SubscribeHow The AP Lied About Gore’s Energy Use
First, the latest on this story from the plucky Tennessee Center for Policy Research:
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…
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…
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.
And, lest we forget, this is just one of Mr. Gore’s several manses.
It’s almost as if Mr. Gore has not even taken his own pledge:
"I pledge… to take personal action to help solve the climate crisis by reducing my own CO2 pollution as much as I can and offsetting the rest to become ‘carbon neutral.’ … To work for a dramatic increase in the energy efficiency of my home…"
But never mind all that.
Let’s turn to what the DNC’s Associated Press reported about Mr. Gore’s energy usage back in October of last year:
Gore makes Nashville home more ‘green’
Fri October 12, 2007
NASHVILLE, Tennessee (AP) — Al Gore, who was criticized for high electric bills at his Tennessee mansion, has completed a host of improvements to make the home more energy efficient, and a building-industry group has praised the house as one of the nation’s most environmentally friendly.
The former vice president has installed solar panels, a rainwater-collection system and geothermal heating. He also replaced all incandescent lights with compact fluorescent or light-emitting diode bulbs — even on his Christmas tree…
Gore’s improvements cut the home’s summer electrical consumption by 11 percent compared with a year ago, according to utility records reviewed by The Associated Press. Most Nashville homes used 20 percent to 30 percent more electricity during the same period because of a record heat wave…
In February, a conservative think tank criticized Gore for using an average of 16,000 kilowatt hours a month for an average monthly bill of $1,206 in 2006. The typical Nashville home uses about 1,300 kilowatt hours a month.
Gore has said the criticism was unfair because the 10,000-square-foot mansion was undergoing extensive remodeling. He said this week that "global warming denier" groups were trying to discredit him because they don’t like the attention he has given to climate change.
"You’re going to have people try to attack the messenger in order to get at the message. They have not been able to succeed," Gore told CNN from Norway, where he picked up the Nobel Peace Prize for his environmental work.
"The only way to solve this crisis is for individuals to make changes in their own lives," he said…
Electricity usage at the home remains well above regional averages, but Gore’s power consumption decreased by 6,890 kilowatt hours, or 11 percent, between June and August, despite the heat wave.
Gore’s electric use increased again after he had to take his solar panels off-line in August so his new geothermal system could be integrated into the system. But his natural gas use has dropped 93 percent in the three months since the geothermal pump was activated.
When the Gores’ heated pool is hooked up to the system later this month, their energy use is expected to decline more, his spokeswoman said.
Gore has also said he invests in renewable energy such as solar and wind power to balance 100 percent of his electricity usage…
It is very difficult to reconcile these two articles. It’s hard to see how the same utility bills could show both a 11% decrease and an 10% increase in consumption.
No, it would seem that Associated Press will promulgate any lie accept any explanation from their Democrat masters and their plaster saints like Mr. Gore.
Which is something to bear in mind when reading any AP story, or indeed anything from our watchdog media.
Related Articles:
- AP Calls Leftwing Tax Report 'Non-Partisan'
- Al Gore To Campaign For Obama - Oh Joy!
- AP To Limit Use Of Its Articles On Websites
- AP: Caroline Brings Discretion To VP Search
- The AP Crows: Army Suicides Are Up Again!
- AP Puts Hillary On Mt Rushmore - Photos
- AP Defends Dem Who Skipped On Mortgage
- AP: Guards Drag Gitmo Detainee To Court
- AP: "Bush Lectures Arab World On Reform"
- Gore: US Blocking 'Climate Change' Progress
- Al Gore Wins Nobel Peace Prize For Slide Show
- Take Al Gore's 'Global Warming' Pledge
- Gore's Son Jailed - 100mph In A Prius, Drugs
- Watch Gore Blast Bush 41 Over Saddam In '92
- Gore Buys Carbon Offsets From Own Company
13 Responses to “How The AP Lied About Gore’s Energy Use”
Leave a Reply
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.
June 18th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Is it me, or is Al Gore taking a cue from Pope Leo X - while we pay penance to him for our carbon footprint, he gets richer with he & people like him remain the only ones with the means to afford things that used to support our ways of life.
Sounds like the dark ages all over again.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Not to jump to the AP’s defense, but… The AP article was reporting on power consumption between June and August, whereas the Tennessee Center for Policy Research is reporting over the whole year (Feb. 07 - Feb. 08). So, while energy consumption was down for the three months by 10%, it was up 11% overall for the whole year. However, the power consumption for the year should have decreased as the heated pool (heated pool for an environmentalist???) was going to be added to the Gore Home Grid. Either the grid addition didn’t happen, or the ’science’ behind the enviromental technology installed at the home is bunk.
Looking at Al Gore’s schedule over at Daily Kos (had to take a bath afterwards to wash the slime away), it doesn’t appear that he was around the Gore homestead much during the summer when the AP article reported that 11% decrease in energy consumption.
Regardless, it shows the utter (continuing) hypocrisy of Gore and the minions that cattle around him, including those idiots (non-quoteable, ya know) over at AP.
June 18th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
“bunk”
Says it all.
June 18th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Al will simply say he now owns a “plug in electric vehicle.”
Remember, electricity is (apparently) OK to consume, as long as you pay the token fee many utilities charge for “wind power.”
(Which of course really comes from coal as there aren’t power lines running directly from the wind farm to particular homes…)
June 18th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Well, gas prices aren’t quite at the $6 a gallon that Gore has hoped for over the years, (and certainly at this point he could afford $60 a gallon), but things are going swimingly for the Globaloney Gas Bag. Let’s face it folks, Al is right—our only hope is the wind powered automobile……
June 18th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Gore, burning all the fuel that Americans won’t.
Or is it so they can’t.
Way to go you swollen sloth bladder, and keep eating all the food to keep the rest of us thin.
June 18th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
swollen sloth bladder? OOORAH! DEZ~!!
June 18th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
And yet, and yet the AP can’t even bring itself to mention that President Bush’s home had all those neato-enviro protecting goodies designed and built into it all those years ago. But no, it wouldn’t do to point out that the conservative President is a bigger enviro-protector than the Goracle. It just won’t do.
Gore’s energy bills are so high because his oven and microwave are working overtime to keep that food coming to his big, fat, stupid mouth.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Why does the Carley Simon song “He’s So Vain” always come to mind when Albert (green-genes) Gore opens his mouth? If he’d move a little more toward “center”, the earth wouldn’t be tilted on its axis.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Al Gore says; “…….”global warming denier” groups were trying to discredit him because they don’t like the attention he has given to climate change……”
“Does this pair of pants make my ass look fat?” No! Your ASS makes your ass look fat, you nincompoop!
Al, baby. Just face it, you asswipe. People don’t like you because you’re so YOU! That must really suck.
June 18th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Dana Carvey had a killer standup comedy special on HBO where he riffed on Al Gore for a good 10 minutes. I know most people on this board probably already cancelled their HBO subscription thanks to Bill Maher but has anyone seen it? It was great.
June 18th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
As Arctain said the explanation is simple. The extra power was used in the winter.
He has to keep his home at 103 throughout the winter to induce the continual hallucination about global warming. Now wonder it spiked, what with the cold winters we have been having thanks to all this warming going on.
June 19th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
(I know this is a long post and it contains a bunch of statistical data - sorry, it can’t be helped…) According to NOAA (www.noaa.gov) for the greater Nashville area during this past winter compared to the previous winter:
Starting in October -
Oct. 06 vs.. Oct. 07 - Oct. 07 was warmer, on average, than Oct. 06 with an average temp being 60 degrees. It was 6 degrees warmer, on average, in Oct. 07 than it was in Oct. 06. Warmer weather in Oct. probably means that the cooling system was still in use, and was in more use in Oct. 07 than it was in Oct. 06; which translates into more energy consumption in Oct. 07 - all things being equal (which we know they aren’t supposed to be due to the ‘greening’ of the Belle Meade home just before Oct. 07).
Nov. 06 vs. Nov. 07 - Nov. 07 was cooler, on average, than Nov. 06 with an avg. temp being 49 degrees. It was 3 degrees cooler, on average, in Nov. 07 than in Nov. 06. Cooler weather in Nov. 07 should mean that the heating/cooling system would use less energy in Nov. 07 than in Nov. 06 - all things being equal (which we know they shouldn’t be… Nov. 07 should reflect more energy efficiency at the Belle Meade home. This, coupled with less energy demand due to mild weather in 07, should show energy consumption for Nov. 07 much lower than Nov. 06). The energy consumption comparison does not reflect this expected decrease.
Dec. 06 vs.. Dec. 07 - Dec. 07 was extremely similar to Dec 06 with an avg. temp of both being 46 degrees, where both month-years were plus 5.5 degrees warmer than average. This is the month where an ‘apples to apples’ comparison should show the benefits of the ‘green’ modifications done to the house. Instead, there is an increase in energy consumption at the Belle Meade house in Dec. 07.
Jan. 07 vs.. Jan. 08 - Jan. 08 was cooler, on average, than Jan. 07 with an avg. temp being 37 degrees. It was 5 degrees cooler, on average, in Jan. 08 than it was in Jan. 07. Cooler weather in Jan. should mean that the heating/cooling system used more energy in Jan. 08 than in Jan. 07. This means that if all things were equal in the Belle Meade home, Jan. 08 energy consumption should have increased; but, with the energy efficiencies well in place by this time, Jan. 08 should show a decrease in energy consumption, even though the weather was cooler than in Jan. 07. The energy consumption comparison does not reflect this expected decrease.
Feb. 07 vs.. Feb 08 - Feb. 08 was warmer, on average, than Jan. 07 with an average temperature being 42 degrees. It was 5 degrees warmer, on average, in Feb. 08 than it was in Feb. 07. Warmer weather in Feb. 08 should mean that the heating/cooling system should use less energy compared to Feb. 07, even negating for the improvements in energy efficiencies. The energy consumption comparison does not reflect this expected decrease.
—–
Here we have a good comparison between the temperatures in Nashville of one winter (2006-2007) compared to another (2007-2008). The energy consumption of the Belle Meade home is known during those times, with a significant increase in energy consumption during the winter of 2007-2008 compared to the previous winter. (Since there is global warming, shouldn’t energy consumption go down during the winter, as outside temperatures are supposed to be higher and the load on heating consumption should decrease?) From what I’ve garnered, there were no construction/improvements to the house that would have caused a large increase in energy consumption - in fact, there are no construction/improvements (via permitting) for the Belle Meade home during either time period above. Basically, the above shows that the Gores used more energy consumption after the improvements during milder weather than before the improvements.
Even on those two months where the energy consumption should realistically be expected to be higher (Oct. 07 and Jan. 08), the ‘improvements’ should have been reasonably expected to offset the increased load on the heating/cooling system. Shouldn’t they have?
So, once again, it’s either because the Gore’s are hypocrites, or the installed improvements at the Belle Meade house are bunk.
Personally, I vote for both…
Of course, there is one other possibility - Gore could claim that the house is a liberal ‘death trap’ and should be razed to make way for new construction. He could claim that the house is 80 years old, and couldn’t be brought up to the ‘green’ standard. I think we need to find a enviro-wacko group to start a petition to call for the destruction of the Belle Meade house due to it’s continual and exorbitant use of carbon-based resources. Of course, this would mean the cutting of timber (probably from old-growth forests) and the exhaust of more greenhouse gases (from the tools of destruction and construction), but who’s counting…