Remember, don't live with blinders on..

Drew263

Follow the money..


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54528


THE HEAT IS ON
Gore's 'carbon offsets' paid to firm he owns
Critics say justification for energy-rich lifestyle serves as way for former VP to profit

---

Posted: March 2, 2007
4:13 p.m. Eastern

© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com


Al Gore's Nashville mansion (PajamasMedia.com)
Al Gore defends his extraordinary personal energy usage by telling critics he maintains a "carbon neutral" lifestyle by buying "carbon offsets," but the company that receives his payments turns out to be partly owned and chaired by the former vice president himself.

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," writes blogger Dan Riehl.

Gore has described the lifestyle he and his wife Tipper live as "carbon neutral," meaning he tries to offset any energy usage, including plane flights and car trips, by "purchasing verifiable reductions in CO2 elsewhere."

But it turns out he pays for his extra-large carbon footprint through Generation Investment Management, a London-based company with offices in Washington, D.C., for which he serves as chairman. The company was established to take financial advantage of new technologies and solutions related to combating "global warming," reports blogger Bill Hobbs.

(Story continues below)


Generation Investment Management's U.S. branch is headed by a former Gore staffer and fund-raiser, Peter S. Knight, who once was the target of probes by the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice.

Hobbs points out Gore stands to make a lot of money from his promotion of the alleged "global warming" threat, which is disputed by many mainstream scientists.

"In other words, he 'buys' his 'carbon offsets' from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself," Hobbs writes. "To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy 'carbon offsets' through Generation Investment Management – he buys stocks."

As WND reported, Gore, whose film warning of a coming cataclysm due to man-made "global warming" won two Oscars, has a mansion in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville that consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, citing data from the Nashville Electric Service.

The think tanks says since the release of Gore's film, the former presidential candidate's energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kilowatt-hours per month in 2005, to 18,400 per month in 2006.

---

Pacomc79

That little credo certainly helps one wade through pages of BS be it political or corporate.

Follow the money....

Being environmentally sound is great, but it's just as much big business as anything else.

RainDog

Remember, don'y you live with blinders on, either. And always follow where your information comes from, Mr. World Net Daily.

Kann

So basically Al Gore is politician who likes money, that's not anything new.
It doesn't do much change for the bigger problem that is global warming.

keeponrockin

That's not cool, having said that, would you not use a company you own if you could (and don't bring up Haliburton because that's using tax money).

THC

Its the message...not the messanger.

if you don't like al gore...then listen to the 1000's of scientists who do climate research for a living!

or watch a video of a polar ice cap the size of california melting into the sea.

Eliot Rosewater

Drew263 wrote:

Follow the money..

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54528

Who owns the company is irrelevent....somewhat. He's still erasing his carbon footprints, right? That's the point. I saw Gore on Donny Deutch last night and it was pretty good. I've always felt like Gore is very sincere with his environmental concerns. Sure, he's fucking rich and sure he has been his entire life, so money probably means more to him than it does to me. But I don't think that changes his sincerity on this topic.

polaris

Drew263 wrote:

Hobbs points out Gore stands to make a lot of money from his promotion of the alleged "global warming" threat, which is disputed by many mainstream scientists.

my favourite line ... i wonder who these "mainstream" scientists are?

anyhoo - anything to distract people even further ...

RolandTD20Kdrummer

I'm a bit confused. Given the options, wouldn't this be considered smart?

When is being intelligent a negative?

What exactly should he be doing with his money?

I guess the question is this: Do you think Gore is personally running around the world blatantly lying to everyone on purpose just to spin a profit?

Hmm...I know someone who probably is though.

I think Gore could find (many) other ways to make a quick buck with far less effort...if you know what I mean

surferdude

don't gimme no wrote:

Who owns the company is irrelevent....somewhat. He's still erasing his carbon footprints, right? That's the point. I saw Gore on Donny Deutch last night and it was pretty good. I've always felt like Gore is very sincere with his environmental concerns. Sure, he's fucking rich and sure he has been his entire life, so money probably means more to him than it does to me. But I don't think that changes his sincerity on this topic.

You cannot erase your carbon footprint. It's impossible. Just like the Catholic church stopped selling indulgences, the enviro bunch should stop with this carbon neutral crap. Here's a unique idea leave as small a footprint as possible. Mothball about 20,000 square feet of that 22,000 square monstrosity that Gore calls a house. Carbon neutral is just a money maker that does absolutely nothing for the environment unless 100% of proceeds go directly into R&D. This is not the case. Carbon neutral has just become another ploy for people like Gore to sell fear to make money.

Pacomc79

wouldn't it make more sense to buy a large area of land and populate that with indiginous vegetation, in addition to living off the grid and all sorts of other eco friendly individual activities?

I mean I guess that's what they do?

polaris

surferdude wrote:

You cannot erase your carbon footprint. It's impossible. Just like the Catholic church stopped selling indulgences, the enviro bunch should stop with this carbon neutral crap. Here's a unique idea leave as small a footprint as possible. Mothball about 20,000 square feet of that 22,000 square monstrosity that Gore calls a house. Carbon neutral is just a money maker that does absolutely nothing for the environment unless 100% of proceeds go directly into R&D. This is not the case. Carbon neutral has just become another ploy for people like Gore to sell fear to make money.

how can you say investing in renewable energy projects or buying tracts of forests that would otherwise be cut down for soya beans not productive?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Pacomc79 wrote:

wouldn't it make more sense to buy a large area of land and populate that with indiginous vegetation, in addition to living off the grid and all sorts of other eco friendly individual activities?

I mean I guess that's what they do?

Want a zero carbon foorprint? Go back to colonial times and live like a quaker.
Maintain the smallest farmland environment possible to sustain your hunger with zero technology.

No TV, no news of any kind, other than word of mouth, and certainly no electricity or industrially manufactured possessions.

surferdude

polaris wrote:

how can you say investing in renewable energy projects or buying tracts of forests that would otherwise be cut down for soya beans not productive?

Because all it's doing is shifting production areas. Conservation of natural resources and a switch to green sources of energy are the only answers. The carbon neutral strategy encourages waste, hell it's viability is based solely on this premise. The fact that carbon offset companies are seen as money making ventures tell you everything you need to know about them. I could almost agree with the strategy if they were required to be not-for-profit organizations, that had to put all proceeds into R&D but that's not the rules. They are a joke and I can't fathom why anyone who cares about the environment would back them. It's the selling of environmental indulgences, plain and simple. It let's Gore think he cares about the environment while living in a 22,000 square foot house. It let's people and encourages people to live lies. It's a sham. Until there is a glut or over abundance of green energy so that no green house gas energy sources are used it should be thought of the height of selfishness and conceit to live like Gore. Instead he acts like he's a fucking role model and preaches to people on how to live. He's built a religion out of it, has his following, and is more corrupit than any church I know.

tybird

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Want a zero carbon foorprint? Go back to colonial times and live like a quaker.
Maintain the smallest farmland environment possible to sustain your hunger with zero technology.
.

Any fire used to sustain such a lifestyle would be a carbon footprint.

Ahnimus

We already went over this bullshit in multiple other threads.

Gore uses Green Energy in his 22,000 sqft 220,000 kWh mansion. He pays more than any of you whiney bitches do in order to have that Green Energy. But you will sit back guzzling your oil and calling him a hypocrite.

Gore has never said its not ok to be rich, and he's never condemned owning a big house or using lots of energy. He simply suggests ways of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, and the steps he recommends are steps he has taken himself. The only thing hypocritical are these republican think tanks that waste energy running their Al Gore smear campaigns and the dumbasses that believe every bit of propaganda they publish.

I really don't care about Al Gore. But I do care about the environment. All this bullshit is to make Gore the figurehead for Environmentalism, so to discredit Gore is to discredit the theory of Global Warming. It's pure bullshit and any rational person who wasn't an oil-sucking addict could see the political motives.

surferdude

Ahnimus wrote:

We already went over this bullshit in multiple other threads.

Gore uses Green Energy in his 22,000 sqft 220,000 kWh mansion. He pays more than any of you whiney bitches do in order to have that Green Energy. But you will sit back guzzling your oil and calling him a hypocrite.

Gore has never said its not ok to be rich, and he's never condemned owning a big house or using lots of energy. He simply suggests ways of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, and the steps he recommends are steps he has taken himself. The only thing hypocritical are these republican think tanks that waste energy running their Al Gore smear campaigns and the dumbasses that believe every bit of propaganda they publish.

I really don't care about Al Gore. But I do care about the environment. All this bullshit is to make Gore the figurehead for Environmentalism, so to discredit Gore is to discredit the theory of Global Warming. It's pure bullshit and any rational person who wasn't an oil-sucking addict could see the political motives.

Gore's gluttonous use of green energy prevents others from doing the same. Gore is part of the problem. The carbon neutral strategy is part of the problem. Both are purely ventures designed to lead us away from real solutions and just provide a new source of income for some while providing nothing tangible in return. The only return to people in general is that now gluttonous users of energy can assuage their guilt and continue to indulge in a lifestyle that is harmful to us all.

Eliot Rosewater

Ahnimus wrote:

We already went over this bullshit in multiple other threads.

Gore uses Green Energy in his 22,000 sqft 220,000 kWh mansion. He pays more than any of you whiney bitches do in order to have that Green Energy. But you will sit back guzzling your oil and calling him a hypocrite.

Gore has never said its not ok to be rich, and he's never condemned owning a big house or using lots of energy. He simply suggests ways of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, and the steps he recommends are steps he has taken himself. The only thing hypocritical are these republican think tanks that waste energy running their Al Gore smear campaigns and the dumbasses that believe every bit of propaganda they publish.

I really don't care about Al Gore. But I do care about the environment. All this bullshit is to make Gore the figurehead for Environmentalism, so to discredit Gore is to discredit the theory of Global Warming. It's pure bullshit and any rational person who wasn't an oil-sucking addict could see the political motives.

In a thread where very few posts make an ounce of sense, Ahnimus finally comes through for the side of logic and reason. Thank God. Ahnimus 2008.

surferdude

don't gimme no wrote:

In a thread where very few posts make an ounce of sense, Ahnimus finally comes through for the side of logic and reason. Thank God. Ahnimus 2008.

Given what we know of Gore and the carbon neutral strategy I cannot see how anyone can approve of either. Gore's a bleeding hypocrite but people seem more than happy with him and apologetic for his behavior. maybe Ahnimus in his blind admiration is just trying to be more American. And at a time when there is so much talk of the need for universal health coverage (or socialized health care) I find it amusing these same people back a for profit carbon neutral strategy that has zero tangible output. The strategy that is equivalent to say it's okay to be a fat glutton in North America because it's being offset by people starving in Africa. That's part of Gore's solution. And people look to him as a leader?????

RolandTD20Kdrummer

tybird wrote:

Any fire used to sustain such a lifestyle would be a carbon footprint.

True. You'd have to be a raw food vegetarian Quaker, and in a warm climate.

I think it's pretty much undeniable at this point that the human species is overpopulating and the effects are becoming amplified and noticeable.

surferdude

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

True. You'd have to be a raw food vegetarian Quaker, and in a warm climate.

I think it's pretty much undeniable at this point that the human species is overpopulating and the effects are becoming amplified and noticeable.

How can people overpopulate? What does this mean? Does it mean we were underpopulated previously? Population is a fact, facts are neither over or under. A population is either sustainable or not. Sustainability is not in a reciprical relationship with population.

We've never had fewer people as a percentage suffering from malnutrition or dieing of disease at young ages. People seem to be doing okay. We are working on long term solutions to what we see as coming problems. We adapt to change at a ferocious rate.