energy hog gore - democrat hypocrisy on conspicuous display | ecology news at
abelard's home latest changes & additions at link to document abstracts link to short briefings documents quotations at, with source document where relevant click for abelard's child education zone economics and money zone at - government swindles and how to transfer money on the net latest news headlines at abelard's news and comment zone
socialism, sociology, supporting documents described Loud music and hearing damage Architectural wonders and joys at about abelard and visit abelard's gallery Energy - beyond fossil fuels France zone at - another France

news and comment

article archives at abelard's news and comment zone topic archives: ecology

for previously archived news article pages, visit the news archive page (click on the button above)

New translation, the Magna Carta

site map

This page helpful?
Share it ! Like it !

energy hog gore - democrat hypocrisy on conspicuous display

“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.”

This is just one of four ‘homes’ allegedly owned by Al Gore. Then, of course, there is his jet and limo lifestyle. Keep in mind that this is being compared to average consumption in a wealthy and profligate economy, therefore half the population will be using less and often much less than a twentieth of Gore’s consumption.

The Democrat shills claim that he is correcting the situation by ‘offsetting’. Of course that is a ‘market’ that is increasingly being outed as ‘greenwashing’.

The supposed ‘offsets’ are mostly innumerate con games, recently caricatured as the modern equivalent of the medieval selling of ‘indulgences’.

marker at

While this news reflects badly on Gore’s integrity, it does not, of course, have any bearing whatsoever on anthropogenic global warming.

By contrast, here is Al Gore on the integrity of the fossil media

“Back in Tennessee on Tuesday, Gore told a crowd of about 50 people at the U.S. Media Ethics Summit II that the presentation's single most provocative slide was one that contrasts results of two long-term studies. A 10-year University of California study found that essentially zero percent of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles disagreed that global warming exists, whereas, another study found that 53 percent of mainstream newspaper articles disagreed the global warming premise".”

marker at

And here’s the Crawford ranch of that awful, hippy-hating, oil industry tool, George W. Bush:

“The 4,000-square-foot house is a model of environmental rectitude.

“Geothermal heat pumps located in a central closet circulate water through pipes buried 300 feet deep in the ground where the temperature is a constant 67 degrees; the water heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. Systems such as the one in this "eco-friendly" dwelling use about 25% of the electricity that traditional heating and cooling systems utilize.

“A 25,000-gallon underground cistern collects rainwater gathered from roof runs; wastewater from sinks, toilets and showers goes into underground purifying tanks and is also funneled into the cistern. The water from the cistern is used to irrigate the landscaping surrounding the four-bedroom home. Plants and flowers native to the high prairie area blend the structure into the surrounding ecosystem.”

Not only is George Bush’s house exceptionally energy efficient, Bush’s house is under half the size of Al Gore’s 10,000 square foot pad.

the web address for the article above is




black is the new green

“From the lights out department - did you know that a cathode ray tube (CRT) monitor uses about 74 watts to display an all white web page, but only uses 59 watts to display an all black page? Yes, there all still plenty of these still in use, particularly in China and Latin America. Worldwide, about 25 percent of the monitors currently in use are cathode ray tubes, which means that they waste energy displaying white backgrounds. This can add up for sites with a global audience.

“Take at look at Google, for instance, who gets about 200 million queries a day. Let's assume each query is displayed for about 10 seconds; that means Google is running for about 550,000 hours every day on some desktop. Assuming that users run Google in full screen mode, the shift to a black background will save a total of 15 (74-59) watts. Now take into account that about 25 percent of the monitors in the world are CRTs, and at 10 cents a kilowatt-hour, that's about $75,000/year, a goodly amount of energy and dollars for changing a few color codes.”

the web address for the article above is

“the best laid schemes o’ mice an’ men, gang aft agley”

“ "The really good idea was to provide habitat for marine critters so we could double or triple marine life in the area. It just didn't work that way," said Ray McAllister, a professor of ocean engineering at Florida Atlantic University who was instrumental in organizing the project. "I look back now and see it was a bad idea."

“In fact, similar problems have been reported at tire reefs worldwide.

“"They're a constantly killing coral-destruction machine," said William Nuckols, coordinator for Coastal America, a federal group involved in organizing a cleanup effort that includes Broward County biologists, state scientists and Army and Navy salvage divers.

“Gov. Charlie Crist's proposed budget includes $2 million to help gather up and remove the tires. The military divers would do their share of the work at no cost to the state by making it part of their training.

“A month-long pilot project is set for June. The full-scale salvage operation is expected to run through 2010 at a cost to the state of about $3.4 million.”

the web address for the article above is

increasing ecological problems threaten chinese economy and food supplies

“The country's plans to develop its impoverished west could be imperilled, Zhou said, adding that if the glaciers melt away and precipitation is extremely uneven, the whole ecology of China's northwest will be unsupportable. "Don't mention development, it won't even allow people to live," he said.

“Zou and other experts have spelled out other worries in a series of recent assessments, warning that global warming may trip up China's sprint for middle-class prosperity.

“Increasingly frequent droughts and floods will threaten crops, Zou said. Hotter weather could speed the spread of deadly infectious diseases. Rising sea levels will slam rising waves against China's densely populated coast, driving sea water high upstream in shrinking rivers, ruining surrounding farmland.

“Floods, droughts, hurricanes and other climate disasters now sap at least 2 percent away from China's potential GDP every year, and the absolute value of that damage is likely to grow with deepening climate change, Zou said.”

related material
land conservation and food production

the web address for the article above is

highly dishonest 'report' on global warming from the fossil media national post of canada

This item includes the following:

“Tol is a Denier, to use the terminology of the "science-is-settled" camp in the increasingly polarized global warming debate. Like many other Deniers, Tol doesn't think the evidence is in on global warming and its effects, he doesn't think there's reason to rush to action, and he doesn't think that crash programs to curb global warming are called for.”

And much later:

“Yes, global warming is real, he believes, and yes, measures to mitigate it should be taken [...]”

This is typical of fossil media distortion and the real deniers such as the author of the sloppy article (handle with tweezers and keep your distance).

Tol is arguing responses with the proposals of Stern. He is not denying the obvious realities of anthropogenic global warming.

Tol is quoted thus:-

“There is no risk of damage [from global warming] that would force us to act injudiciously," he explains. "We've got enough time to look for the economically most effective options, rather than dash into 'actionism,' which then becomes very expensive.”

This seems reasonable to me, until some idiots suppose it to mean we do not need to act. What does “injudiciously” mean to Tol? It is very hard to say from this awful ‘article’.

Does he mean: don’t rely on windmills? Who can tell?

Not only has the author sought to heavily distort Tol’s position, he has not enlightened readers just what that position is.

Some comments on, and links to, the recently released IPCC report. has a recently released briefing document dealing with the various misunderstandings of the flat earthers. This document is currently in beta edition, and is being actively developed.

It is relevant not to confuse Stern’s report that focuses on ‘what to do’ with AGW, with what is happening right now on the warming front - the anthropogenic global warming [AGW]. (For a better understanding of Stern, go here and follow ‘market failure’link.)

There is another badly written item on Stern in the Australian fossil media, which apparently is quoting very recent comments by Stern.

“I have heard three kinds of argument claiming that it is not necessary to combat climate change," Sir Nicholas told a conference in Paris on Friday..”

But I can only find two ‘kinds of argument’ attributed to Stern in the article. Ho hum.

the web address for the article above is

a fairly obvious and over-egged critique of problems with stern

Recommended reading.

“And before anyone says that the rich today must make sacrifices for the poor tomorrow - which sounds eminently reasonable - the critics point out that, by Sir Nicholas's own calculations, future generations will be much richer than our own. Stern predicts that, by 2200, the annual consumption of the world will be $94,000 per person (at today's prices). In 2006, it was $7,600. Sir Nicholas is asking us to make huge sacrifices today for people who, he himself says, will on average be 12 times better-off than we.”

To keep all this in context, it is essential to realise that global ‘debate’ revolves around forecasts. It is fundamental to sanity to be aware that all and any forecasting is a very fraught game, as trillions of gamblers have discovered.

For those still struggling with the details, anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is sound and established science. I regard those who argue against that as flat earthers.

Then come the more difficult problems: how much, when, how costly etc.? What to do, how much to spend, when etc.?

Stern’s report lays down some markers on this road. It is very right and proper that those markers be understood, and debated.

The above linked article has far too much rhetoric and far too few counter proposals. In crude terms, it is destructive, not constructive. This really will not do.

The article suffers from the very same problem the lefties have each time they whine and George Bush politely asks them for their alternative suggestions.

For more details, see related material:
“a vast market failure” - stern

the web address for the article above is

global warming is now a planetary concern

“Rising temperatures in China could slash grain production in the world's most populous country by over a third in the second half of this century, imperilling food security, the official Xinhua agency reported on Wednesday.”
[Quoted from]

marker at

“Indonesia and perhaps Australia risk more droughts because of shifts in Indian Ocean temperatures and stronger monsoons widely linked to global warming, scientists said on Wednesday.”
[Quoted from]

marker at

“US scientists and evangelical Christian leaders joined forces on Wednesday to protect the environment from the ravages of global warming, calling on President George W. Bush and others in power to help.”
[Quoted from]

That’ll give him a problem. Which is it to be, George? Big oil or big G?

marker at

But, but.... it’s expensive, say the flat earthers.

“A much bigger financial carrot is needed to get companies to spend billions on catching carbon dioxide, a gas widely thought to cause climate change, and bury it under the seas around Britain.

“The untested technology is likely to cost at least around 25 pounds (or 38 euros) per tonne of CO2 captured and stored, more than double the cost of emitting carbon, according to a new report by Poyry Energy Consulting for the UK's Department of Trade and Industry, [...]”
[Quoted from]

land conservation and food production

And now wonder about this:

“The information we have is that a missile was fired at an old Chinese weather satellite and destroyed the weather satellite, and so we would like to hear what China has to say about it," Mr Downer said.

“ "The Chinese have always opposed the militarization of outer space, so that's why we look forward to hearing what they have to say about the issue," he added.

“ "They're not saying very much about it, I must say, at the moment."”

“The United States, which condemned the strike on Friday, expressed worries that debris could endanger the manned International Space Station or orbiting satellites.

“US ally Taiwan, which China regards as its territory and has repeatedly threatened to invade, called for worldwide pressure on Beijing and warned of a threat to regional peace.

“Canada also expressed "strong concerns" over the strike.”
[Quoted from]

the web address for the article above is

on-rush of science - making food

Eat yourself, or invite your friend into the stew.

“The political fight over animal cloning is just beginning. It's a lot like the fight over human cloning, except that the roles are reversed. Right-wing groups and Republican senators fanned fear and ignorance about human cloning; left-wing groups and Democratic senators are fanning fear and ignorance about animal cloning. Moderates on both sides get trampled. So do principles. The same liberals who demand stem-cell research using human embryos and who blasted the FDA for delaying approval of emergency contraception now accuse the FDA of recklessly approving cloned food.” [Quoted from]

marker at

Meanwhile, here’s a list of problems that may be cured by cloning meat directly. Forget all about the unnecessary intermediate nuisance of methane-generating cows.

“Despite its popularity, meat - both in production and consumption - has a number of adverse effects on human health, environmental quality, and animal welfare.

“These include:

“Meat-borne pathogens and contaminants, such as Salmonella, Campylobacter, pathogenic E. coli, Avian influenza, and Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). In the United States, foodborne diseases - the most common causes of which are contaminated meats - are responsible for over 76 million episodes of illness, 325,000 hospitalizations, and 5,000 deaths each year. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria due to the routine use of antibiotics in livestock;

“Soil, air, and water pollution from farm animal wastes; Annually, 1.4 billion tons of farm animal wastes are produced in the United States. Together with animal feed production, meat production is responsible for the emissions of nitrogen and phosphorus, pesticide contamination of water, heavy metal contamination of soil, and acid rain from ammonia emissions.

“In addition, in the United States, a quarter of all the human-induced production of the greenhouse gas, methane, comes from farm animals and their waste products.

“Inhumane treatment of farm animals; 9 billion farm animals are killed each year in the United States to produce meat. The conditions in which these animals are raised and killed raise serious concerns about their welfare.

“Depletion of fishing stocks. 75 percent of existing fishing stocks are either fully- or over-exploited” [Quoted from]

marker at

So, solve the problems!

“One technique is to grow cells in large flat sheets on special thin membranes. The sheets of meat would be grown and stretched, then removed from the membranes and stacked on top of one another to increase thickness.

“The other method would be to grow the muscle cells on small three-dimensional beads that stretch with small changes in temperature. The mature cells could then be harvested and turned into a processed meat, like fish sticks, nuggets or hamburgers.” [Quoted from]

Last two links from Lazar.

related material
land conservation and food production

the web address for the article above is

global warming in russia - from your caring fossil fuel industry

“NTV television, owned by state-controlled Gazprom, hardly helped lift the gloom by screening a documentary suggesting the mild winter was the belated result of global warming sparked not by carbon emissions but by the so-called Tunguska Event of 1908 - when a meteorite or comet is believed to have exploded in the air above a remote part of Siberia with the force of a nuclear blast.

“The warming climate, it continued, might be part of a chain reaction that would lead to a new ice age and the end of the world in 2019. So much for the season of good cheer.”

related material
Tunguska Event

the web address for the article above is

This article has been transfered to Giant ice shelf broke free in the arctic

the web address for the article above is

You are here: ecology news from January 2007 < News < Home

latest abstracts briefings information   hearing damage memory France zone

email abelard email email_abelard [at]

© abelard, 2007, 03 january
all rights reserved

variable words
prints as increasing A4 pages (on my printer and set-up)