Al Gore not exactly environment friendly...

[Tzupy]

Getting an Oscar for 'An Inconvenient Truth', but in his private life not acting accordingly, this smells fishy!
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37905

[MikeC]

Does that really undermine the content of his film in any way? If you watched it, you would not think so. I found the Inquirer piece snide & biased: "hand-wringing documentary" is not the way I perceived it at all. It strikes me as a film that should be shown to everyone in the world. (I have to say some portions were a bit too monotone, but the overall content is utterly compelling and totally relevant/timely.)

Reportedly, Gore's "personal energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh to 18,400 kWh a month... How much bloody electricity can one man use, for God's sake?" Do we know anything about what his mansion is used for? Is it the HQ for his work? Does he employ a bunch of people who work at his house?

On a personal note, perhaps the several 24/7 computers and PSU testing keep the electricity consumption in my home higher than it could be -- though it's actually still quite low -- 720kWh in Jan -- because only high efficiency bulbs are in use (16~23W), and neither my wife nor I commute by car to work.

[nici]

I read the same thing on BBC earlier today, here, and i felt that was more objective than this article. This article failed to mention some facts and is obviously biased. I don't have an opinion on this issue, i just have something against sensationalist "journalism".

[autoboy]

I'm not a big fan of the old hockey stick arguement. It is really easy to lie with charts and politicians are notorious at this. Still...this is not an inconvient truth thread.

I find to totally believeable that Al Gore would use this much power at his house. I don't know how big it is, but is is probably 5-10X the size of normal "average" homes. He also works out of his house and probably has at least some staff. He probably has all the toys any self respecting millionaire would have...a theater, in house audio system, TVs in every bedroom and common area, at least 4 computers, printers, faxes, etc. Houses like his are full of light fixures, not just a lamp in the corner. With staff, it is unreasonable to keep all the lights off like I do at my home (except my gf can't turn anything off!) He is not a hippie living with the trees.

Still, I find it alarming that he does not have some sort of alternative energy feeding his home. Solar Panels, or a mini windmill are viable alternative energy sources and while it may be difficult to power a power hungry house like his, it can lower the bills substantially.

It is pretty common for advocates to not practice what they preach. It happens all the time. Most of the time these people just want some attention.

[NeilBlanchard]

Hello,

I'm a little suspicious of this story, even though the BBC has carried it. No one has mentioned the largest electrical use that is possible in a home: air conditioning. (The mention of an electric gate is just plain silly, in terms of electrical use, and seems to be mentioned in an attempt to enflame...)

As I type, this story is being reported on NPR's All Things Considered.

For what it is worth, my household used 10,219kwH last year -- and I did not use any A/C last year, and 9 out of 10 light bulbs in this house are compact fluorescent or LED. The few incandescent bulbs are in areas that are infrequently used and then only for brief periods. Seeing that, I am a bit suspicious of their average number?

[Edit: The Wikipedia entry (linked below) mentions that the electric company is denying that they were ever asked for the numbers. If this is true, then I think we know where they got the numbers...]

[jaganath]

Still, I find it alarming that he does not have some sort of alternative energy feeding his home.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore_co ... gy_in_home

There is a bit about this claim at the bottom of the wiki article.

smells like a right-wing think-tank digging for dirt on a left-wing figure.

[nici]

Still, I find it alarming that he does not have some sort of alternative energy feeding his home. Solar Panels, or a mini windmill are viable alternative energy sources and while it may be difficult to power a power hungry house like his, it can lower the bills substantially.

If you read the BBC story, you see that he does, and is about to install solar panels and low-energy lightbulbs. The house is 20 rooms.

Living in a hut and feeding on rats and cacti is not an option for most people.

[qviri]

Living in a hut and feeding on rats and cacti is not an option for most people.

Most people aren't the face of the so-called global warming.

I'd like to find out why does he need a 20-room house.

[Erssa]

Even, if Al Gore lived in a tree with no electricity, it wouldn't solve the global warming problem, and maybe Al Gore's house is power by nuclear energy making it a environmentally friendly .

I can smell dirty republican fingers all over this news.

If Al weren't a politician, he could say right now: "Do as I say, not as I do"

[Eunos]

As a rule of thumb, be very very suspicious of any sensationalist media reports against a leader. Usually someone higher up is pulling the strings.

[Nick Geraedts]

All I've got to say about it is that the whole "green" hype is just that - a lot of hype.

I'll point you towards one site in particular - www.climateaudit.org. Have a read through there and you'll see how some facts are not what they seem - see here for an example.

[AZBrandon]

On a personal note, perhaps the several 24/7 computers and PSU testing keep the electricity consumption in my home higher than it could be -- though it's actually still quite low -- 720kWh in Jan -- because only high efficiency bulbs are in use (16~23W), and neither my wife nor I commute by car to work.

At 720kw/h in January, you can't be using electricity for your heating, are you? If you are, is your house below ground or a multi-family home, mitigating some of the heat loss? I live in Phoenix and have an electric heat pump for my 1350 square foot home, all CFL lighting, no TV, nothing really of interest at all that draws power besides my PC, water heater, fridge, and heat pump. For that matter, do you have an electric water heater? Anyway, even my house used something around 900kw/h in January, so I can't see how a home in Canada would be less unless you're not heating electrically.

A lot of cold climate areas obscure the issue by using natural gas and/or heating oil for their home and water heat plus cooking too. According to one of the stories about Gore's house, his average natural gas bill is $1,080/month, which is nearly as bad as his electric bill. I should hope nobody on this forum is spending nearly $13,000/year on natural gas!

[autoboy]

I can smell dirty republican fingers all over this news.

And "dirty" democratic fingers aren't all over the inaccuracies of the documentary?

I'm all for clean energy and curbing our dependance on foreign oil, I was even part of getting the Tesla Roadster off the ground, but neither side of the fence ever tells the whole truth. These kind of remarks are no better than the stupid fanboism remarks all over Tomshardware Forums. This is some guy that doesn't like Al Gore's politics making sensational remarks based on half truths, overgeneralizatins, and missing the whole point of view. Typical bloging. Nothing else.

I wish people could talk rationally about politics but it is never going to happen. Everytime I try to talk about politics with someone it always turns into a flame war between two sides that don't know sh*it about what they are talking about. Myself included.

[Erssa]

I can smell dirty republican fingers all over this news.

And "dirty" democratic fingers aren't all over the inaccuracies of the documentary?

I'm all for clean energy and curbing our dependance on foreign oil, I was even part of getting the Tesla Roadster off the ground, but neither side of the fence ever tells the whole truth. These kind of remarks are no better than the stupid fanboism remarks all over Tomshardware Forums. This is some guy that doesn't like Al Gore's politics making sensational remarks based on half truths, overgeneralizatins, and missing the whole point of view. Typical bloging. Nothing else.

I wish people could talk rationally about politics but it is never going to happen. Everytime I try to talk about politics with someone it always turns into a flame war between two sides that don't know sh*it about what they are talking about. Myself included.

I can smell sensitive republican fingers.

[qviri]

I can smell a flamewar.

[MikeC]

At 720kw/h in January, you can't be using electricity for your heating, are you? If you are, is your house below ground or a multi-family home, mitigating some of the heat loss? I live in Phoenix and have an electric heat pump for my 1350 square foot home, all CFL lighting, no TV, nothing really of interest at all that draws power besides my PC, water heater, fridge, and heat pump. For that matter, do you have an electric water heater? Anyway, even my house used something around 900kw/h in January, so I can't see how a home in Canada would be less unless you're not heating electrically.

You're right. The house is 2400sf, 2 levels. Natural gas is used for central forced air heating, and the water heat is gas fired as well. Those two items accounted for 14 gigajoules (GJ) in Jan. One GJ is equivalent to 278 kw/h; 14 = 3892kw/h. For the whole year, NG consumption is around 90GJ. June to Sept, the monthly demand falls to under 3 GJ -- around 700kw/h. Electricity consumption drops too, but only by 10-15%.

This is interesting, as it's the first time I've tried to quantify the house energy consumption. Obviously, heating in colder weather is the single biggest energy consumer. New better insulated windows should help; the ones we have are pretty bad...

[Erssa]

Just for the record, I was merely teasing/joking. Nothing serious. So no need to get fired up.

[MikeC]

I can smell a flamewar.

Come on guys, let's make sure this gets put out before it begins. There's no point.

[autoboy]

See, it turns into a flame war. Maybe it is just me

Sorry about that. Jokes sometimes don't type well. I was joking about it too. I guess I got too flared up

Back to Gore...

[jaganath]

All I've got to say about it is that the whole "green" hype is just that - a lot of hype.

I'll point you towards one site in particular - www.climateaudit.org. Have a read through there and you'll see how some facts are not what they seem - see here for an example.

So are you saying global warming isn't happening? MBH have been vindicated multiple times, including by the American National Academy of Sciences.

I wish people could talk rationally about politics but it is never going to happen. Everytime I try to talk about politics with someone it always turns into a flame war between two sides that don't know sh*it about what they are talking about. Myself included.

There's a very old saying. "Never talk about politics, religion or sex in polite company" for exactly this reason. However that leaves out quite a large amount of human experience. I think in the US politics has never been so partisan, the old GWB motto "you're either with us or against us" which is very polarising. It's quite strange how a lot of countries basically only have 2 political parties, in places like Italy that have proportional respresentation they have hundreds of them.

[jhhoffma]

I think in the US politics has never been so partisan, the old GWB motto "you're either with us or against us" which is very polarising.

It's kind of funny how Bush is the only one who was quoted saying that...

"Hillary Clinton said on September 13, 2001: "Every nation has to either be with us, or against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price."

But seriously, I agree that politics in America is too partisan. People see too much of Republican/Democrat, left/right, conservative/liberal, instead of right/wrong. Politicians aren't interested in doing what's right anymore, just doing what gets them elected or gains their party more power. Let's take the blaming the Republicans/Bush for the war in Iraq. Nevermind that the resolution was put up for vote in both houses and in the Senate the vote was 77-23 for the Iraq Resolution (the Senate was 54-46 Republican). Or the conservative ideal of "smaller government" when Bush has done nothing but increase the size of the government.

I really not trying to start anything up here, I'm just sick and tired of all the finger-pointing. I deal with it every day at work and it's just so damn irritating. Instead of blaming "the other guy" for the problems we face, we should be saying "OK, here's a problem. Will you work with me to fix it?"

But that's probably just my naivety kicking in again...

[jaganath]

I really not trying to start anything up here, I'm just sick and tired of all the finger-pointing. I deal with it every day at work and it's just so damn irritating. Instead of blaming "the other guy" for the problems we face, we should be saying "OK, here's a problem. Will you work with me to fix it?"

When you think about it, it's natural to seek to apportion blame. No-one wants to be stuck fixing someone else's mess when it's not their fault. But the problem is, if something is a really urgent problem (let's take global warming as a hypothetical example) we're so caught up in trying to figure out who to blame that we won't do anything about it until it's too late.

Sometimes I wonder how we ever made it down from the trees....

[autoboy]

So are you saying global warming isn't happening? MBH have been vindicated multiple times, including by the American National Academy of Sciences.

I don't think anyone can say that global warming is not happening. The modern high accuracy temperature data clearly shows that the earth is warming and that carbon dioxide in the atmoshpere is increasing. This is undisputed truth backed by empirical evidence.

The CAUSE and EFFECT of global warming is the question. We can easily see from ice cores and other evidence that the earth is a dynamic environment that is ever changing ... and now we want to blame the changing in environment to humans? Ummm, the earth changed a lot before we even existed. There is all sorts of other factors involved with the warming of the earth that many people are just ignoring or just don't even know about yet. We can't even predict the weather accurately a few days out and you want me to believe that the environmentalists know for a fact that the the evil humans are changing the earth's climate with a little bit of carbon dioxide emissions? Is global warming even bad? Our mates up in Canada could probably use a few more degrees of warmth J/K

Lets reduce emissions for the sake of better cleaner air and reducing our footprint on the earth, but for christ sake lets not take some fanciful theory and claim it as the definitive answer. We are going to need many many many many many more years of solid empirical data before we can ever claim to remotely support this theory.

Also, just because everyone believes in something doesn't make it right. Most newbies here think they need a 600W power supply for a 7600GT. Oh, and one of my favorites is that people actually think optical spidf cables sound better than coax spdif. "Global Warming" is all marketing.

[MikeC]

autoboy -- have you watched movie? It doesn't sound like you have.

I'd seen lots of evidence that human activity is causing rapid climate change before. That movie puts it all together in the most compelling and urgent way. It's really not open to debate any more, imo. It's just a question of how we will change our current habits and behaviors and patterns to slow the warming, and whether we can do it quickly enough.

[BrianE]

Regarding the whole global warming/climate change "debate", my personal view is very simple.

Since the industrial revolution the amount of energy that individual people, and the world, has been expending has been increasing almost exponentially. Energy could mean anything, from burning wood to electricity. Given the wasteful nature of many energy conversion processes, like changing hydrocarbons to electricity or mechanical motion, or even the SPCR-familiar process of converting AC to DC, much of that energy gets released into the environment as waste heat.

To blindly think or hope that the earth can simply manage the massive amounts of extra heat, not to mention chemicals, that we have been releasing without any kind of change or adverse reaction is either naive or foolhardy.

Intuitively it simply cannot be a good thing, and something ought to be done about it on a large scale regardless of whether people are thinking the earth is warming up or not. This must be done quickly as the pace of economic and industrial development will only increase.

EDIT: I haven't seen the movie BTW but it's on my rental "to do" list.

[qviri]

Our mates up in Canada could probably use a few more degrees of warmth J/K

Yup, these 35*C waves in the summer are way too cold for my liking.

It's just a question of how we will change our current habits and behaviors and patterns to slow the warming

Not owning a 20-room house would probably be a damn good start.

Not owning cars is a good one. Fluorescent bulbs, turning lights off when not needed... Not running Folding@Home 24/7 is okay as well.

To blindly think or hope that the earth can simply manage the massive amounts of extra heat, not to mention chemicals

How much energy and chemicals is released in a volcano eruption?

[MikeC]

How much energy and chemicals is released in a volcano eruption?

Massive amounts. And volcanos have had catastrophic effects on life on earth before.

Krakatoa (in Indonesia) has had a long history of eruptions that caused immense damage and even climate change over the last couple thousand years. See - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krakatoa

So what?

An asteroid could come screaming in from Andromeda and pulverize the planet, too, as so many Hollywood flicks have shown.

There's nothing we can do about such things.

There is lots we can do about our effects on rapid global warming.

[BrianE]

I think the earth is probably quite good at absorbing the occasional speed bump here and there. After all, how often to major, devastating volcanoes erupt anyway? Lava has always oozed and burped out of the earth on a constant basis since the very beginning.

It's the slow, steadily climbing, 24/7 constant output of humanity since the last couple hundred years that we should worry about.

[NeilBlanchard]

Hello,

The CAUSE and EFFECT of global warming is the question.

The consensus statement from the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (related to the UN) study group on global warning, said that there is a 90% chance (or better) that human activity is the cause of global warning.

http://www.ipcc.ch/

This is hard to argue with.

[qviri]

There is lots we can do about our effects on rapid global warming.

I suggest everyone stop spewing hot air and start doing it, then. You don't need to convince everyone around you that you're right in order to walk places instead of driving.