Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

It’s just GOT to be Al Gore’s night

By

I’ll probably miss it (long day tomorrow), but for me, the only thing I’m rooting for in the Oscars tonight — heck, practially the only thing I’ve ever rooted for — is in the field of Best Documentary.

Whether or not Al Gore ever runs for President, an Oscar really gives this film and this issue a huge publicity bump — I mean, it’s an honor that everyone has at least heard of; this would be the ultimate endorsement from the biggest publicity machine on the planet.

It’s gotta win, right?  UPDATE (by David): Right.  There wasn’t ever really any doubt.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • …but I THINK Pan’s Labyrinth got as many Oscars as The Departed!  And really – if you haven’t seen this film – keep in mind that while Eisenhower swept dictators from the REST of Europe, we left Franco alone…it made the scene where the rebels in the forest get excited about D-Day poignant for me, as they are doomed to lose.

      <

      p>
      The only injustice in my mind was that Peter O’Toole didn’t win (full disclosure – I would watch Peter O’Toole read the telephone book).  In Venus, I saw a performance; in the Last King of Scotland, I saw a masterful impersonation (same thing for Helen Mirren, really).  Alan Arkin was a nice surprise, although I would have picked Mark Wahlberg.  I was just glad they didn’t nominate Jack again, although he WAS better in The Departed than some of the things he won for!  and at long last – MAAHHHHTY!

  6. …it did get a little pedantic.

    <

    p>
    Good on the facts, but a little too fauning over the star for my tastes.

    <

    p>
    Problem is, it won’t make a whole lot of difference in the long run regarding global climate change because whatever Americans and Europeans do to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the developing countries will overwhelm them.

    • There won’t be much development going on in Mumbai if the sea level increases 20 ft. China’s economy is not going to thrive if its interior turns to dessert.

      <

      p>
      You’re right only if they act like stupid natives — but they aren’t stupid natives.

      • …humans react to crises for which the repercussions are relatively immediately noticeable to them, and are far more likely to ignore crises that are likely to take decades for the repercussions to directly affect them.

        <

        p>
        It isn’t that the “natives,” as you put it, are stupid.  It’s that they’re human.

    • The developing economies will do whatever we tell them to do. They mostly aren’t selling things internally, so if we tell them we won’t buy from them unless they control their greenhouse gas emissions, they will do it.

      <

      p>
      Also, a lot of what needs to be done right now is further technology development. Developing economies will happily build cleaner factories if we give them the plans. The hardest thing to do is actually shutting down the dirty developed factories. Places that are building new factories are much less of a problem.

      • …Wal-Mart etc. controls what is allowed to be imported into the US.  And it would take a yeoman’s effort to get a substantial portion of the US population to boycott Wal-Mart just because it buys from China.

        • we, as a government, can choose to create a trade policy that dictates what walmart can and can’t buy from china, based on whether or not China complies with certain greenhouse gas emissions.

          • …If we as a government can’t prevent companies from shipping manufacturing jobs from the US to China–which causes immediate repercussions at home in the US–what seriously makes you believe that we as a government would forbid imports from China merely because they might be unwilling to create a stranglehold on their economy that might–just might–prevent flooding in their city of Shanghai?  Or Bombay/Mumbai in regards India?

            <

            p>
            Thimk.

            • …that was not a typo in my last line.  Do a google search on “Thimk” and you’ll see what I mean.

  8. is an incredible film, I’m really glad it won for best foreign-language movie. It’s truly outstanding cinema, telling a gripping story through great acting, pacing, writing and directing.

    <

    p>
    And while it is an excellent period piece, re-creating a specific time and place in East Germany before the wall fell, it also holds an important contemporary message about the dangers of unchecked government power to spy on its citizens.

    • Pan’s Laborynth is one of the best – if not the best – films I’ve ever seen. I can’t fathom that the Lives of Others even compares in greatness.

  9. He probably left a bigger “carbon footprint” last week than my whole family did last year.

    <

    p>
    Gore is not a man from whom I’ll take my environmental cues. And I’m no slouch when it comes to conservation.

    • …what you are suggesting is that Gore is something of a hypocrite because he flits around on private jets instead of taking commercial airliners.  I’ve heard that accusation against him.  I’ve also heard a similar accusation against RFKennedy Jr, another global climate change crusader. 

      <

      p>
      But, in Gore’s case, it may be that he, as a former vice president, is still under Secret Service protection, and that they are dictating the modalities that he uses for travel.  If so, I’d cut him some slack.

    • that he was carbon neutral — that is, somebody is counting up his carbon emissions, and he’s creating negative emissions elsewhere by funding wind projects or tree plantings or somesuch.

      <

      p>
      Anybody gots the data on that one?

  10. Gore Responds to Charges His House Uses Too Much Electricity 

    <

    p>
    02/27/2007  — 

    <

    p>
    Al Gore has responded to charges that his house consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, with the new Oscar winner saying he has taken many steps to reduce the carbon footprint in his home.

    <

    p>
    The office of the former vice president and former presidential candidate told Thinkprogress.org that he has signed up for 100 percent “green” power through Green Power Switch – a renewable energy program through the massive local electric distribution network, the Tennessee Valley Authority. Gore also has installed solar panels and uses compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy-saving technology.

    <

    p>
    Gore said he also buys carbon offsets: a service that tries to reduce the total carbon emissions of individuals or organizations indirectly.

    <

    p>
    “What Mr. Gore has asked is that every family calculate their carbon footprint and try to reduce it as much as possible,” Gore’s office said, according to Thinkprogress.org. “Once they have done so, he then advocates that they purchase offsets, as the Gores do, to bring their footprint down to zero.”

    <

    p>
    A carbon footprint is a measure of the impact human activities have on the environment in terms of the amount of greenhouse gases produced. It is measured in units of carbon dioxide.

    <

    p>
    Gore was responding to a report issued by the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, which cited figures from the Nashville Electric Service that showed Gore has burned through 22,619 kilowatt-hours of electricity at his house since last August, and his average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.

    <

    p>
    The report said that Gore’s electricity consumption rate was more than twice the level used by an average U.S. household in an entire year.

    <

    p>
    Click here to read the research center’s press release on the report.

    <

    p>
    On Sunday, Gore’s global-warming documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” won an Oscar. The movie has won accolades from a wide berth of groups, including many in Hollywood. In the film, Gore calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.

    <

    p>
    Using Gore’s fresh win at the Oscars as a backdrop, the new report said Gore’s energy consumption has jumped by about 14 percent since the movie’s release. The Gore household averaged 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, and 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

    <

    p>
    The report also said that the Gore’s natural gas bills for his mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.

    <

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

    • I’m sorry, but using the rich man’s solution of throwing money at a problem doesn’t bring the carbon footprint to zero – it just shoves off responsibility.

      <

      p>
      I wonder how much of an offset Ted Kennedy would be willing to purchase to deep-six the wind-farm?

      • The problem isn’t consumption per se, it’s the net carbon results of consumption.  If you can consume without releasing the carbon — or if you can both release and sequester carbon — then your actions are carbon neutral.

        <

        p>
        If everybody were carbon neutral, the net carbon emissions from human activity would be zero.  Throwing money at this particular problem can indeed bring the carbon footprint to zero.

      • Offsets as they are called, sound good on their face, as they allow those with deep pockets to pollute today, and mitigate tomorrow, with a clear conscience.

        <

        p>
        Planting trees and funding windfarms, however laudible, may take years, before any actual sequestration begins.
        In the case of plantings, it could take decades to see a net reduction in greenhouse gases. And that is assuming that the trees are of the right species, and are planted in areas where they can actually have a beneficial effect (some forests actually contribute more to warming than to cooling).

        <

        p>
        The problem I see with offsets is that the so-called footprint and the atmospheric damage that has been attributed to it, is happening right now.

        <

        p>
        If the situation is as dire as Al Gore would have us believe, then offsets are hypocritical, and immediate conservation measures should be shouldered by everyone.

        <

        p>
        And yes, that does mean keeping the Lear in the hanger, and travelling with the hoi polloi.

        • Planting trees: well, technically, trees are “inhaling” CO_2 immediately.  Sure, they’re little trees and will “inhale” at a faster rate later, but they do breathe immediately.

          <

          p>
          As for the wind farms, the funding doesn’t typically go to build new wind farms.  It buys (and retires the green credit) of wind produced now which means that there’s constantly increasing demand for wind farms, thereby stimulating more of them.  But, the green credit part is about introducing x kWh of CO_2-free electricity now to compensate for the x kWh of electricity consumed — now making that same x kWh of electricity available again, rendering the net amount of CO_2 used in those x kWh equal to zero.

          <

          p>
          The mitigation is happening in the very short term, ranging from instant to within a few years.  Forrest planting mitigation results do begin immediately, and obviously ramp up as the tree grows.

          <

          p>
          But this is standard rhetoric from the right.  Keep spreading the FUD instead of working toward making things better or offering up better solutions, just keep taking pot shots and making cynical commentary about what he’s doing isn’t enough, when it’s well more than he who makes such commentary in the first place.

          • In addition to the fairly green lifestyle that I lead at home, I have been for several years involved in the stewardship of one of the larger remaining tracts of privately held, undeveloped open space left on the Cape. I’ve written a comprehensive plan for its long term maintainance and improvement. and done it in such a way that it can be easily understood and followed by those who will eventually succeed me.

            <

            p>
            I am also probably one of the few commenters on this forum who has actually taken the initiative to be trained and certified in an outdoor ethics philosophy.

            <

            p>
            These are but a couple of the the contributions that I make to keep my corner of the earth healthy. And I was doing it long before it was stylish to be “green”.
            I say this not to brag, but to respond to your obvious misconception of my attitude towards environmental issues.

            <

            p>
            The fact is Stomv, I feel we are basically of the same stripe where the ecology is concerned, and I feel quite comfortable pointing out what I consider to be the sanctimony on the part of those who tend to speak down to the rest of us.

            <

            p>
            Making reflexive statements about my ecological bonafides, based solely on my conservative political veiwpoint, will only leave you scraping from the sole of your shoe, a warm, nitrogen rich, methane releasing, bovine byproduct.

    • …it probably receives most of its electric power from the Tennessee Valley Authority.  I don’t know the mix of power generation methodologies that the TVA uses, but if memory serves, much of it comes from hydro, and possibly some nuclear. 

      <

      p>
      If so, high electric bills does not necessarily correlate to high carbon emissions.

      • According to Wikipedia, in 2005 the Tennessee Valley Authority generated 10% of its electricity via hydro-power, 28% via nuclear power and the remaining 62% via conventional fossil fuels.

        <

        p>
        For the purposes of this discussion, nuclear is “green” (as it doesn’t release [much] carbon), so that means that TVA electricity is about 1/3 “green” and 2/3 “dirty”.

  11. Al Gore is a BS artist

    <

    p>
    Why wasn’t his carbon offset strategy included in “An Inconvenient Truth”

    <

    p>
    Gore pretends to be an expert and isn’t

    <

    p>
    Gore will hurt the environmental cause with his close relationship with Hollywood

    • I’m an earth scientist, and these arguments about Gore (or any environmentalist’s) personal consumption habits frustrate me. Why reporters always turn to the environmentalist and ask what they are doing in their own lives to reduce their footprint is missing the point.  This notion that the speaker must live up to some martyr-like quality of life in a hut somewhere is silly and misguided, and turns the conversation into a judgement of the hypocrisy of the speaker, rather than a practical assessment of the steps society (not individuals) must take to correct global warming.

      <

      p>
      Folks, this is about global biogeochemical cycles.  That’s what they’re called, the word Gore almost says a million times in his movie, the word I can’t get our webmaster to put on our institution’s website.  Biogeochemistry, the study of elements moving through the whole planet’s ecosystems and geological components.  When you have 6 billion humans jumping up and down and racing around in cars burning fossil fuels, you are in effect moving a lot of carbon around in ways that have the earth has never seen before.  What one human in Tennessee’s house does is completely missing the point.  That one human has been leading a battle for decades to try to create top-down solutions to climate change.  Picking apart individual’s actions is counter productive.  We need a top-down complete reassessment of our society’s energy use and efficiency. If Gore (one human) needs to fly around in a plane to convince 6 billion people this is necessary, or 300 million people in our country, that is the best investment of fossil carbon I can possibly imagine. 

      <

      p>
      C’mon Gore, we need you in ’08.  Humanity needs you.  Stay humble, stay focused on the goal, and people will believe in you.

        • Instead, it was “The actions of thousands, millions, or billions of people outweigh the actions of one.”

          <

          p>
          Instead of expecting Gore to be a carbon saint, check the big picture.

  13. BTW, I consider it courteous to acknowledge a response to one of my comments.  Is that considered OK here, or is it considered too much of a use of bandwidth?

Archives