Al Gore: Hero or Hypocrite?

[Masquerouge]

The important question is not if Al Gore is a hypocrite or not, it's if he is right or not.

Exactly! These are two independant thing, yet people try to undermine the credibility of Gore's message by attacking his personal lifestyle - regardless whether or not they're right.

 

[Taliesin]

Bottom line, from the story, we need he buys offsets
...
To me, that does not indicate that he is operating in a null carbon footprint at all.

This can only indicate that you don't understand what a carbon offset is.

 

[JollyRoger]

Bottom line, from the story, we need he buys offsets and has a few cost saving bulbs in his house (remember the solar panels are planned, so not in place yet). To me, that does not indicate that he is operating in a null carbon footprint at all. To me it means he is making token efforts at energy savings (light bulbs and solar panels are supposed to save you energy, not make it more expensive) not operating at 100% green.

From the story in your opening post:

The vice president has done that, Kreider argues, and the family tries to offset that carbon footprint by purchasing their power through the local Green Power Switch program — electricity generated through renewable resources such as solar, wind, and methane gas, which create less waste and pollution. "In addition, they are in the midst of installing solar panels on their home, which will enable them to use less power," Kreider added. "They also use compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy efficiency measures and then they purchase offsets for their carbon emissions to bring their carbon footprint down to zero."

 

[MobBoss]

See, now you're asking question, that's a good thing.

He's purchasing carbon offsets. This means that he's hired a service to count his CO2 output, and they're charging him money based on his consumption. They then put this money into subsidising electrical purchases elsewhere in the country, so that that green energy is being bought by other people, instead of coal-fired electricity. (in addition to other things, like green research and carbon sequestering).

The sum total of this is that (after factoring in the money he spends) his family produces less total CO2 than an average family. If he wasn't purchasing the offsets, then people wouldn't be using the Texan windfarms (for example) as much as they are, because they're not priced properly yet.

I think that you should include the following in your OP, so that people can form a more reasoned opinion. This will change the nature of the OP into one that inspires debate. As well, since many people only read the OP, they're not getting the information that Jolly Roger already included. You're not currently bringing forward the knowledge that the $30,000 is green power. Keep in mind, too, that this $30,000 is being paid at a higher rate, because he's capturing the cost of the CO2 production.

Thanks for explaining it a bit. In application, it appears an offset is a sort of self-imposed/voluntary fine/cost (or investment with no immediate return). However, I think you are drawing a single false conclusion that his energy bill includes the cost of such offsets. I dont think it does, as the website from his energy provider explains it and the cost fairly accurate. Nor do we actually know the full extent of how many offsets he buys in comparison to his footprint - all we know is that 'he buys some'. Thats fairly ambiguous if you dont mind me pointing it out.

 

[JollyRoger]

Thanks for explaining it a bit. In application, it appears an offset is a sort of self-imposed/voluntary fine/cost (or investment with no immediate return). However, I think you are drawing a single false conclusion that his energy bill includes the cost of such offsets. I dont think it does, as the website from his energy provider explains it and the cost fairly accurate. Nor do we actually know the full extent of how many offsets he buys in comparison to his footprint - all we know is that 'he buys some'. Thats fairly ambiguous if you dont mind me pointing it out.

"He buys some" is ambiguouis, however that is not what the article says - it is more specific than that - it says he buys enough to bring his carbon footprint down to zero.

 

[MobBoss]

"He buys some" is ambiguouis, however that is not what the article says - it is more specific than that - it says he buys enough to bring his carbon footprint down to zero.

Well, thats what their spokesperson says. It might be true, or it might not be true. Personally, I would like to see some proof of that. Publicists often say such things to douse an immediate fire.

 

[JollyRoger]

Well, thats what their spokesperson says. It might be true, or it might not be true. Personally, I would like to see some proof of that. Publicists often say such things to douse an immediate fire.

So you've got a think tank that no one has ever heard of (except the IRS who has questioned their tax status due to lack of activity) vs. a spokeperson for a former Vice President who presents an explanation that is very plausible, given the former Vice President's activities on the issue.

 

[carlosMM]

So you've got a think tank that no one has ever heard of (except the IRS who has questioned their tax status due to lack of activity) vs. a spokeperson for a former Vice President who presents an explanation that is very plausible, given the former Vice President's activities on the issue.

That doesn't matter. Anything a right winger says is true, anything else is a lie - period.

 

[Azash]

A bit of both.

 

[MobBoss]

So you've got a think tank that no one has ever heard of (except the IRS who has questioned their tax status due to lack of activity) vs. a spokeperson for a former Vice President who presents an explanation that is very plausible, given the former Vice President's activities on the issue.

Actually, what we have is a $30,000 a year electric bill that has a lot of questions regarding it. And not really a lot of specific answers so far. What I see is scrambling for damage control on the Gore side.

Anyway, Gore has burned far more energy over all his travels around the world than he is able to offset. Considering that, I am highly skeptical that his house and cars are as green as his spokesperson claims. I am not the only one to view this as hypocrisy.

 

[carlosMM]

Actually, what we have is a $30,000 a year electric bill that has a lot of questions regarding it. And not really a lot of specific answers so far. What I see is scrambling for damage control on the Gore side.

Actually, what we have is a load of insinuations by you, claims that Gore is lying and has people lying for him, and nothing to back that up. Hmmmmmmm

Anyway, Gore has burned far more energy over all his travels around the world than he is able to offset.

Another claim that I now want to see some proof for. Come on, sum up the energty he used and prove that he can not possibly offset that.

Considering that, I am highly skeptical that his house and cars are as green as his spokesperson claims. I am not the only one to view this as hypocrisy.

Argument from what? Someone's opinion? That's even weaker than an argument from authority


Sorry, MobBoss, but this story stinks about as much as the Swift Boat veterans did - and they are some really bad stinking liars!


by the way, there's a good phrase for what you are doing - sorry it's Latin:
aliquid haeret!

 

[JollyRoger]

Actually, what we have is a $30,000 a year electric bill that has a lot of questions regarding it. And not really a lot of specific answers so far. What I see is scrambling for damage control on the Gore side.

Anyway, Gore has burned far more energy over all his travels around the world than he is able to offset. Considering that, I am highly skeptical that his house and cars are as green as his spokesperson claims. I am not the only one to view this as hypocrisy.

A $30,000 energy bill for a residence that runs two businesses and hosts numerous functions. Numerous questions raised by an astroturf think tank. A spokeperson that answered the questions raised.

Speaking of questions raised that that nobody has answered is why $30,000 would be excessive for Al Gore when a person with his level of business activity generated $186,000 in energy bills 6 years ago. It looks like Big Al is conserving somewhere along the line to come in so many multiples under Cheney.

 

[MobBoss]

Actually, what we have is a load of insinuations by you, claims that Gore is lying and has people lying for him, and nothing to back that up. Hmmmmmmm

Sigh. Not in the least. Come on Mr. Scientist, even you should agree that an comment via a spokesperson is not 'proof'. Can you at least be that honest? And how is asking for such proof a bad thing?

Another claim that I now want to see some proof for. Come on, sum up the energty he used and prove that he can not possibly offset that.

Do you have any idea of the amount of air miles the guy has logged? Please.

 

[RedWolf]

To say he buys Green Power could mean he buys a single block (a whopping $4 expense).

He buys 108 blocks per month:

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/186511

Gore participates in a utility program that sells blocks of "green power" for an extra $4 a month. He buys 108 such blocks every month, covering 16,200 kilowatt-hours and helping subsidize renewable energy sources.

Looks like he has himself covered and then some:

191,000 / 12 = 15917

15,917 - 16,200 = 283 Kilowatt hours

Bills showed the Gores used about 191,000 kilowatt hours in 2006. The typical Nashville household uses about 15,600 kilowatt-hours a year.

 

[MobBoss]

He buys 108 blocks per month:

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/186511



Looks like he has himself covered and then some:

191,000 / 12 = 15917

15,917 - 16,200 = 283 Kilowatt hours

Actually, you have just proven that he is only about 30% compliant. If he is only spending $432 dollars on offsets, and his total energy bill is $1200 - $1300, then about 2/3s of his energy costs are not offset.

I would say thats a ways to go for a 'zero' footprint.

EDIT: Oh by the way, you missed this one: Gore has been buying the "green power" for $432 a month since November; He only started buying green power last November. That means he has offset his footprint for barely 4 months. How long has he been talking about global warming?

So, if he only bought offsets for the last two months of 2006? Exactly how large was his "carbon footprint" FOR THE YEAR?

Zero my ass. Hypocrite pwned.

 

[RedWolf]

Actually, you have just proven that he is only about 30% compliant. If he is only spending $432 dollars on offsets, and his total energy bill is $1200 - $1300, then about 2/3s of his energy costs are not offset.

I would say thats a ways to go for a 'zero' footprint.

It says he buys enough offsets to cover 16,200 killowat hours. He only uses 15,917 killowat hours. The math seems pretty simple to me.

The offset is an ADDITIONAL charge - above and beyond the price of regular electricity. The point isn't to offset your COST.. it's to offset the killowat hour by getting electricty from "green technologies". But this costs more as others have pointed out many times.

 

[Masquerouge]

Actually, you have just proven that he is only about 30% compliant. If he is only spending $432 dollars on offsets, and his total energy bill is $1200 - $1300, then about 2/3s of his energy costs are not offset.

I would say thats a ways to go for a 'zero' footprint.

Well if I read that right, every month his $432 offset 16,200 kw/h, making for a total yearly offset of 194,400 kw/h, thus more than you're claiming he's consuming (191,000 Kw/H)

I don't understand why you're looking at money, when what he has to balance are kw/h

 

[RedWolf]

How long has he been talking about global warming?

Get a grip... what is he suppossed to do? Atone for his entire life on planet earth? Otherwise his message has no value or worth?

 

[RedWolf]

I don't understand why you're looking at money, when what he has to balance are kw/h

He's not understanding the concept of the offset system.

I could spend 1 million dollars every month on electricty.. but if included in that 1 million dollars was enough $4 blocks to "offset" every killowatt hour I used then I have come out neutral.

 

[Masquerouge]

EDIT: Oh by the way, you missed this one: Gore has been buying the "green power" for $432 a month since November; He only started buying green power last November. That means he has offset his footprint for barely 4 months. How long has he been talking about global warming?

So, if he only bought offsets for the last two months of 2006? Exactly how large was his "carbon footprint" FOR THE YEAR?

Zero my ass. Hypocrite pwned.

Oh well, it looks as if you missed this:

Johnson said Gore used nearly 221,000 kilowatt hours last year and his average monthly electric bill was $1,359. He claimed his group obtained its figures from Nashville Electric Service, but a spokesperson said the utility never had a request from the group and never provided them with information.

Selective reading FTW! Looks like another hypocrite is pwned.