Al Gore:How Green Is He?

[DreadPirateRoberts]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

I'm still stuck on the house size comments made earlier.

There are many things that one can do to one's house to conserve energy. A small, poorly insulated but overly ACed or heated house might just use as much as a large house on a conservation plan. There are many things you can do go "go green" that don't involve downsizing your living space. Does he have dual paned windows? How about solar panal additions to the structures? Energy efficient appliances? A zoned AC/heating unit? But, a large,efficient house is a greener place to live than a smaller house which wastes resources.

I agree, the size of one's house does not have to correlate to its energy efficiency.

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

I have 1320 square feet of house with old windows, big drafts and ineffeciant heating and air conditioning. I wonder how my usage compares with larger but greener houses.

You probably use more, newer houses are normally more efficient because of building code requirements. I believe attics are required to have insulation now with a high R-value. But there are many things you can do to make your house more efficient, as you have pointed out.They don't all have to be expensive. I just got done adding extra insulation to our attic, retrofitting dual glaze lowE windows, and swapping out incandescent light bulbs for the compact flourescent lighting. The new insulation really helped the upstairs temperature, and the new windows are great, no drafts and do a good job of cutting out the outside noise. Its amazing how much cooler the bathroom is when you remove 2 60 watt incandescent bulbs and replace them with 2 13 watt flourescent bulbs and get the same amount of light for less energy.

[sleepyjeff]

It's not just the house itself.....what about the yard? Is it being mowed with a push mower, an electric mower, or a maybe a two-stroke tractor?

Does he use a clothes-line?(I know that there are energy efficient dryers, but even those are really no friend of the enviroment)

Does he walk to destinations that are within walking distance? Even evergy efficient cars do some damage.

------I ask these questions because, even though I am no enviromentalist by any stretch of the imagination I do use a push mower, a clothes line(except in the Winter) and walk to and from work(about 3.9 miles each way) at least twice a week. I also live in an 1100 square foot home that is heated and cooled by an energy efficient heat pump.

Who is worse? Someone who believes global warming is real but does only what is convenient to help stop it or someone who doesn't buy into it at all but still tries to live a life with as little waste as possible but for selfish reasons?

I think most people could point to things they do that are good for the enviroment.......even Gore. But if one is going to ask others to sacrifice even more than they already do that person should at least be prepared to give up a little more than they already do too.

[scaeagles]

Again, what Gore does or doesn't do isn't the problem for me. If he weren't so apolocalyptic about the whole thing, it wouldn't be a story. It was like Jimmy Swaggart in the car with a prostitute and a playboy. Not the first man to do it, I'm sure, and not the last either, but in spite of his lack of infallability, it was a story because of his high profile status as some sort of moral leader.

Likewise, there was so much criticism of Bush for not going to Vietnam.....legitimate criticism. When it would come up, if I would dare to mention that Clinton not only didn't go, he spoke of loathing ithe military and now wanted to be commander in chief, I would be rebuked here about changing the subject from Bush to Clinton. "We aren't talking about Clinton!" was the repeated cry.

So, I completely respect, though disagree, with what Alex is saying. As far as justifying hypocrisy by pointing out that we are all hypocrits....it is an obvious thing to point out. I count myself among the worst as a professing Christian who does stupid and non Christian things daily.

[SacTown Chronic]

Apples to oranges, Leo. I wasn't defending Gore by mentioning Bush. I could understand the charge if I had brought up Bush's environmental record or some such. I was contributing to what I thought was a thread about political hypocrisy.



On the subject of Gore, I drive a hybrid but not one of the more fuel efficient models. Sometimes we ride our bikes to go get dinner but we usually take the car. i recycle but sometimes it's easier to throw my plastic water bottle in the nearest garbage can. Do these things disqualify me from teaching my children to be environmentally conscious? Should I be banned from speaking at the city council meeting where they will consider allowing housing developments in our wetlands?

Look at how Gore travels around the globe to preach his message. By jet. Has he ever heard of a satillite link or a phone call?

I remember you stating that seeing Reagan speak live in Sacramento shaped you politically. Do you believe you would have been similarly inspired by a conference call?

[Alex]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

So, I completely respect, though disagree, with what Alex is saying. As far as justifying hypocrisy by pointing out that we are all hypocrits....it is an obvious thing to point out. I count myself among the worst as a professing Christian who does stupid and non Christian things daily.

I'm not justifying hypocrisy by saying we are all hypocrites. I'm saying it is not hypocrisy when someone fails to live up to your standards of how they should live.

Gore does not say we should emit no carbon, he says we should be carbon neutral. This means he could be the biggest carbon emitter on the planet and still not be a hypocrite so long as he is also the biggest carbon reducer on the planet.

I'm also saying that failure to achieve perfection is also not hypocrisy. So even if Gore were proposing the lifestyle several people in this thread are erroneously trying to hold him to, it is not necessarily hypocrisy if he fails to acheive it 100%.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

I'm not justifying hypocrisy by saying we are all hypocrites. I'm saying it is not hypocrisy when someone fails to live up to your standards of how they should live.

I apologize for not being more clear on what I meant. You have not done that in this case, but others have (or at least that's what I think I read).

I didn't say Gore should live up to my standards. Not in the least. I clearly stated that I begrudge no one their wealth or private jets or large homes or whatever their extravagances may be.

However, again taking the example of Jimmy Swaggart, I don't believe he had ever said he was a perfect individual prior to his "fall". (As an aside, I am no Swaggart fan, it's just a good example.) However, didn't he lose his most of, if not all of, his credibility in speaking in terms of what is moral?

Sac, I cannot hypothesize as to if seeing Reagan in person vs. seeing him on TV would have inspired me any differently. I was inspired by him whenever I saw him speak. If you are passionate, that passion comes through a TV or a radio or a phone.

Gore can do whatever the he wants. He can preach his sermons, and I will fully admit that he has no credibility with me whether he preaches it or not or drives an Excursion. I just think it's humorous, really.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

However, again taking the example of Jimmy Swaggart, I don't believe he had ever said he was a perfect individual prior to his "fall". (As an aside, I am no Swaggart fan, it's just a good example.) However, didn't he lose his most of, if not all of, his credibility in speaking in terms of what is moral?

Again, this comparison makes no sense. It only makes sense if Al Gore is willfully failing to live up to a standard he claims to live to. So far, there is no evidence offered that this is the case.

Just evidence that he isn't living up to the standards that others have decided he claims to live up to but he has not.

You find this "humorous." Similarly I could find it humorous that you don't live up to Levitical law since you claim the Bible as the source of your morality. It doesn't matter that you make no claim that Levitical law is the ruling law of the modern Christian since Mosaic law was overturned by Jesus and the New Testament. All that matters is what I claim you should believe and act on based on my interpreation of what you actually believe.

Does me calling you a hypocrite because of this actually make you a hypocrite and therefore your hypocrisy is humorous?

You say you aren't judging him based on your terms but you are. Or else there would be nothing to find humorous here.

[innerSpaceman]

Public Alex mojo.

[Stan4dSteph]

I also agree with what Alex has said in this thread. Thanks for the well-worded comments.

[Scrooge McSam]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Public Alex mojo.

Oh yeah, he likes it that way, doesn't he?

Well spoken, Alex!