Power: Gore Mansion Uses 20x Average Household

sourdough wrote:

Regardless of Gore's personal actions (I have no idea whether the charges against him are legit or not), it does not make his message or his film any less relevant.

soulsinging wrote:

1. becos i know random house wouldn't let anyone but themselves publish joseph heller's novels.

2. the thing is, the art could be worth more than $.02, it's just that somebody else is taking it... it could be that the average worth of your book to readers is $9, but this person can make photocopies and sell them for $8 and make thousands of dollars on something worth thousands of dollars while you, the creator of the book starves to death.

3. their products would not be sold at worth, they would be sold at the bare minimum of the cost of production without regard to the actual value. as i noted above, even if someone thinks something is worth $10, they're not going to pay $10 to the original author when they can pay $5 to the guy who copied it, esp if they dont even know who the author is. bands can get around this becos they play live concerts that allow them to earn money beyond the actual song on cd. authors can't really do the same. for that matter, how would you feel if someone advertised as pearl jam, promoted a show, and you bought a ticket and went to find out that it wasn't ed and the group but some impersonators. do you think the people touring as lynyrd skynyrd now are lynyrd skynyrd? it's ripe for deception. i guess id draw a line between patents and intellectual property law basically.

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

... until someone invents an energy free "snap your fingers" method of campaigning the entire world...what to do?

farfromglorified wrote:

Dude, he's not plugging the planes and limos into the kitchen outlet.

soulsinging wrote:

that's the point... without any sort of intellectual property protection, you cannot contract around that. whatever contract you work out is worthless becos third parties can just take your work and auction it off without regard to your contract. you're talking about different values... there's buyer value, seller value, and production value. buyers might be very willing to buy your product at $9 and buyers and sellers might agree that it is worth that price, but the cost to print the artform might only be $1. that does not mean the art is worth that. a car is worth considerably more than the sum of its parts and art is the same way. a cd costs pennies but the music on it is where the value is. this simply means someone is undercutting you on your product. it means that artists will never be able to support themselves becos in order to make any money at all, they wil only be able to charge pennies over the cost of production or risk being undercut by someone else who is bootlegging their work. there is no way contracts or technology can get around this and you can't really "add value" to a novel or a song that will prevent someone else from bootlegging it.

becos there would be no way to tell who the real pearl jam is. it would amount to buyer deception... telling them "oh yeah, this is pearl jam alright, the real deal. all their songs." and you don't realize until you've bought the ticket or cd that you just gave some nerd with a computer your money and pearl jam will never see a cent. you cannot support the artist becos with so much bootlegging, you'd never know which copy goes to the artist. technology means the bootleg version of ten would be indistinguishable from the real copy of ten.

im trying in all these example to talk about how we're not going to scuttle the arts. they have achieved a profit-worthy product but others will steal their work or dilute its value to render it valueless. the arts as we know it would disappear if there was no way to protect against plagiarism becos all the great artists would be unable to produce their art. they'd all be working at mcdonald's 60 hours a week and too tired to create.

MakingWaves wrote:

I also saw this morning where they get their power from an energy source that uses renewable resources or something like that and they also said they are in the process of updating the home and adding solar panels. I don't like Al Gore that much as a politician but it sounds like he is trying. I think you have to look at this for what it is, more political crap that happens by the other side (by both republicans and democrats) when ever someone is in the news for something positive.

El_Kabong wrote:

yeah, i heard that on the news, too...they said the electricity he uses is more expensive than normal electricity b/c he uses 'green electricty' from things like wind turbines and other things...not sure how much that would offset the bill, 20 rooms does seem a bit excessive

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

POWER: GORE MANSION USES 20X AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD; CONSUMPTION INCREASE AFTER 'TRUTH'
Mon Feb 26 2007 17:16:14 ET

Nashville Electric Service/Gore House

2006

High 22619 kWh Aug – Sept
Low 12541 kWh Jan - Feb
Average: 18,414 kWh per month

2005

High 20532 Sept - October
Low 12955 Feb - March
Average: 16,200 kWh per month

Bill amounts

2006 – $895.60 (low) $1738.52 (high) $1359 (average)
2005 – $853.91 (low) $1461 (high)

Nashville Gas Company

Main House
2006 – $990(high) $170 (low) $536 (average)
2005 – $1080 (high) $200 (low) $640 (average)

Guest House/Pool House

2006 – $820 (high) $70 (low) $544 (average)
2005 – $1025 (high) $25 (low) $525 (average)

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research, an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization, issued a press release late Monday:

Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.

Gore’s mansion, [20-room, eight-bathroom] located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).

In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.

The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.

Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.

“As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk to walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use,” said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson.

In total, Gore paid nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for his Nashville estate in 2006.