Gore's blaring hypocracy

[Stinger]

From the Senate Committee website

.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.

GORE REFUSES TO TAKE PERSONAL ENERGY ETHICS PLEDGE​

WASHINGTON, DC – Former Vice President Al Gore refused to take a “Personal Energy Ethics Pledge” today to consume no more energy than the average American household. The pledge was presented to Gore by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, during today’s global warming hearing.

Senator Inhofe showed Gore a film frame from “An Inconvenient Truth” where it asks viewers: “Are you ready to change the way you live?”

As a believer:
· that human-caused global warming is a moral, ethical, and spiritual issue affecting our survival;

· that home energy use is a key component of overall energy use;

· that reducing my fossil fuel-based home energy usage will lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions; and

· that leaders on moral issues should lead by example;

I pledge to consume no more energy for use in my residence than the average American household by March 21, 2008.”


Gore refused to take the pledge. But then someone has to buy those carbon credits through a company he has an interest in else he won't make any money.

Al Gore's Inconvenient Loot

 

[Yosarian]

I find it bizzare that all these Republicans are pissed off at Gore for having a big house and therefore using more energy then average. He's rich, in large part because he's a very sucessfull buisnessman. Are you suggesting that sucessfull buisnessmen should not be allowed to have big houses, because they are likely to use more energy?

Not to mention the creepy right-wing group that's apparently been going through Gore's garbage to find his energy bills.

Is this really the level we've sunk to?

 

[C.J.]

I find it bizzare that all these Republicans are pissed off at Gore for having a big house and therefore using more energy then average. He's rich, in large part because he's a very sucessfull buisnessman. Are you suggesting that sucessfull buisnessmen should not be allowed to have big houses, because they are likely to use more energy?

I don't think that's what he was saying. I believe it goes more along the lines that some think he is being hypocritical for using so much while asking others to curtail use.

Also possibly buying credits from his own company. I wonder if anyone would question the owner of an insurance company because he chooses to insure his auto through his company, or the owner of a gum factory for purchasing and chewing gum from his company.

Not to mention the creepy right-wing group that's apparently been going through Gore's garbage to find his energy bills.

It's a little easier and cleaner than that.

Is this really the level we've sunk to?

No, we haven't sunk to any level, at least not recently. We've been down there for many years.

Regards,

"C.J."

 

[Just Me 2]

Gore is nothing but a hypocritical ***. He preaches to the rest of us to live a low carbon life but he does nothing to do the same. He does not have only one huge house, he has FOUR!! He claims that he buys credits. What a joke if he really cared he would walk the walk that he tells everyone else to. He needs four houses? GMAFB, he needs a private jet? Hell no. If a republican were telling people to live a low carbon life but was doing all the crap Gore is all hell would be breaking loose. The man is a joke and he pretends to give a crap but his actions prove otherwise. And please don't give me this buying credit garbage. So if I am a glutton but I pay my friend to eat rice cakes does that let me off the hook? NO I am still a glutton. Oh yeah Gore cares about the environment but pays someone else to actually do something about it. :roll:

 

[Yosarian]

How much energy Gore uses is absolutly irrelevent. It's just an attempt to try and confuse the issue by an ad hominum attack on the messanger by people who know they can't argue with the message. And it's such a stupid, stupid thing to try to attack someone with; are they going to count how much toilet paper he uses next? Or should I go and look at your energy bill and judge your worth as a human being based on how many energystar appliances you own?

 

[Just Me 2]

How much energy Gore uses is absolutly irrelevent. It's just an attempt to try and confuse the issue by an ad hominum attack on the messanger by people who know they can't argue with the message. And it's such a stupid, stupid thing to try to attack someone with; are they going to count how much toilet paper he uses next? Or should I go and look at your energy bill and judge your worth as a human being based on how many energystar appliances you own?

Really? That is very interesting considering he is the main spokesperson for the GW movement. So I should just listen to him and not question why he does not do what he says we should, he just buys his way out of doing anything. Maybe that is ok with you but it is most certainly not ok with me. Please tell me what message is being confused. Would it be the one that Gore talks a good game but does nothing to follow though or would it be the one that Gore buys his way out of responsibly? Please tell me. Let's see, Gore=major mouthpiece for GW. Gore=doesn't walk the walk. Seems pretty damn clear cut to me. Don't preach to me when you don't do what you preach nothing to confuse. Nice try though. Keep defending a man that care NOTHING for the environment.

 

[Sammy2]

Really? That is very interesting considering he is the main spokesperson for the GW movement. So I should just listen to him and not question why he does not do what he says we should, he just buys his way out of doing anything. Maybe that is ok with you but it is most certainly not ok with me. Please tell me what message is being confused. Would it be the one that Gore talks a good game but does nothing to follow though or would it be the one that Gore buys his way out of responsibly? Please tell me. Let's see, Gore=major mouthpiece for GW. Gore=doesn't walk the walk. Seems pretty damn clear cut to me. Don't preach to me when you don't do what you preach nothing to confuse. Nice try though. Keep defending a man that care NOTHING for the environment.

Excellent points Just Me.

I'm just curious...how does one buy "energy credits"? Does Al have solar powered systems in all of his houses?

I have a business that would (looked into it) COST $800K to install solar panels on the roof. Yes, there are rebates, so after all is said and YEARS from now it may have cost me about $500K to save a little and take me off of the grid. And since I wouldn't be using the grid, the local gas and electric co. would pay me for "units unused". It would be a LOOOOOONG time to regain what I put out when I could stick that $800 K in an ING account and continue to gain interest off of it.

If it was such a great thing....EVERYONE would be doing it. It's just not cost effective.

 

[Chanda]

Would it be the one that Gore talks a good game but does nothing to follow though or would it be the one that Gore buys his way out of responsibly? Please tell me. Let's see, Gore=major mouthpiece for GW. Gore=doesn't walk the walk. .

Let's see...

"1) Gore’s family has taken numerous steps to reduce the carbon footprint of their private residence, including signing up for 100 percent green power through Green Power Switch, installing solar panels, and using compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy saving technology.

"2) Gore has had a consistent position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office explains:

"What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon footprint and try to reduce it as much as possible. Once they have done so, he then advocates that they purchase offsets, as the Gore’s do, to bring their footprint down to zero."

Think Progress » Gore Responds To Drudge’s Latest Hysterics

Keep defending a man that care NOTHING for the environment

Nothing? Seems to me he's devoted a good part of his life bringing the issue to the attention of Americans.

 

[Just Me 2]

Let's see...

"1) Gore’s family has taken numerous steps to reduce the carbon footprint of their private residence, including signing up for 100 percent green power through Green Power Switch, installing solar panels, and using compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy saving technology.

Which residence? The one that uses 20 times more then the average user or one of the other three?

"2) Gore has had a consistent position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office explains:

"What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon footprint and try to reduce it as much as possible. Once they have done so, he then advocates that they purchase offsets, as the Gore’s do, to bring their footprint down to zero."

Think Progress » Gore Responds To Drudge’s Latest Hysterics

You can defend this till your blue in the face. It IS a cop out. It is taking the easy way out. Instead of getting ride of the private jet and selling a couple of his houses he buys his way out of having to be inconvenienced. It is crap.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/26/gore-responds-to-drudge/

Nothing? Seems to me he's devoted a good part of his life bringing the issue to the attention of Americans.

It means crap if he doesn't walk the walk, which he does not.

 

[Sauwan]

Gore runs a personal business out of his home. This means that he has a large rate of consumption that the average homeowner does not have. Also, the larger a house the larger surface area there is perpetuate heat loss. There are many variables involved in assessing the amount of energy used by a home, but it all boils down to one thing - how much have you done to reduce your consumption. I would be willing to bet a ton that Gore has done as much as he can without putting himself out of business to minimize his consumption of energy.

That's all irrelevant to the GW debate though, because - as it has already been pointed out - the skeptics cannot seem to debate the science, and resort to drastic and pathetic Ad Hominem attacks.

 

[jfuh]

Gore runs a personal business out of his home. This means that he has a large rate of consumption that the average homeowner does not have. Also, the larger a house the larger surface area there is perpetuate heat loss. There are many variables involved in assessing the amount of energy used by a home, but it all boils down to one thing - how much have you done to reduce your consumption. I would be willing to bet a ton that Gore has done as much as he can without putting himself out of business to minimize his consumption of energy.

That's all irrelevant to the GW debate though, because - as it has already been pointed out - the skeptics cannot seem to debate the science, and resort to drastic and pathetic Ad Hominem attacks.

Within one week we have now seen 5 seperate threads on the exact same topic of attacking Gore by the exact same poster:roll: why am I not surprised? Not only are they the same topic but even the titles are practically identical, Gore is a hypocrite.
The "conservatives" don't have anything, they can't refute the science, they can't refute the initiatives - hence all they have left is to attack the presenters and the images of the individuals.
Gore has money, he's rich, so he owns large homes. Ok, What's the hypocracy? Gore says that we need to cut our greenhouse gas emissions - but he also, if you watched "An inconvenient truth", that going green needn't result in major life style changes.
So let's compare here - if any of you are to say that Gore uses more energy than the average american, than you must also compare that he has the same income as the average american. Yet the average american is not the multi millionaire. Hence in order to claim that Gore is a hypocrite you must compare him to the average multi millionaire.
Fact of the matter is those using his energy use as some ridiculous attack on global warming are simply jealous of the fact that Gore is a multi millionaire. So is this a thread on attacking those who are rich or attacking those that pollute? So far, large houses, large energy bills yada yada, all that's been shown here seems to be against being rich. I thought that was a liberal thing, not conservative.

But here's what is really interesting. The "conservatives" have claimed that going green or supporting initiatives to decrease greenhouse gases will destroy the economy - interesting that they are now accusing Gore of ripping ppl off some how and making millions through exactly what they say will break the bank.

 

[Australianlibertarian]

He is a hypocrite.

Consider how much energy was used to produce all the furnishings in his house. The energy needed to produce the dishwashers, fridges, telephones, paints, timber, ceramics. Etc. So far many people have looked at Gore's electricity consumption. But has anyone factored in all of the energy required to build his house?

Secondly we all assume that by planting trees that somehow Al Gore is offsetting his carbon emissions by carbon sinks (trees). This assumes that trees are net carbon sinks throughout their life span. I've yet to see evidence to support this.

If you really care about the environment and really have any clue about CO2 and the carbon life forms that we are. You know that the only way to reduce green house gases is to live in a cave, and consume very little at all.

 

[Sauwan]

Consider how much energy was used to produce all the furnishings in his house. The energy needed to produce the dishwashers, fridges, telephones, paints, timber, ceramics. Etc. So far many people have looked at Gore's electricity consumption. But has anyone factored in all of the energy required to build his house?

Good point; we should all live in caves because even the effort to lean trees together to provide shelter causes us to respire CO2.

Secondly we all assume that by planting trees that somehow Al Gore is offsetting his carbon emissions by carbon sinks (trees). This assumes that trees are net carbon sinks throughout their life span. I've yet to see evidence to support this.

I'm not sure if you're unfamiliar with the processes of photosynthesis, or if you're just playing dumb.

If you really care about the environment and really have any clue about CO2 and the carbon life forms that we are. You know that the only way to reduce green house gases is to live in a cave, and consume very little at all.

Haha, well I'll admit I didn't finish your post before deciding to respond. (The trees not being carbon sinks was quite amusing) I'm going to leave my response to the first part just because it's that much funnier.

For those of us who DO know about CO2 and the environment, we know that a large majority of the CO2 output from humans is from fossil fuel burning power plants. This is easily remedied by creating Nuclear facilities - however in the short term it's good to reduce your power consumption. This blatant non-sequitur that any CO2 that is output is bad therefore we should live in caves is laughable. The earth is largely resilient, and we just need to understand when we cross a line.

 

[Stinger]

I find it bizzare that all these Republicans are pissed off at Gore for having a big house and therefore using more energy then average.

Why do you misrepresent it?

 

[Stinger]

How much energy Gore uses is absolutly irrelevent. It's just an attempt to try and confuse the issue by an ad hominum attack on the messanger by people who know they can't argue with the message. And it's such a stupid, stupid thing to try to attack someone with; are they going to count how much toilet paper he uses next? Or should I go and look at your energy bill and judge your worth as a human being based on how many energystar appliances you own?

You lead by example. Gore is a hypocrite.

 

[Stinger]

Gore runs a personal business out of his home. This means that he has a large rate of consumption that the average homeowner does not have.

That's it???? :spin:

Also, the larger a house the larger surface area there is perpetuate heat loss.

Then he should practice what he preaches and live in a smaller house or limit his energy usage, energy which must be produced, to that of everyone else or better yet LESS.

 

[Stinger]

The "conservatives" don't have anything, they can't refute the science,

Gore is the one who believes and preaches the issue, yet he lives hypocritically and you guys won't even call him on it.

 

[Just Me 2]

Gore runs a personal business out of his home. This means that he has a large rate of consumption that the average homeowner does not have.

He runs it out of ONE what about the other three?

Also, the larger a house the larger surface area there is perpetuate heat loss. There are many variables involved in assessing the amount of energy used by a home, but it all boils down to one thing - how much have you done to reduce your consumption. I would be willing to bet a ton that Gore has done as much as he can without putting himself out of business to minimize his consumption of energy.

My point EXACTLY why does he need four LARGE houses?

That's all irrelevant to the GW debate though, because - as it has already been pointed out - the skeptics cannot seem to debate the science, and resort to drastic and pathetic Ad Hominem attacks

I have no problem with the fact that GW is happening what I have a problem with is someone that does not walk the walk but will preach to me.

 

[Gill]

Gore has had a consistent position of purchasing carbon offsets to offset the family’s carbon footprint — a concept the right-wing fails to understand. Gore’s office explains:

"What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon footprint and try to reduce it as much as possible. Once they have done so, he then advocates that they purchase offsets, as the Gore’s do, to bring their footprint down to zero."

Simple question... When Mr. Gore or anyone else, buys carbon credits, is the overall carbon emissions of the world lessened??

Carbon credit trading is a way for some to make themselves feel as though they are saving the world, while at the same time continuing to live an exorbitant lifestyle. For others, it is a get rich quick scheme. It appears to me that Mr. Gore is playing both sides.

Gore runs a personal business out of his home. This means that he has a large rate of consumption that the average homeowner does not have.

And you have proof of this??

 

[Chanda]

I have no problem with the fact that GW is happening what I have a problem with is someone that does not walk the walk but will preach to me.

From Urban Legends:

"In the book version of An Inconvenient Truth where Gore discusses what ordinary citizens can do to help combat global warming, he stops well short of calling for deep sacrifice or lifestyle change.

"First, he lists a number of modest steps individuals can take to make their homes and activities more environmentally friendly -- like using energy-efficient appliances, adjusting the thermostat by a couple of degrees, installing solar panels, and using less hot water when possible -- all of which are economically as well as ecologically beneficial, and none of which we have any reason to believe Gore is not taking himself.

"Second, he preaches activism -- voting for environmentally enlightened measures and candidates and spreading he gospel of global warming. And in these we know Al Gore has played an exemplary role.

"Third, he argues that everyone ought to try to achieve a "carbon neutral" lifestyle. How? By doing precisely what he does -- offsetting one's environmental impact through investments in projects and enterprises aimed at reducing energy consumption overall.

"So, where is the disjunct between what he says and what he does? Unless you put words in his mouth, there isn't one. You might argue that it would be better for the environment if people like Gore lived in smaller houses and modified their lifestyles instead of shelling out bucks for carbon offsets -- and you might even be right -- but that's a policy disagreement, not proof that he's a hypocrite. Folks who dislike his politics will no doubt call him hypocritical just the same, but judged strictly in terms of whether or not Al Gore practices what he preaches, the case against him is a sham."

Al Gore's Energy Usage Exceeds U.S. Average [p. 2]

 

[Just Me 2]

From Urban Legends:

"In the book version of An Inconvenient Truth where Gore discusses what ordinary citizens can do to help combat global warming, he stops well short of calling for deep sacrifice or lifestyle change.

"First, he lists a number of modest steps individuals can take to make their homes and activities more environmentally friendly -- like using energy-efficient appliances, adjusting the thermostat by a couple of degrees, installing solar panels, and using less hot water when possible -- all of which are economically as well as ecologically beneficial, and none of which we have any reason to believe Gore is not taking himself.

"Second, he preaches activism -- voting for environmentally enlightened measures and candidates and spreading he gospel of global warming. And in these we know Al Gore has played an exemplary role.

"Third, he argues that everyone ought to try to achieve a "carbon neutral" lifestyle. How? By doing precisely what he does -- offsetting one's environmental impact through investments in projects and enterprises aimed at reducing energy consumption overall.

"So, where is the disjunct between what he says and what he does? Unless you put words in his mouth, there isn't one. You might argue that it would be better for the environment if people like Gore lived in smaller houses and modified their lifestyles instead of shelling out bucks for carbon offsets -- and you might even be right -- but that's a policy disagreement, not proof that he's a hypocrite. Folks who dislike his politics will no doubt call him hypocritical just the same, but judged strictly in terms of whether or not Al Gore practices what he preaches, the case against him is a sham."

Al Gore's Energy Usage Exceeds U.S. Average [p. 2]

I am very aware of the things that he says.

Most emissions from homes are from the fossil fuels burned to generate electricity and heat. By using energy more efficiently at home, you can reduce your emissions and lower your energy bills by more than 30%.

So why does he have four large homes? Does he NEED four homes? NO but why does he have four? Well because can can, great he'll just pay HIMSELF so that others can clean up his desire to have four homes.

Almost one third of the carbon dioxide produced in the United States comes from our cars, trucks and airplanes. Here are some simple, practical things you can do to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide you produce while on the move.

Ok so why does he not take the transportation that is going from point A to point B anyway, instead of adding more crap to the air by having a private jet? Again oh it is ok because he pays HIMSELF so that someone else can clean p his crap.There is absolutely NO reason, NONE for him to have a privet jet, well other then because he can. That is pretty damn selfish and hypocritical if you ask me.


I'd like to know how long it take a tree to offset his privet jet use? It is like me telling everyone to eat healthy foods, yet I stuff myself with cookies but wait I pay the workers at the cookie factory that I OWN to eat lettuce. It is ridiculous. He is using the buying carbon credit thing to make money, plain and simply. He is in it so deep it is not even funny. The two largest companies that do this carbon credit thing are:

Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc.

Well, well, well look who is on the board of directors. Mr. Maurice Strong long time friend of Al Gore. So Al's carbon credit scam makes his friend a pretty penny.


AND

Generation Investment Management LLP


Again what a shock Al Gore is a co-founder of the company. So he buys credits from himself, no conflict of interest there.

How can you not see this buying credit thing is nothing but a scam. It is a way for companies to get rich.

Interesting information.

Creators of carbon credit scheme cashing in on it


The man is a scam artist and is making money off his save the environment crusade. The things he says to do other then this credit thing are good but he IS getting rich off the carbon credit scam.

 

[Sauwan]

And you have proof of this??

Sure.

Urban Legends Reference Pages: Al Gore's Energy Use

Note that this cost is actually exaggerated because he pays a premium of $432/month to get electricity from "green" sources.

 

[Australianlibertarian]

Good point; we should all live in caves because even the effort to lean trees together to provide shelter causes us to respire CO2.

I'm not sure if you're unfamiliar with the processes of photosynthesis, or if you're just playing dumb.

Haha, well I'll admit I didn't finish your post before deciding to respond. (The trees not being carbon sinks was quite amusing) I'm going to leave my response to the first part just because it's that much funnier.

For those of us who DO know about CO2 and the environment, we know that a large majority of the CO2 output from humans is from fossil fuel burning power plants. This is easily remedied by creating Nuclear facilities - however in the short term it's good to reduce your power consumption. This blatant non-sequitur that any CO2 that is output is bad therefore we should live in caves is laughable. The earth is largely resilient, and we just need to understand when we cross a line.

Actually my reference to trees, was NET intake of CO2. I saw some research somewhere that when trees are young or sapplings that the produce more CO2 than they sequester, due to cellular respiration. It is only once the trees have matured that you get a NET intake of CO2. SO yes I am very fimiliar with CO2, as my I have a degree in biology.

I agree with you about nuclear power plants, but my reference to living in caves is designed for people that are so scared of CO2 emissions yet at the same time won't even attempt to ponder nuclear power.

 

[Sauwan]

Actually my reference to trees, was NET intake of CO2. I saw some research somewhere that when trees are young or sapplings that the produce more CO2 than they sequester, due to cellular respiration. It is only once the trees have matured that you get a NET intake of CO2. SO yes I am very fimiliar with CO2, as my I have a degree in biology.

Well I apologize. If you are able to find that research again I would be interested in reading it. I couldn't find anything with a few minutes of googling.

I agree with you about nuclear power plants, but my reference to living in caves is designed for people that are so scared of CO2 emissions yet at the same time won't even attempt to ponder nuclear power.

I think people are afraid of the word "Nuclear" altogether. I think it would be really interesting to see Gore actually press for more Nuclear power plants. If he was against those, I would see some hypocrisy.

 

[Chanda]

So why does he have four large homes? Does he NEED four homes?

Do you have proof he has four homes? According to Time, "Gore...owns homes in Carthage, Tenn., and in the Washington area" Even if he has multiple homes, he doesn't live in all of them at once, and, "You might argue that it would be better for the environment if people like Gore lived in smaller houses and modified their lifestyles instead of shelling out bucks for carbon offsets -- and you might even be right -- but that's a policy disagreement, not proof that he's a hypocrite."--urbanlegends.about.com

There is absolutely NO reason, NONE for him to have a privet jet,

Do you have proof he has a private jet?

So Al's carbon credit scam makes his friend a pretty penny.

What is Strong's salary for being on the Board of Directors for CCX?

Again what a shock Al Gore is a co-founder of the company. So he buys credits from himself, no conflict of interest there...The man is a scam artist and is making money off his save the environment crusade.

Wrong, GIM isn't a provider of carbon offsets. Furthermore, the Gores have donated all the profits from his book and movie to global warming education.

Interesting information.

Creators of carbon credit scheme cashing in on it

Interesting credentials: Canada Free Press founding editor Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years experience in the print media. Her work has appeared on Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, Glenn Beck and The Rant.