Wednesday, June 18, 2008

More on Gore's Energy Consumption

Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month

Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite “energy-efficient” home renovations

NASHVILLE - In the year since Al Gore took steps to make his home more energy-efficient, the former Vice President’s home energy use surged more than 10%, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research.

“A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, President of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.”

In the past year, Gore’s home burned through 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity, enough to power 232 average American households for a month.

In February 2007, An Inconvenient Truth, a film based on a climate change speech developed by Gore, won an Academy Award for best documentary feature. The next day, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research uncovered that Gore’s Nashville home guzzled 20 times more electricity than the average American household.

After the Tennessee Center for Policy Research exposed Gore’s massive home energy use, the former Vice President scurried to make his home more energy-efficient. Despite adding solar panels, installing a geothermal system, replacing existing light bulbs with more efficient models, and overhauling the home’s windows and ductwork, Gore now consumes more electricity than before the “green” overhaul.

Since taking steps to make his home more environmentally-friendly last June, Gore devours an average of 17,768 kWh per month –1,638 kWh more energy per month than before the renovations – at a cost of $16,533. By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 kWh in an entire year, according to the Energy Information Administration.

In the wake of becoming the most well-known global warming alarmist, Gore won an Oscar, a Grammy and the Nobel Peace Prize. In addition, Gore saw his personal wealth increase by an estimated $100 million thanks largely to speaking fees and investments related to global warming hysteria.

“Actions speak louder than words, and Gore’s actions prove that he views climate change not as a serious problem, but as a money-making opportunity,” Johnson said. “Gore is exploiting the public’s concern about the environment to line his pockets and enhance his profile.”

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research, a Nashville-based free market think tank and watchdog organization, obtained information about Gore’s home energy use through a public records request to the Nashville Electric Service.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

McCain on Drilling

McCain on Drilling

"We must embark on a national mission to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil," McCain told reporters yesterday. In a speech today, he plans to add that "we have untapped oil reserves of at least 21 billion barrels in the United States. But a broad federal moratorium stands in the way of energy exploration and production. . . . It is time for the federal government to lift these restrictions."

Hmmm, I wonder how much he contributed to this 'broad federal moratorium'. I of course agree with him. But I can't help but expect pandering.

McCain's record on Energy and Oil from

Click here for 32 full quotes on Energy & Oil OR other candidates on Energy & Oil OR background on Energy & Oil.
  • GovWatch: 2003: Ethanol doesn't increase energy independence. (Feb 2008)
  • End reliance on petro-dictators with market-based reform. (Feb 2008)
  • Be more active in addressing the issue of climate change. (Jan 2008)
  • In favor of cap-and-trade. (Jan 2008)
  • FactCheck: Oil independence will take 25 years, not 5 years. (Dec 2007)
  • Climate change is real and must be addressed. (Dec 2007)
  • Climate change is real; nuclear power is solution. (Oct 2007)
  • Public pressure on oil industry to invest in alternatives. (Oct 2007)
  • FactCheck: nuclear plants do emit no GHGs, but do have waste. (Jun 2007)
  • Reinvest oil profits in nuclear power. (Jun 2007)
  • Ethanol made no sense in `05 but with $60/bbl it makes sense. (May 2007)
  • 2000: Held hearings on mounting evidence of climate change. (Jan 2004)
  • 2000: Criticized Bush's withdrawal from the Kyoto Treaty. (Jan 2004)
  • Energy 2001: 1st Republican to sign onto reducing GHGS. (May 2002)
  • Strength Clean Air & Water Acts; but not Kyoto. (Jan 2000)
  • Supports alternative fuels, emission controls, & CWA. (Jul 1998)
  • Voted YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR. (Nov 2005)
  • Voted NO on $3.1B for emergency oil assistance for hurricane-hit areas. (Oct 2005)
  • Voted NO on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%). (Jun 2005)
  • Voted YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. (Mar 2005)
  • Voted NO on Bush Administration Energy Policy. (Jul 2003)
  • Voted YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010. (Jun 2003)
  • Voted YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003)
  • Voted NO on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
  • Voted NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002)
  • Voted YES on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)
  • Voted YES on defunding renewable and solar energy. (Jun 1999)
  • Voted YES on approving a nuclear waste repository. (Apr 1997)
  • Voted NO on do not require ethanol in gasoline. (Aug 1994)
  • Sponsored bill for greenhouse gas tradeable allowances. (Feb 2005)
  • Rated 17% by the CAF, indicating opposition to energy independence. (Dec 2006)
  • Supports immediate reductions in greenhouse gases. (Sep 1998)

Friday, June 13, 2008

Open Carry in Utah

Open Carry Article

Open carry is legal in Utah, so long as the gun is unloaded -- and that's just fine. But the radical gun-righters don't exhibit the sense that God gave a pencil eraser. Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be. In today's society, the presence of a handgun on somebody's hip -- other than an officer of the law -- is likely to make people uncomfortable.

At first reading this article it sounds like another antigun rant. But reading it further, it makes more sense. I don't particularly care what others think, and don't care if they're uncomfortable with me having a gun on my hip. But there are some other valid points. One in particular, quoting John Lott in the article,

"Some of the best known evidence for the benefits of liberal concealed-carry laws comes in the work of John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime." So it is revealing when Lott expresses doubts about "open carry."

On his blog,, Lott recently wrote that, compared to open carry, "there are probably greater social benefits to people carrying guns concealed since it protects people who don't carry. In addition, if a criminal is going to attack a group of people in public, he can wait for the people who are openly carrying to leave the area or [he can] take those people out first." "

I think I'll stick to my concealed carry...

Earmark Spending in Congress

Earmark Spending

"More than a year after Congress pledged to curb pork barrel funding known as earmarks, lawmakers are gearing up for another spending binge, directing billions toward organizations and companies in their home districts.