Gore Refuses to take The Pledge

[red states rule]

Or perhaps Gore is buying a small bit of green power - perhaps enough to account for the 0.12 cents per kwh disparity in the rate and his actual bill.

and the rest of his “green power” offset is coming in the form of "carbon offsets" Which is a far cry from having all your power be renewable

 

[maineman]

Or perhaps Gore is buying a small bit of green power - perhaps enough to account for the 0.12 cents per kwh disparity in the rate and his actual bill.

and the rest of his “green power” offset is coming in the form of "carbon offsets" Which is a far cry from having all your power be renewable

that is not an option for most electric distribution companies.... you pick your supplier..... and that is who provides you the KWH. YOU cannot buy only a small bit of green power. Either it is green or it is not.

 

[red states rule]

that is not an option for most electric distribution companies.... you pick your supplier..... and that is who provides you the KWH. YOU cannot buy only a small bit of green power. Either it is green or it is not.

Not everybody is Al Gore. The huge gap in price is very strange

 

[maineman]

Not everybody is Al Gore. The huge gap in price is very strange

did you read my link?

there is a disparity among green power suppliers.... some are quite competitive. and for you to suggest that electric distribution companies have special rules for rich customers is laughable. That is my business, RSR.... we do not play favorites, and there are plenty of very wealthy customers of my company who might want us to. that doesn't happen.

 

[red states rule]

did you read my link?

there is a disparity among green power suppliers.... some are quite competitive. and for you to suggest that electric distribution companies have special rules for rich customers is laughable. That is my business, RSR.... we do not play favorites, and there are plenty of very wealthy customers of my company who might want us to. that doesn't happen.

but not a former VP - the number do not add up

Plus his other energy use is through the roof - which clearly is not green

 

[maineman]

but not a former VP - the number do not add up

Plus his other energy use is through the roof - which clearly is not green

actually...we have a former president as a customer. the current president's dad.... or did you forget that he has an enormous mansion in Kennebunkport?

and carbon offsets cover the non-green portion of Gore's energy consumption..... and just because you have an editorial which shows where some carbon offset companies are not on the up and up, does not mean that Gore's are not. I point you back to the MPUC site where it discusses the very valid carbon offset plans available on the market.

 

[Gunny]

but not a former VP - the number do not add up

Plus his other energy use is through the roof - which clearly is not green

I think you are seeing something that isn't there. Cost is irrelevant. Fuel source is what is relevant.

Electricity is generated by turbine friction. If those turbines are powered by oil, then oil consumption is high. If they are converted to burn green fuel sources, oil consumption is at a minimum.

The idea here being to become less dependent on oil and oil-based products for fuel. Every drop of oil we don't need makes us that much less dependent on foreign nations for our nation to operate.

If you were as gungo-ho patriotic as you claim to be, you would quit thinking green power is some liberal sell-job and look at the big picture. As long as we are dependent on foreign oil, we will be embroiled in their internal politics.

 

[red states rule]

I think you are seeing something that isn't there. Cost is irrelevant. Fuel source is what is relevant.

Electricity is generated by turbine friction. If those turbines are powered by oil, then oil consumption is high. If they are converted to burn green fuel sources, oil consumption is at a minimum.

The idea here being to become less dependent on oil and oil-based products for fuel. Every drop of oil we don't need makes us that much less dependent on foreign nations for our nation to operate.

If you were as gungo-ho patriotic as you claim to be, you would quit thinking green power is some liberal sell-job and look at the big picture. As long as we are dependent on foreign oil, we will be embroiled in their internal politics.

The cost tells me Gore is getting it below the market price - or only a small part of his electricy is "green"

Gunny - there have been a coouple of major oil finds in the US. There are billions of barrels of oil sitting in the ground (or sea floor) waiting to be tapped

We can drive the cost of oil (and gas) down but the enviro wackos block attempts to get the oil

The US also needs to build new and expand refineries. The last time a refinery was built was around 1979

 

[maineman]

The cost tells me Gore is getting it below the market price - or only a small part of his electricy is "green"

Gunny - there have been a coouple of major oil finds in the US. There are billions of barrels of oil sitting in the ground (or sea floor) waiting to be tapped

We can drive the cost of oil (and gas) down but the enviro wackos block attempts to get the oil

The US also needs to build new and expand refineries. The last time a refinery was built was around 1979

you are wrong. electric companies do not have the capability to split energy providers for customers. You get your electricity from one provider and one only...in Gore's case, it is green.

 

[red states rule]

you are wrong. electric companies do not have the capability to split energy providers for customers. You get your electricity from one provider and one only...in Gore's case, it is green.

and his natural gas, private jets, and carbon offsets - are they "green"?

 

[maineman]

and his natural gas, private jets, and carbon offsets - are they "green"?

carbon offsets are definitely green....quit spinning away from the fact that you are WRONG about his electricity.

 

[red states rule]

carbon offsets are definitely green....quit spinning away from the fact that you are WRONG about his electricity.

carbon offsets do NOTHING MM

the point is - which you want to ignore - Al's total enegry use is huge, while he lectures the rest of us to conserve

 

[maineman]

carbon offsets are effective. that is fact.

I posted enough websites to public utility commission sites to keep you reading for weeks.

the point is: quit ragging on his electric bill...it is green.

 

[red states rule]

carbon offsets are effective. that is fact.

I posted enough websites to public utility commission sites to keep you reading for weeks.

the point is: quit ragging on his electric bill...it is green.

Carbon offset are a ripoff. They do nothing except make libs fee good - or put money in other liberals wallets

Taking Al's light bill off the table you still have a huge gas bill and his private jets

Much like the Dem candidates did this week - libs will not walk the walk only talk the talk

 

[red states rule]

As far as carbon offsets - Al is making millions


Al Gore's Inconvenient Loot


Former Vice President Al Gore has built a Green money-making machine capable of eventually generating billions of dollars for investors, including himself, but he set it up so that the average Joe can't afford to play on Gore's terms. And the US portion is headed up by a former Gore staffer and fund raiser who previously ran afoul of both the FEC and the DOJ, before Janet Reno jumped in and shut down an investigation during the Clinton years.

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2007/03/al_gores_inconv.html

 

[maineman]

Carbon offset are a ripoff. They do nothing except make libs fee good - or put money in other liberals wallets

Taking Al's light bill off the table you still have a huge gas bill and his private jets

Much like the Dem candidates did this week - libs will not walk the walk only talk the talk

that is incorrect. Carbon offsets fund efforts to improve the environment. Like I said, you ignore the links that I have posted which show how they work in my state.... that's because, of course, you really don't care about truth.

 

[red states rule]

Now even the NY Times is asking if carbon offsets do any good

NY Times Surprisingly Asks ‘Is the Carbon-Neutral Movement Just a Gimmick?’
Posted by Noel Sheppard on April 29, 2007 - 11:25.
The reader is formally cautioned to prepare his or herself for an alternate reality. You have been warned.

I’m shocked, I tell you, shocked to find the New York Times asking the following question on a Sunday morning:

But is the carbon-neutral movement just a gimmick?

Is this possibly a sea change in media coverage on this issue, or just an olive branch cynically tossed to create the illusion of balance?

Regardless of the answer, although Andrew C. Revkin’s “Carbon-Neutral Is Hip, but Is It Green?” fell short of exposing all the hypocrisies concerning this matter, it was nonetheless surprising to see a Times writer offer the following opinions about such a controversial and polarizing subject (emphasis added throughout, h/t Glenn Reynolds):

Some believe it helps build support, but others argue that these purchases don’t accomplish anything meaningful — other than giving someone a slightly better feeling (or greener reputation) after buying a 6,000-square-foot house or passing the million-mile mark in a frequent-flier program. In fact, to many environmentalists, the carbon-neutral campaign is a sign of the times — easy on the sacrifice and big on the consumerism.

http://newsbusters.org/node/12398

 

[Gunny]

The cost tells me Gore is getting it below the market price - or only a small part of his electricy is "green"

Gunny - there have been a coouple of major oil finds in the US. There are billions of barrels of oil sitting in the ground (or sea floor) waiting to be tapped

We can drive the cost of oil (and gas) down but the enviro wackos block attempts to get the oil

The US also needs to build new and expand refineries. The last time a refinery was built was around 1979

Oil is finite. Period. Your vision is extremely short-sighted. It's going to run out. It is not the most efficient means of energy. It IS however the dirtiest.

And most of all, it keeps us dependent on nations that aren't worth crap and we could otherwise watch blow each other up if we didn't have to protect our source.

That there are billions of gallons sitting in the ground is unsupported speculation. And there have been no new petroleum refineries built because oil corporations refuse to build them to EPA standards. Thinking the pricetag for those new refineries and/or oil rigs/wells won't be passed on tot eh consumer is in direct contradiction to your stance in the economy thread.

There's a difference between being an environment wacko and believing in using natural resources responsibly and conservatively. I wouls think a self-proclaimed conservative would understand THAT.

 

[red states rule]

Oil is finite. Period. Your vision is extremely short-sighted. It's going to run out. It is not the most efficient means of energy. It IS however the dirtiest.

And most of all, it keeps us dependent on nations that aren't worth crap and we could otherwise watch blow each other up if we didn't have to protect our source.

That there are billions of gallons sitting in the ground is unsupported speculation. And there have been no new petroleum refineries built because oil corporations refuse to build them to EPA standards. Thinking the pricetag for those new refineries and/or oil rigs/wells won't be passed on tot eh consumer is in direct contradiction to your stance in the economy thread.

There's a difference between being an environment wacko and believing in using natural resources responsibly and conservatively. I wouls think a self-proclaimed conservative would understand THAT.

EPA standards are not the reason - it is the endless lawsuits the envir wackos will file

There have been recent discoveries of huge oil reserves. The biggest is in the Gulf - 15 billion barrels worth

As technology improves - more oil will be found

 

[Gunny]

EPA standards are not the reason - it is the endless lawsuits the envir wackos will file

Bullshit. EPA restrictions were toughened up in 79 with a grandfather clause covering existing refineries. The corporations stated at the time they just weren't going to build anymore.

They're just beautiful too. You should see them.

There have been recent discoveries of huge oil reserves. The biggest is in the Gulf - 15 billion barrels worth

Which is a guess.

As technology improves - more oil will be found

Lame copout skirting the issue.