem to me that he is unjustified in that belief.

I guess you don't think that using credits and green power truly offset the cost of living in such a big house. So let me ask: why not? Can you offer additional explanation about why these credits and green power don't work?

Wind generators seem like a good idea to me, but I wonder whether he has the land space to install them. Does he live in a rural area with large spans of open land, or does he live in the city/suburbs?

According to the article I posted, Gore is currently installing solar panels in his home.

It is my understanding that Gore drives a hybrid, not an SUV. Am I mistaken?

I have heard it stated that Gore only used private jets during his campaigns and promotion of his movie, when travel time was very important to get the word out. In those situations, he used carbon offsets, which, until you explain othwerise, still seem like a reasonable way to offset the carbon he caused.

An average of $1,200 per month for this mansion.


That's OVER 10x per month what my electricity bill is. And I'm not claiming to be Captain Environment!

I agree that it goes completely against what he stands for.

I don't know what's up with that..

Actually, a better option for Gore, and many other folks for that matter, would be for Gore to install a geothermal heat pump system powered by an array of photovoltaic cells.

With this setup, he can both heat AND cool his home very efficiently, produce hot water, and sell any excess electricity his system generates to his utility company.

The cost of a geothermal heat pump system, although initially more expensive than a conventional heating/cooling system, is relatively inexpensive long-term compared with a conventional heating/cooling system due to energy savings and lower maintenance costs.

And, the cost of PV cells has been dropping substantially the past decade or so.

And, there are a lot of incentives today from the federal government and the state governments for homeowners to invest in these technologies.

Saving energy and eliminating a great deal of pollution isn't some "decades away" possibility. It can be DONE TODAY.

For more info on geothermal heat pumps, see:

Geothermal Technologies Program: Geothermal Heat Pumps

Well by the same logic that our intellectual juggernaut Jefferson states, Ole georgie & family should be out on the front lines fighting the good war shouldn't they? I mean i would think that Bush's insistence of illplanned armed conflict is FAR MORE disgusting considering he did everything he could to skip out on military service, yet he continues to praise the forces as he sends them to their deaths in Iraq and elsewhere. Honestly, if you are SO gung-ho about "hypocrisy" i would think a hypocrite who stays safe and sends others to die is FAR WORSE than a hypocrite that advises less power usage and then leaves his lights on at night.

The simple fact is that unless you know what Gore uses his power for, you are noone to pass judgement on his usage. The fact is that his documentary has probably saved the US more power than any move Bush has . he has probably also saved the government more money than Bush has ( what with the wars, the tax cuts, balooning debt, and loss of investment interest in the US due to bad-will across the planet).

This is one of those childish attempts to invalidate the message by dirtying the messenger.

Let's forget WHO made the documentary.. Let's just say ole Simon Papadopoulos Van der Bumblefragg made the whole thing ( for which he just won an oscar.. his home town of Kamprankniskovpore has gone all out with a huge party with all the free pickled herring you can eat - see more on E-news special "Don't give a fuck who made it" edition).

nowthen, would you care to address the issues brought to light in the documentary?