http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/GlobalWarming/story?id=2906888&page=1

You simply can't make this stuff up.
ABC News, even.

Herb

By all means, let's continue discussing Al Gore's utility bills and not the real problem of global warming that could wreck catastrophe on our civilization. After all, the key point of Gore's global warming talks has been to urge people to use less energy themselves...er, right? Can you quote Gore even once urging his fellow Americans to use less energy as a solution to global warming?

Andrew

"...let's continue discussing Al Gore's utility bills and not the real problem of global warming.."

Having a carbon footprint 10 or 20 times of typical families is not the real problem? It appears that they've got you hook, line and sinker.

The point is that since the guy is making major bucks by scaring the pants off people...and hasn't even tried to walk the walk, DOESN'T THAT BOTHER YOU?

I can expect Mr. Gore being duplicitous. He acts like a phoney politician, according to that article.

But what's YOUR excuse? While we may often disagree, I give you far more credit than Al Gore. WHY would you defend such a flat-out hypocrite? Is it about simply defending the democrat, no matter what?

Sure looks like it.

Herb

There are related comments on the BIG OIL thread.

Is Al playing on Global Warming fears?

Don't forget that Al Gore was VP when like 150 coal burning power plants were constructed.

Thanks, 62kgw. I just noticed them as well.

These guys are shameless. And they called Nixon a phoney.

Herb

Herb- Have you even seen An Inconvenient Truth?

My cousin is a geology professor for Portland State University. He has all these rocks in his cramped office. He has been around the world several times lecturing on geology and promoting PSU. I asked him his thoughts on Gore's movie and he agrees with what Al is presenting.

My cousin's politics are conservative but on this issue he sides with Gore.

So go ahead and shoot your darts at Gore but if you aren't doing anything to help improve and cut down on your carbon footprint then you too are as guilty as Gore.

Herb The industrial revolution of the early 1900's forever changed the landscape of our environment. The United State spends 59 percent of the estimated 2.7 trillion dollars on global health care costs. You would think if we spend that kind of money we would be the healthiest nation on the planet. Turns out we're 24th.

Our food supply is in danger because of all the chemicals we use to produce crops. We are destroying the very ground in which we need to grow food and all you can come back with is Gore is a hypocrite.

Our bodies need oxygen, water and a balanced diet. No oxygen we're dead in 3 minutes. No water- a week to 10 days. No food you die in 3 weeks.

Time for some re-evaluation and Gore presents not only the bad news but the good. When is the last time you stuck your foot out on a limb with passion like Gore's? When is the last time you presented your views over a 1000 times around the globe to help educate others?

lets see now, the DVD version of The Inconvienent Truth is one of the FIRST major motion picture DVDs sold without the high-oil-consumption-to-maunfacture DVD plastic box. I'd say this pretty much offsets the energy consumption of the Gore faimly compound. (and all the Cheney-Bush family compounds combinded too. So one could actually say Gore did Bush and Cheney a favor by not bringing up their family energy consumption in his movie.)

Lets hope the troll-like people of the planet DIE OFF SOON, so we can save ourselves!

From Herb's article:

"The press release from Johnson's group, an obscure conservative think tank founded by Johnson in 2004 when he was 24, was given splashy attention on the highly-trafficked Drudge Report Monday evening, and former Gore aides saw it as part of a piece, along with an Fox News Channel investigation from earlier this month of Gore's use of private planes in 2000. Last year, a seemingly amateurish Youtube video mocking the "An Inconvenient Truth" turned out to have been produced by slick Republican public relations firm called DCI, which just happens to have oil giant Exxon as a client."

Herb, I'm not going to let this one go, even though you glossed right over it, because I know it destroys your argument. I'll ask again: Can you quote Gore even once urging his fellow Americans to use less energy as a solution to global warming?

Just one quote? Should be easy to find from such a flaming hypocrite as Gore. Right?

Andrew

Gore might not actually be a hypocrite....
He might really believe that "human caused global warming" is based on junk science, but he decided to make it his job anyway, just like a true salesman.
The only other explaination is that he is so arrogant, that he has no clue how much energy power he is using, or he thinks he doesn't need to take any drastic action himself because he's so important.
How much oil was used by all of the people who drove their cars to the theatre or store to buy the dvd? And how much electricity is being used to play it?? And to heat the theatres?

"Can you quote Gore even once urging his fellow Americans to use less energy as a solution to global warming?"

If others want to wade through Mr. Gore's rabid musings, fine. Besides, it's implied.

But for you to defend one who is now mega-rich from scaring everyone about global warming while using 20 times the average energy in his home alone, plus his extensive use of carbon-spewing jets is beyond laughable. If you can't see that, no one can help you.

Herb

Herb wrote:
"Can you quote Gore even once urging his fellow Americans to use less energy as a solution to global warming?"

If others want to wade through Mr. Gore's rabid musings, fine. Besides, it's implied.


So you can't back up your point? OK, I know you can't admit it directly - I get it.

See, Gore isn't going around the country telling people that they must use less energy to solve global warming (that would make him a hypocrite for having a huge house and flying in corporate jets). But, since you don't really listen to what Gore is saying, you wouldn't have a clue what he's really talking about or what he's suggesting. All you want to do is call him a hypocrite. That's your agenda.

If you bothered to open your tiny little mind a smidgen, you'd find that the touted solution is not "drive less, use less energy." It's "develop alternate forms of energy." Don't drive less - drive a Prius if you can. Support cleaner-burning fuels. Gore is adding solar panels to his house. How many people are doing that? Gore's also buying carbon credits; it costs money for companies to reduce their emissions. Gore is helping to pay for that. I'd suggest that Gore's overall carbon footprint is less than yours, Herb, even without having made his movie.

And it's ironic that you don't realize how Gore is supporting the notion that it's OK to be wealthy as he is and still be a good environmental citizen. He's not advocating living like a monk to use less energy; he's got a big house but he's installing solar panels. And instead of doing the meat and potatoes lecture circuit and making a bundle like Gerald Ford did, he's actually using his celebrity to promote positive change on the planet. He could make more money for himself by emulating Ford instead of talking about global warming.

Andrew

"Don't drive less - drive a Prius if you can."

Must Mr. Gore fly in a jet? Why doesn't HE drive a Prius? Why are you dancing around on this one?

Herb

I wonder if there is proof that Mr. Gore has become "mega rich" from this movie? I seriously doubt it.

I'm not dancing around anything. Al Gore can't drive around in a Prius for the same reason Dick Cheney won't be able to in 2009. He flies in a jet for the same reason anyone else flies instead of driving or taking a train. If he takes corporate jets, I assume it's for the same reason other celebrities do (not only would be be constantly mobbed by fans, but some people might try to harm him). The ironic thing is that the renewed fame and time requirements of his global warming initiative have probably forced him away from more energy-efficient modes of travel.

Andrew

Andrew, it just seems that if Mr. Gore is going to make an issue of every one of us spewing carbon, then he would minimize his own, that's all.

I googled Mr. Gore's name and many current news articles in the past day or so mention his energy usage. It also appears that many on the left are defending him vigorously, as you have been. But why would ABC News, hardly a bastion of conservative thought, see this as newsworthy, unless they, like me and plenty of others, see an inconsistency here?

Just based on the news links I pulled up, I can see this being a very POLARizing [pun intended] issue in the coming election. And if Mrs. Clinton is nominated, it will be even more so, as she is considered the most polarizing democrat of all. It should be interesting.

Herb

Herb writes:
Andrew, it just seems that if Mr. Gore is going to make an issue of every one of us spewing carbon, then he would minimize his own, that's all.

Again, based on comments like that, you seem to have no clue what Gore is actually advocating. No doubt you don't care to learn - you simply want to bash him.

I googled Mr. Gore's name and many current news articles in the past day or so mention his energy usage. It also appears that many on the left are defending him vigorously, as you have been. But why would ABC News, hardly a bastion of conservative thought, see this as newsworthy, unless they, like me and plenty of others, see an inconsistency here?

Impossible! The media has a liberal bias, doesn't it??? This couldn't have POSSIBLY been published by ABC news! Not a chance! I thought only FOX was talking about it???

I think you better check your sources again, Herb. The liberal media would never publish such a story. Never!!!

Andrew

Food for thought on this topic:

http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2007/02/al-gore-is-big-fat-hypocrite.html

Herb- It's obvious you haven't even tried to understand what Gore is presenting. You haven't even answered my simple question, have you seen his documentary? If you say no, then I suggest you view it and then come at us with your feedback. At least we'll have a common place to dialogue.

Gore has a passion and is using his celebrity status to make a positive change. I doubt seriously that you'll see GW Bush do anything positive after office. Just leaving office in 2009 will be a positive step, no matter who comes in next.

Herb please tell me what you're doing to "walk lightly on the earth?"

Indeed I have not seen Mr. Gore's movie. So if that's a prequisite to discussing his apparent inconsistencies, fine.

But as far as walking lightly, I certainly walk lighter than Mr. Gore. Or is that not good enough? Why would any of us be held to a higher standard, if those promoting it don't meet it themselves?

Besides, it's all on a sliding scale, isn't it? If Mr. Gore can spew carbon at a very high rate, then is it simply that one spews LESS than they WOULD HAVE?

I could fly to Brazil. But since I won't, I can pat myself on the back and say I'm walking lighter now. Ahhh. I feel better already.

Herb

Herb- When you put your arrogance on it's very ugly. Okay so you're a better man than Gore. We have established that much.

At least Gore is attempting to communicate something that should be taken very seriously. For you and I as Christians it's a spiritual mandate that we take care of God's world. There are grassroots faith based organizations (some conservative) that are coming together to help lead those of faith into making personal changes.

http://www.beliefnet.com/blogs/godspolitics/2007/02/bill-mckibben-gospel-versus- global.html

Jump all over Gore, come down harder on him, continue to point out the hypocrisy you see and when what he says comes to fruition�Brazil might look pretty good.

"For you and I as Christians it's a spiritual mandate that we take care of God's world."

Touche', Chris. You have me there. Indeed, we are told to be good stewards of God's creation. Point well taken.

I wasn't trying to be mean, but simply was trying to point out that a lot of the environmentalism appears to be for show, or to simply 'feel good,' or about money-making, or for publicity. It's often also not very substantive.

Obviously, you take it to heart and are a man of substance. When the actions of people like Mr. Gore are so obviously at odds with what is being touted, it just makes it worse for those who are credible.

As a fisherman, I'm an environmentalist. I strive to leave no trace, and see firsthand the effects of pollution. Not all Republicans are anti-environmentalist. I think most are just anti-environmental extremist and also quick to spot an inconsistency.

Herb

"and also quick to spot an inconsistency."

Or is it quick to smear?

Thank you Herb. If I came across a bit ruffled I apologize. I want to keep honest communication open even with those I have disagreements with.

So let me try a different tact. Let's take Gore's lifestyle out of the equation and look solely at the substance of what he is presenting. Again I challenge you to actually find a DVD of his presentation and take a critical look at what he is presenting. Take notes, find refutable evidence or just out right disagreement. Also take note of what seems to be something you didn't know and will look further to learn more.

You are well read Herb and you have taken time to present many different arguments. I ask that you do it again....for you ole' buddy CT.

Chris, you don't get it. People like Herb aren't interested in what Gore has to say. They are interested only in attacking him whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Andrew

Hardly.

I was simply expecting the man to practice what he preaches. If a pastor told his flock to not have adulterous affairs, yet he himself did, I'd say the exact same thing.

If you wanna give someone a pass, that's your call. But don't be surprised when many others don't see things the same way you do.

Herb

WHAT DOES HE PREACH?? That's the point - You don't have any idea. You think you know from listening to Hannity or someone else attack him or from a 12-second soundbyte on the news, but it sounds like you really haven't a clue what Gore has been "preaching." That's why Chris suggested you at least watch his DVD.

If you think Gore has been preaching "Everyone must drive and fly less" then you have no idea what he's talking about.

Andrew

Andrew I am aware of what Herb is doing. Like you I am trying to get him to stop judging the content of the documentary without seeing it. If Herb views the DVD and trashes it I can at least respect the fact he took the time to watch it.

It's like when Herb posts scripture as his only answer and not explaining the context of the passage. Assumptions and generalizations seem to Herb's only line of defense in many cases.

I have posted many questions to Herb which 90 pecent of have gone unanswered or brushed aside. It makes dialogue difficult and jaded.

My wife and I have been to some seminars recently on finances and health care. We didn't agree with everything that was said but it was information worth kicking around because we took the time. Herb is choosing not to take the time because his mind is already made up. That is dangerous.

"his mind is already made up"

Which is why people like Gore need to spend extra $$$ flying around the planet to educate other people, hoping to spread enough awareness to offset the damage caused by the troll and like-kind.

God, the troll's demise from this planet can't come soon enough -- the longer his type stay around, the more likely he takes all of us inhabitants of the planet down with him.

This from the article:

"If this were any other person with $30,000-a-year in utility bills, I wouldn't care," says the Center's 27-year-old president, Drew Johnson. "But he tells other people how to live and he's not following his own rules."

Well, as it turns out, one of the things they left out was that Gore's utility bill is as high as it is is because he participates in a TVA program called "Green Power Switch" where he pays more for "blocks" of green energy. Green energy is produced through wind, solar, and methane gas programs TVA already has in place.

Seems that maybe you can make this stuff up.

We buy a block of wind power as well and our power bill is probably $20-$30 higher. But for me it's not always about money. It's about doing the right thing.

The numbers of people doing this are growing rapidly in this area.

A growing slice of the Gen X and Gen Y people are in their prime earning times right now. The appeal of eco-fuels and food is growing more rapidly in these demos than in any other.

These eco-consumers will pay a premium to make a statement. This, by the way, is the majority of hybrid car owners. They know the payoff for their particular investment is not likely, but they also know nobody will be able to see a payoff if the effort is not made first.

Chris, you are in good company it seems.

(Research done for a friend currently building an organic farm. I'll be helping out with this on several levels. It's a very cool movement that I'm happy to see thriving.)

Missing, ever read "The Omnivore's Dilemma?" Great book about the American food system in general, covering everything from the industrial food system to organic farming. It's surprising how little "organic" really means anymore. Some true sustainable farmers hate the word "organic" because many factory farms still grow "organic" food and it can be used pretty freely now in marketing such food.

Andrew

Yep. Organic is pretty diluted.

No I've not read the book. I'll put it on the list.

One trend I'm watching, where organic and ordinary farming is concerned, is the growing emphasis on community and local food production and consumption.

The high energy density of oil has spoiled us. Today the average person eats food that has traveled 1200 miles! This is a lot of fuel consumption that is likely to change as we experience peak oil.

(Which we may be doing right now)

There is a curve where alternative energy sources can largely fill the gap, but must be developed. Said development will require oil to accomplish.

This curve intersects with peal oil with a point of no return, should we go to far. IMHO, we are not there yet, but we are close enough for this potential issue to become obvious.

Depending on where we are on that graph, when we seriously engage alternative energy, we may experience a very strong need for community food production and a more seasonal food supply.

For a lot of people, this will be a significant adjustment.

Should we go too far, we may see a lot of deaths as the energy density available may not be enough to sustain our current food distribution means.

BTW: We will be doing hard core Organic, as in sustainable farming with means and methods that incorporate naturally occuring substances.

I am enjoying reading the discussion. As a side note, Al Gore is going to present a whole range of our opinions on global warming to Congress. If you would like to share something with him and the fighting 110th, here is the hyper-link:

http://www.algore.com/cards.html

"Today the average person eats food that has traveled 1200 miles!"

Oh great! Now I feel guilty about the peaches from Chile I bought from Fred Meyer.

Skep, don't feel guilty. That purchase served some folks dinner tonight. I am all for imports from Chile, well, now that Pinochet is gone. :o)

If you aren't adding fuel to civil strife and poverty, eat up. I know it is pure heresy with our own delicious bounty nearby, but I am partial to New Zealand apples myself.

My wife and I get Organics To You delivered twice a month. We get veggies, fruit and other organic foods from local farmers. No fancy packaging just great tasting food. We have ended up eating foods we normally wouldn't eat.

We do most of our grocery shopping at New Seasons. Love that place.

We are loving the rain because our rain barrels are being filled and new seeds planted are being watered. Our three chickens are now laying eggs again now that the days are longer.

There are things you can do every day that are "green." However I also believe that we need to be green with our economics as well, from the government down to each citizen.

Here are a coupla web sites to check out:

www.PDXswap.com
www.freecycle.org
www.flylady.net

"We do most of our grocery shopping at New Seasons. Love that place."

Chris, my wonderful girlfriend is one of their managers and I have other friends who work there too. Rest easy about that store, let me tell you, they truly do right by their people. They are also very finicky about products and give high quality locals top priority.

Wow, I really admire all the folks here who grow their own food. It sure is satisfying and yummy to make a meal from your own backyard, aint it? :o)

My wife is pushing our family more organic, which is great. We buy locally grown beef by the half-cow (but less next year now that both my wife and teenage daughter have gone vegetarian) and buy certain items at Wild Oats in Gresham (but I can't stop calling it Nature's!).

My way of trying to reduce consumption is to buy used appliances whenever possible, and keep what we have working until it is beyond repair. For example, my TV (which I dug out of the dumpster at work and got working again with some wire and solder) recently broke it's on/off button, with no way to repair it. Instead I drilled a finger-size hole in the front so I could reach in and trip the button on the PC board directly. There, just got another 3-4 years use out of it. My kids hang their heads in shame of their miserly, dorky parents.

Edsel, and all of us, can benefit from these frugal ever-recycling computer nerds:
http://www.freegeek.org/

And, since my boss helped seed this place and get it going back in the day, props to the Rebuilding Center:
http://www.rebuildingcenter.org/

I agree with growing your own food. My wife and I bought our first house in the Kenton area - man we could grow anything in that soil! The entire peninsula area is made up of that rich sedimentary soil from the Columbia. So cool to be able to go out and pluck fresh corn on the cob for your evening dinner. And we had a raspberry bush that seemed to never lack for ripe fruit.

Now we live in a nice neighborhood in Sandy on a high ridge above the Sandy River. And our soil is sticky red clay. Terrible for growing a garden. Raised beds help a little, but we cannot get the crops like we had in North Portland.

I would wonder how "local" farmers come up with fruit for Organics For You to deliver in February . . .

Edselehr- It's great you are so handy to keep things out of the dump. But let me have you think about this. Today's new appliances are really energy efficient. We remodeled our kitchen 6-7 yrs ago and upgraded our dishwasher to a Bosch. High end, quality, quiet and NOT an energy suck. Just a few months ago we bought a new energy efficient fridge. The savings alone between these two is significant.

We will eventually get a new energy efficient stacked washer and dryer, to make room for our up flushing toilet which will save us money by not having to dig up our basement floor.

Freegeek is great and the rebuilding center I could spend days in, but today’s new appliances are better made and use less energy. I know a great place to buy appliances.

Just some stuff to think about.

Skep....there are many types of veggies and fruits that are hardy for the winter weather months. You would be surprised how well some things grow during the winter.

We are urbanites and what my wife has done to make our landscaping edible is simply amazing. She has really done her homework and it shows. She is always trying to find new ways to amend the soil in the most organic and creative ways.

Point well taken, Chris. I try to consider the pollution/energy cost of manufacture, and the cost to the environment of disposal. The disposal problem for high-tech devices is huge, and the heavy metals leaching into the soils from disposed-of technology have to be as big a long-term issue as air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. I figure the best way to mitigate this is to keep technology in service for as long as possible. Heck, I still have a couple of rotary telephones in my house!

And, here in the PNW, our electricity production has a very low carbon output due to being mostly hydro produced. (though there are other "costs" to hydro, discussable elsewhere).

In short, I think that may of the efficiencies of newer appliances are offset by the energy/pollution costs of manufacture, so that it may be close to a wash.

But when I do purchase new, energy efficiency, repairability, and disposability are prime considerations.

I'm in the same mindset.

Depends on the devices too. Using an older washer, for example, is likely a net loss overall. However, an old television, computer, radio, etc... is a net gain as the differences in consumption are not significant.

This is also true of many cars. My old beater Corolla gets 35mpg on a regular basis. If I'm careful, it will exceed 40, and that's with a fair amount of city driving in the mix. This car is worth keeping on the road.

Of course there is another aspect of this, I happen to take seriously and that is self reliance. It's all too easy to spend ones way out of problems. This is a trend that has really become pervasive and I think it's a mistake overall.

Should we actually end up in an oil crisis --or even some economic or biological one, we really are better off being able to make use of existing tech. The more of us that can do this, the better off we are.

For me personally, developing these skills have saved my arse more than once as money was simply not an option. Seems I nearly always have time though!

"Should we actually end up in an oil crisis --or even some economic or biological one, we really are better off being able to make use of existing tech. The more of us that can do this, the better off we are."

It makes me think of the Cubans, and how circumstance has forced them to become probably the most resourceful people in the developed world. When Castro's Cuba eventually falls, I hope the world takes some time to learn from the experiences of these people before they get re-subsumed back into the modern consumer world.

Good job boys. We have been a one car family for over 13 years. There are days the van never leaves the driveway. Since we live in an urban area we can walk to most places.

Working from home eliminates daily commutes plus we are near the bus and MAX. I look forward someday to not needing a car at all. Portland is a great biking town and we are discovering it more and more each summer.

Doug I agree about old TV’s and computers. We have a 13 inch color TV my folks gave to us 15 years ago. We have no other TV in the house and I like it that way.

Solar panels are in our future but there are other considerations until then. And my wife and I love the challenge of it all.

ahem, recently I've "acquired" a '93 Geo Metro convertable stick shift with a 3 cylinder engine. Before you laugh (as I did), it gets 46 MPG and with the tank on "E", I've never had to put more than 7 gallons in it to fill it up.

Of course, I'll never let my daughter ride in it, being the deathmobile it is, however, its a nice addition to my fleet to help me keep my Pacific Pride bill reasonable and my contribution to all things green.

So which local media outlet steals all the ideas from this thread for a "green Portland" story? Any bets? :0)

This is great stuff!

IMHO, there is huge potential for solar to power consumer electronics devices. If we could equip houses with a good sized panel, and storage system, most of the constant power drain would be sharply diminished.

At one time, I had collected a bunch of 12 volt gear. A couple of deep cycle marine batteries would power them a very long time. One of these days, I'm gonna stock up on the white LED christmas lights and try making some creative house lighting that is 12 volt powered. I'm interested in how that all will really work.

If it works like I think it will, accent type lighting, sufficient for most day to day tasks can be done for a fraction of the power consumption we experience today. This kind of stuff, combined with solar could really pay off quick!

Skep, with super gasoline, and a light pedal, that Geo can exceed 50Mpg fairly easily.

I owned the earlier model called the Sprint. It was a carb engine and could be coaxed over 50 with no trouble. I've noted the fuel injected engines are not quite as easily driven for max mpg as the older carb designs are.

Anyone know why this is?

KSKD, I believe that can be done, but I'm no fan of 55 MPH! My around town driving with the thing brought in a 42 MPG reading.

The 93 has a carb on it -- I believe this is what will put the Geo to a premature death -- there's about 32 miles of rubber hoses under the hood and seemingly like a couple dozen electronic gadgets attached to the carb. One would have to have an engineering degree to diagnosis the thing if something goes awry. Although it runs quite well and clean now, I think I'd rather have a fuel injected system.

Get yourself a small solar recharger for dem batts and on days when there is a visible sun it could recharge them!

Here is something to ponder. Two batteries in series, a inverter, a small trickle charger. You run the lights and charger from the inverter with the charger and inverter connected to the batts. If the charger were to put back more or just as much as the the output then you got perpetual power my man. Add the solar charger for good measures and you have mood lights for a long long time!
Highly recommend ACDELCO M27MF Marine Deep Cycle batteries. They are the absolute best on the market.

Add
The Coast Gaurd use the ACDELCO S2000 deep cycle in bouys and other navigation markers. I beleive it has a longer reserve capacity but does not have the convieniant wing nut style terminals for connecting things to them.

I'm guessing the FI engine was throttle body, which is not much more than a computer-controlled carb.

My guess is that with the carb engine you could easily "override" the tune up specs for a leaner burn and better mileage with just the twist of some adjuster screws, but FI engines pretty much run at default settings, probably optimal for the engine overall, but not the best tuning for mileage.

Just a guess.

BTW, my brother in law swore by Geos for years for his high desert Central Oregon commuting (Prineville to Redmond), owned 3 or 4 over ten years. Cause of death for each Geo was the same: deer impact.

Don't ever drive one through Montana...a sharp tail grouse would most likely total it as well!

Exploded one on a headlight at 3:00am one time on a roadtrip..(poof nothin but feathers...course I was going 90 in a Suburban)..that was an awakening experience...good thing we had just stopped at a rest area a bit prior or it would have been another type of experience!

Skep, I don't mean 55. You can get the better mileage just with careful starts, skipping third gear (on that car, just drive second a bit higher, but not forced), and the occasional free wheel where it makes sense.

On downhills, do a first, third, fifth gear change. It's amazing the difference it makes on both your consumption and your foot, once you get good at recognizing the conditions where it makes sense.

Clean air filters make a big difference as well.

Those cars actually get their really great milage numbers between 60 and 70mph.

My sprint went nearly 200K. Not one bit of trouble from all those hoses. It broke a timing chain and piston impacted valve.... I sold it for a coupla hundred bucks. (should have just parked it and fixed it... would be great to have right now.

I drove it on a commute between PDX and Newberg for three or four years. I regularly hit 50mpg and was not exactly going slow most of the time.

It's got an 8 gallon tank, BTW.

Did you ever take that trip to the coast?

during a rain storm in the little geo LOL!

I'll be going again in 2 weeks maybe. what we need to do now is bump up that thread . . .

One renewable option that I think will be growing in the near future is micro wind turbines. For a couple grand you can mount a KW wind generator on your house and, rather than using expensive storage batteries and inefficient inverters, you can use the electric utility as your "storage". Just sell back the unused power to the grid.

Well, now that it's come out that Gore voluntarily pays more than 50% extra on his power bill to pay for renewable sources (which helps explain why his power bills are so high), what do the right-wingers have to say now? Herb?

Watch Olbermann's take on it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvvMBHOrpLA

Andrew

How come everyone always picks on Herb in here. There are lot's of conservatives in here to pick on other than just him....is he is just the easy target or something.

When I don't rise to their baiting, they say I'm avoiding them.

Yet it's fine to bash conservatives here. Just don't ever question the leftist way. That's not PC.

Herb

Herb,

You forwarded an attack on Gore that was perpatrated by a conservative smear group.

You called Gore hypocrite for not practicing what he preaches.

Now that it has been shown that he does indeed pay more for green power to reduce his carbon footprint, as a Christian, do feel any remorse for wronging a fellow child of God?

Or is your mercy limited to those you agree with?

I bash em both as I hate politics in general. I am middle of the road not favoring any party at this time.
Actually I take that back: The Independant party
"Tom Dobbs for President"
Man of the Year.....I could deal with that!

Man, go back and read just how sure Herb was and how much he relished us being wrong and him being right. You are WAY to sure of yourself Herb. You present one item, imply that it's the truth and you support it. Then it turns out not to be the truth. You say you never said it was. You are then asked straightly what you do believe, determine that it would make you look bad if you had to say it out loud, decide not to address it and call it bait.

You are so full of pride right now that I cannot take your word on anything anymore. Too bad, too. You have the ability to think for yourself. But that seems to be all you use it for.

You're a big boy - I know it's no skin off your nose to have Chickenjuggler tell you in public that he is disappointed in you - but hey. You and I tried to talk straightly - it just didn't work out.

Get a new catch phrase ready. Because every time I see you type " You can't make this stuff up " - I'm going to remember this thread.

And you are using " Touche' " incorrectly too. I know Mr. Awesome used it against that blind reporter guy - but he used it wrong too.

"...it has been shown that he does indeed pay more for green power..."

So?

Herb

So his bill is inflated because he pays more for green power. If Al Gore just got all his power from coal and oil then his bill would be a lot less and this story probably wouldn't have even been a story.

Andrew

So...

"The point is that since the guy is making major bucks by scaring the pants off people...and hasn't even tried to walk the walk, DOESN'T THAT BOTHER YOU?"

He's walking the walk. You said he wasn't.

So. You participated in spreading an unfounded smear.
Does that bother you?

Herb is no doubt proud to have participated in spreading an unfounded smear. Especially against Al Gore. Who cares if it's true or not?

Andrew

Herb, you just can't toss up a factoid and not expect it to be picked apart. This goes for both sides and if you look at most threads you will find that unless it breaks down into fighting or laughter, the skeptics are busy.

You take attacks way too seriously, perhaps, we all do. The reality is that we are all trying to debunk, grok and have a good time too.

Darktemper is not a leftist at all, does that change how I feel? No, not at all, not even a little. I like him, plain and simple. One of his gifts is that he adds funny when it is desperately needed and a calm voice that asks good questions in the heat of battle. The exact some thing can also be said, but in a different way, of Chickenjuggler.

The problem, Herb, is that you buy into a polarization that just isn't healthy. When any party engages in tactics or embraces ideals that are undemocratic or unconstitutional, most Americans bristle.

Southern Democrats insisted on segregation, looked dumb doing it and have scrambled as a party to move past it. This current GOP administration has taken away our rights, started an unjust war and rationalized every dumb move they have made. Yes, the Republicans will have many years to repair the damage of trying to force Americans to be Americants, just as the Demos did in the past.

You are too impatient. You also don't seem to notice the piling on that has happened to folks on all sides of the aisle. Potshots have been and will be taken at this new Congress. Potshots will be taken at our next President. Just relax man, and enjoy the dialogue. :o)

Wild Predictions: Al Gore declares his intention to run on the Fourth of July after the jetstream touches down in suburban Denver and scrubs it clean. Also this summer, Salt Lake City will be evacuated due to the air being too poisoned to breathe.

"You take attacks way too seriously, perhaps, we all do."

"Just relax man, and enjoy the dialogue. :o)"

Very good points. I think you're onto some thoughts especially worth noting.

Herb

So will you admit that this story about Gore was unfair because he is being a good environmental citizen by spending 50% more on his power bills to pay for clean energy? How about standing up and admitting you were wrong for a change?

Andrew

I'm happy to admit whenever I'm wrong. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

However, I understand that with some companies, this 'clean energy' credit thing can sometimes be merely a book-keeping scam and somewhat suspect. And just because he's wealthy FROM HIS OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM MONEY AND HIS ANTI-CIVIL RIGHTS FATHER, does it excuse his outrageous energy usage...since he can buy his way out of it? Someone posted recently that they didn't like politico.com because it was tainted by outrageous sums of money with a connection from Pinochet. Isn't this merely a taint of a different colour? Be real with us.

Herbert Milhous Nixon III

Herb writes:
However, I understand that with some companies, this 'clean energy' credit thing can sometimes be merely a book-keeping scam and somewhat suspect.

So if we show you that Gore's paying extra for green power isn't a "book-keeping scam" then will you admit you were wrong? Or will you continue to cling to this strawman you made up to avoid being honest?

Andrew

Oh, I suppose it would be a start. But there's a WHOLE LOT of baggage with this guy Mr. Gore, whom you defend so vociferously.

You wanna start by explaining how Mr. Gore is so 'green' given his Occidental Petroleum connections?

And the left bashes Mr. Bush because he was 'born into privilege' with a 'silver spoon in his mouth.' Yet with the privileged democrat, Mr. Gore, as usual, you give him a pass. It'd make more sense if you stood up for someone like Mr. Obama.

Herb

Herb writes:
There's a whole lot of baggage with this guy you defend so vociferously.

You wanna start by explaining how Mr. Gore is so 'green' given his Occidental Petroleum connections?

No, I want to stick to this specific point until you come clean on it, not keep changing the subject. Gore is paying more for clean energy - that's why his electric bill is higher. How about apologizing for being wrong instead of ducking and changing the subject?

Andrew

Herb, you were wrong. It was a bad article.

I see Gore working toward global change as very telling, because he knows the industry. He also has been given some very sensitive information from different sources, the Pentagon, NOAA, NASA and many other studies not made public. He used the film to not only lay out the concrete facts, but to elude and provide clues to things he knows but cannot completely detail.

The special thing about this particular Tennessee son is that he understands the place where we once were. He can see segregation, farming, the oil industry and the world from a perspective few of us could ever imagine. Like other folks here, I appreciate the fact that he is spending his time as a statesman doing good things for our country and the world.

"I'm happy to admit whenever I'm wrong"


Maybe I had my period and was absent that day, but I'm pretty sure I've never, ever seen HerrB admit he was wrong, let alone apologize. On anything. I don't he's even capable of doing either.

My BS detector/Spidey Sense is tingling on overload right now.

Fine, uncle. Let's say this is Burger King. You can have it your way.

But here's the deal. I admittedly don't know much about green credits or whatever you call them. I'm also admittedly no fan of Mr. Gore. I'm biased against the man.

So even if you're as right as I'll grant you, don't expect me to cut him much slack on much. Is it possible that buying green energy makes him worthy of a Nobel peace prize? OK, if you say so. If I'm wrong on this, and I may be, then fine.

And of course you don't want to address the other inconsistencies I point out. I don't blame you. With apologies to Chris, it still appears to expose Mr. Gore for his inconsistency and your whole defense develops holes.

So if you guys wanna say that because he buys some energy in a 'green way' and that makes him such a great role model, what about all the people who would like to, but can't because they don't have daddy's trust fund from a major petroleum firm? Talk about a major weird irony.

And again, if you're gonna bash Mr. Bush on his family's wealth, then just because Mr. Gore can write a bigger check, it doesn't make him any better because he STILL is leaving a far greater carbon footprint than the 'unenlightened' masses who don't have the dough.

And as was mentioned on the previous post, I'm sure Mr. Gore knows about segregation, because his own father voted against a key civil rights bill. But hey, I'm a fairly partisan Republican. You'd be suspicious if I liked the positions of Mr. Clinton's former VP too much, anyway. That would be the kiss of death to any prospective democrat Presidential nominee around this place: Herb's hearty endorsement!



Herb

If Rush Limbaugh can get nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize...well...I got nothing.

Thanks for admitting you were wrong, Herb! I appreciate it.

However, let's remember that you started this thread with this Gore smear. I certainly never suggested he should win a Nobel Prize for heating a 20-room house more efficiently. We were simply defending him from the smear.

If you wish to debate the merits of Al Gore himself or whether his father's vote on a civil rights bill makes Al Gore a bad person, I suggest you start a new thread.

Andrew

Herb, thank you for the above post. You acknowledge the points made in this thread with no (well, minimal) defensive posturing. And you *still* stand your ground about distrusting Gore with firmness, conviction and reason! No short shots, no "spin", no sloganeering, no resurrections of dead presidents. This is real discourse! (absolutely zero sarcasm here)

And that cute little yellow smiley guy at the end of the post just makes me all squishy and liberal-feeling inside. I'm lovin' you even more, man.

Ah schucks. You're very kind.

Herbert M.

Group cyber hug!

The special thing about this particular Tennessee son is that he understands the place where we once were. He can see segregation, farming, the oil industry and the world from a perspective few of us could ever imagine.

Oh thats good, Gore did get a unique perspective, growing up, living in a hotel in Washington DC, having everything handed to him, then having the tobacco farmers give him moneyy to live on, an oil company give him an oil lease, I'm sure he got a good idea how farmers live, visiting the family plantation on vacations and watching the family share croppers work the fields.

Gore has never had a real job, he has always lived on the govt.

Gore worked in the summers on the family farm, and he did go to Vietnam, even if just as a journalist (President Nixon intervened behind the scenes to keep Gore away from serious combat). He went through Army basic training. After he got back from Vietnam he worked as a newspaper reporter for several years in Tennessee. It's false to say he never left the hotel in Washington, DC and never had a real job.

Andrew

Herb- I gotta tip my hat your way too. Probably not easy admitting a mistake. I have the same problem. However what I also want to let you know is that when you did say you're sorry it also indicated to me that you had learned something. Which you deserve credit on as well.

I think this is a perfect opportunity to begin sharing and offering up information on how we can live Green every day. What is it in your day to day lives that you do that doesn't fill up a landfill. Or you reused or are recycling something in a unique way that maybe the rest of us can learn from.

Let's share information that is productive instead of trying to tear down someone who was delivering information not as an expert but as a messenger. I'm sure we can make a very long list and come up with some surprising results.

Al Gore claims that his outrageous personal consumption is actually carbon neutral because he purchases carbon offsets.� From where? From himself, of course. With a straight face, Al Gore claims carbon offsets,� an entirely undefined, unregulated and unaccountable cottage industry, that he purchases� in the form of investments from an investment firm that Gore is the chairman of, negates his outrageous consumption of energy. One could only imagine how we might apply Gore's Ponzi scheme to other parts of our daily lives? Will Jenny Craig start selling "carbohydrate offsets" to people who refuse to diet?

The basic premise of the scheme is that by participating in approved Al Gore investments, and for pennies on the dollar, you are actually not using any energy at all, and therefore, none of the CO2 that you put in the air actually happened in the first place. This has great appeal to pious liberals who do nothing but consume, consume, consume. It's better than a confessional.

The average American family puts 59 tons of CO2 in the air each year. 12.4t from household (electrical, heating, etc), 11.7t from automobile/gas, and 35 t from indirect emissions (commercial, industrial, transportation). What does Al Gore's family belch into the air every year? Lets start with household contributions. We know that he consumes 20x the energy that the average household does, so lets give him 240t on household usage. For automobile usage, he surely uses more than the average American, let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say 15 tons. For indirect, he is after all, one of the most conspicuous consumers in the entire country, therefore he would have a disproportionate share of �indirect." Plus his air travel far exceeds that of an average household, lets give Gore the benefit of doubt again and say his family only belched 70 tons of indirect carbon into the atmosphere. That totals up to a very conservative 325 tons of CO2 that the pious Al Gore unleashes into the atmosphere!

One of the approved carbon offset invest schemes that are touted so heavily by Gore and his ilk is tree planting. It seems logical, plant a tree and the tree will take CO2 out of the air, therefore the carbon I put in the air never existed in the first place. Simple!

Depending on species and age, trees fix anywhere from 3 to 15 pounds of CO2 per year. Lets just assume the upper end, 15 pounds. For the average American to wash there consciences of the 59 tons of carbon emitted they'd have to plant 7,866 trees (about 20 acres) EVERY YEAR to offset� their carbon footprint. For the most wasteful Americans, Al Gore and his Hollywood friends, they'd have to plant 43,000 trees (about 108 acres) to offset� their ridiculous consumption. That being conservative on Gores energy usage and liberal on the amount of CO2 a tree will consume in a year. In reality trees will consume less than 10 pounds per year, meaning Gore had better do a hell of a lot more planting.

Where are all of these acres available for planting? Not on logged land. For over 60 years all logged lands must be replanted within 5 years. Is Al Gore investing in timber companies and claiming that he's responsible for reforestation projects that have been taking place for decades? Where are they planting 108 acres of trees every year? Nowhere. It's not happening. Outside of the forest industry there are no large-scale tree planting projects.

Carbon credits are a scam of epic proportions.

They're little more than self-indulgent confessionals for narcissists. They do nothing to take back the energy used and carbon released into the atmosphere. There are no known accounting metrics to prove their efficacy, and are unregulated and completely vulnerable to misrepresentation, which Al Gore does all the time. They're nothing but "conscience offsets" for people who own multiple residences and consume enormous amounts of energy to support their wasteful lifestyles.

People who subscribe to the notion of 'carbon offsets' are hypocrites. Most all of the visible 'environmentalists' do not live the lifestyle they preach on others.

Who could forget Andy Kerr, former head of the Oregon Natural Resources Council, who spent decades filing nuisance lawsuits against logging companies and the forest service, while quietly building a log mansion in Joseph, Oregon, which consumed enough wood fiber that could have built 20 conventional homes.

Then his successor, through lawsuits and zoning loopholes, found a way to acquire his own Summer log home, right on the banks of the John Jay River.

Wow! Goreecoprofiteer,

Thanks so much for taking the time to drop in and educate us on the subject of carbon offsets.

It's refreshing to see someone contribute to the conversation with fact & supporting documentation as opposed to the smear and invective so often associated with controversial subjects such as this.

Thanks for taking the time to cut and paste this here.

I know I feel good about it!

If this is Goreecoprofiteer's only post (and so far, it is) his/her informative tenure on this board would have been well worth it!

Now, is it pronounced "Go-reeko-pro-fighters" or "Gorey-cop-row-fit-ears?"

Eco sez: "For over 60 years all logged lands must be replanted within 5 years."

Oh really? You might need to clear this up a bit. I believe you're referring only to private land zoned Forest (or especially, Forest Deferral), as being required to be replanted. A landowner having land zoned farm, agriculture or other rural use, may not need to replant trees (but may need to plant an agriculture crop to retain tax breaks) if he harvests existing trees or trees he planted. [and of course, trees in other catagories (whether existing or planted) such as Commerical, Industrial or Residential, may not need replanting].

One could argue that Gore's carbon offset scheme is fuzzy math, however, he is actively pushing for wholesale changes in the way everybody lives so that benefits trickle down (up?) to people living luxury lifestyles as well -- something that Gore would happily pay more for, if it was only available.

For example -- lawn mowers that don't pollute as much but cost more. Both the rich and poor benefit, although the poor have difficulty affording one, the rich are stuck with buying the newer low polluting model, even if they don't give a damn about air pollution (that's you Rush Limbaugh).

Gore has the time and enough money to advocate for these types of changes, something most of us middle classmen and women simply cannot do as effectively. So for this, Gore earns a "Get Out Of Jail Free" pass from me.

I don't see why we could not make mowers that run on alcohol. Same design, different fuel, everybody is happy.

edit below

Al Gore's "My Body has a Fever Diet." Looks like Mr Gore has been buying carbohydrate offsets from himself. Problem solved.

[IMG]http://i11.tinypic.com/2wo8u2x.jpg[/IMG]

As anyone ever notice that Gore is looking more and more like Wayne Knight's twin brother separated at birth?

[IMG]http://i18.tinypic.com/30agbo6.jpg[/IMG]

Astroturf.

KSKD, re: alchohol powered mowers.

It'll be expensive cuz one of the charactorics about lawn mowers is that they operate at full horsepower nearly all the time it is used in order to properly cut the grass with the blade size (length) used.

Longer blades require bigger engines (HP). If the same engines (as currently designed) ran on alchohol instead, they'd be dogs. You'd have to have bigger engines to do the same job gasoline could do with a smaller engine.

AS you know, this is unlike automobile engines which are rarely run at peak HP so there is a lot of leeway in using alchohol in cars.

However, I'm sure one could design a mower engine optimized for alchohol use from scratch that could do the job just as well as gasoline with less pollution. It would cost more, but it fits in perfectly with my forcing the rich to buy more clean air machines.

Nwokie said>>>
Gore has never had a real job, he has always lived on the govt.

OMG!

And people like DUHbya never have????

Yep, serving in the Army -- NOT a real job! You just tell that to all the families of those boys coming home in body bags! I thought you had a great deal of respect for Americans who wore/wear the uniform.

And before you say it, I'd wager Gore did more hazardous duty while in the military than Bush ever did.

I wonder what the footprint is for The White House.

Flying a jet is much more hazardous than being a military journalist for nine months.

Really, flying is more hazardous than facing the enemy? Hmm. Me thinks someone is a chickenhawk.

If you're going to give Al Gore a pass for being a reporter during conflict, then you better do the same for Bill O'Reilly, who is a former war journalist.

Herb

Getting a paper cut. That's really hazardous duty.

Then my hats off to O'Reilly too.

DD, I forget what the media body bag tally in Iraq is up to now. 60?

Well, Skeptical, if you're going to take your hat off to Bill O'Reilly, then I better doff mine to the left-leaning Geraldo Rivera, as well, since he, too, has covered wars.

Just please don't make me tip my hat to the French:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1611172,00.html

If I've been mistaken, and those Frenchies were actually wearing white hats, who am I going to boycott now? If that story turns out to be for real, I may just go out and buy some French wine.

Herb

O'Reilly in combat??? LMAO!
Maybe in a bunker pissing a moaning about someone that doesn't think his way.
O'LIEly had just as much combat experience as Slick Willy.
NONE!

Problem with Al Gores service, he served 9 months as a combat reporter for the army, but he never once went on patrol or otherwise left cam Rahn Bay. Maybe he went to Saigon to get drunk and laid, but thats about it.

Lets see, Al Gore was actually in Vietnam? Thats good enough for me.

By the way, the current media death tally in Iraq is 156 dead. Yep, 156 dead correspondents or cameramen.

Even if we disagree about Gore's Carbon Footprint, we'd all have to agree (if you've seen him lately) that he would have a pretty large Carbon Buttprint.

Bwahahaha! Ouch!

An infantry mans dream, getting a news journalist out in front of you in a fire fight.
Mr Pyle and Mr Mauldin excepted.

GOMER Pyle?

I've always pictured Herb physically looking like Sarge...but less closeted gay. ( Sarge, seemed gay. So did Pyle ).

I would add all war correspondents to my list, but perhaps that is just me. It is sad how many have died getting us some truth about this sham war.

I think Ernie would appreciate the gesture. Too bad he died on an island that arguably saw more men killed by our own guns than any other beach landing in the war, even D-Day.

CJ, boy I always figured Herb for more of a Major Charles Emerson Winchester III. I agree, those boys had some light boots.

Try George Patton, guys.

Actually, he was better looking and a tad too liberal for my tastes.

Herb

So, you got all the babes who dug George C. Scott. That's not bad, not Steve McQueen territory, but definitely a good pull.

I do assume by liberal, you don't mean his hospital visits with the wounded.

Here is the perfect compliment to the Carbon Buttprint in your life:

http://www.cafepress.com/buy/politics/-/pv_design_prod/pg_1/p_storeid.63825645/pNo_63825645/id_13590286/opt_/fpt_/c_360/