“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.”

I wonder how many years it will take to overcome the carbon footprint it took to manufacture all these “green” systems?

Al Gore took a train to receive his Nobel prize to show his commitment to his cause. His luggage went by limo.

Gore completes renovations to Tenn. home…

Al Gore, who was criticized for high electric bills at his Tennessee mansion, has completed a host …

Ehh…

Progress relative to the previous state, but he still lives in a freaking mansion.

Ecologically and socially responsible mansion dwelling is kind of oxymoronic. Good for him, in spirit, and this will be a big hit PR-wise. But, if he really wanted to live by his principles (or closer to them, our principles are probably only ideals we strive for but inevitably fall short of) the first step might be moving out of the mansion.

Ecologically-friendly mansion rehabilitation is kind of like human-rights friendly torture, or for those of you who like mixed metaphors, we could say that Gore is ensuring the chutes he sticks under the environment’s fingernails come from organically grown bamboo (or something).

Proof, I guess, that nothing he does will ever be good enough.

This, more than anything else, is why the environmental movement is doomed to fail. Those on the extremes will always say “why aren’t YOU doing more,” and everyone else will look at that and think “I don’t need to do anything.”

Of course, Gore could move into a 400-sq-ft foam eco-dome and cut his ecological footprint to close to zero, and then he’d just be written off as a crazy. There’s literally no way for him to win.

Real change comes from a lot of people doing a lot of little things, not a few people doing a few big things.

“Of course, Gore could move into a 400-sq-ft foam eco-dome and cut his ecological footprint to close to zero, and then he’d just be written off as a crazy. There’s literally no way for him to win.”

classic false dilemma fallacy

classic false dilemma fallacy

I don’t see why. Even if Gore just moves into more modest digs, he still gets criticized for all the travel he does advancing the cause. If he cut back on the travel, it would be something else. It would simply never be good enough.

But if you think I’m wrong about this, then fine, prove me wrong. Tell me at exactly what point you’d say Gore is doing “enough” to lower his carbon output, and get digglahhh to agree with you, and agree that if he did those things, you would no longer criticize him for not doing more.

I don’t think Gore’s perfect or worthy of some sort of hero worship, but I do think he’s unfairly treated on this issue. And mansion or not, the types of changes Gore’s made to his home are the types of things we should be encouraging. Would it be better, environmentally speaking, if we got everyone to sell their homes and move into apartments? Sure, it would. But that just isn’t going to happen. So you have to find a balance between improved energy efficiency and the comfortable American standard of living.

Gore is by no means the perfect spokesman, but right now, he’s the best one we’ve got. And even if he is a mansion-dwelling member of the Wealthy Liberal Elite Intelligentsia(tm), he’s still doing more than just about anybody else to raise awareness, and more than the overwhelming majority of Americans do to reduce and/or offset their carbon footprint.

But again, that’s not good enough. It will never be good enough. These criticisms of Gore are no different than those the anti-tax advocates make against those who support tax increases: “How come you’re not paying more now, instead of asking everyone else to do so?” If you can explain to me how it’s different, I’m all ears.

Whoa, TG. Call back the cavalry.

I just wanted to put Gore’s improvements in perspective. He is a very rich man who lives in a home bigger than any individual could ever “need.” Is there anything unfair about that?

He’s made admirable environmentally-friendly augmentations to his home, but the sheer size of his home dictates that he will probably still leave a carbon footprint larger than that of even a relatively environmentally irresponsible apartment dweller. Is that unfair?

If his principle is environmental sustainability, it seems unlikely that everybody having a home like Al Gore’s is particularly sustainable. Is that unfair?

Gore’s vast economic resources make it quite feasible to prioritize the environment (relatively speaking), therefore making it easier for him to make these changes to his home than most. Even if you argue that it is ultimately economically efficient to make sure changes, it is still a substantial expenditure up front, and that makes it difficult for many others to do the same. Is that unfair?

He is a public figure, again with wealth and popularity. It is probably more accurate to say that he’s the best spokesperson we’ve got to whom average people are willing to listen, than to say he’s the best we’ve got, period. Is that unfair?

I’m not so much slamming HIM for doing more, but reeling YOU back in the amount of praise you are heaping on him. I’m not, by any means, shitting on his accomplishments, I just think you are giving him excessive props.

I wouldn’t complain about the travel advancing the cause, unless it is really egregious. Among the reasons to travel, his are certainly more noble than most. That’s like saying the government shouldn’t spend any money to collect the taxes, and if they do so, they’re hypocritical. Only if he’s doing things like hopping into the G4 to head to Paris for dinner, then we have a problem.

What digg said. As to my specific objection, there is a middle ground somewhere between 10,000 SF and 400 SF. Thise are not the only two choices, hence my comment.

As I have mentioned before, the fact Gore lives the way he does in no way changes my perception of global climate change – or the causes thereof. But the Freds of the world are easily seduced by this type of sideshow. (I would wager a fair amount that more people know what Edwards paid for a haircut than what any of his policy stances are. Lesson: don’t get expensive haircuts when running for prez.)

Gore reduces the effectiveness of his leadership on issues related to GCC by living in a very large house. It is unfortunate that he does this; it does not reduce the importance of his message, it just reduces the receptiveness with which it is received by many people.

“Gore reduces the effectiveness of his leadership on issues related to GCC by living in a very large house. It is unfortunate that he does this; it does not reduce the importance of his message, it just reduces the receptiveness with which it is received by many people.”

His effectiveness is reduced because many people consider him a hypocrite — Do as I say do, not as I do.

Exactly my point Fred. Most people are unable to process his global message without taking into consideration his personal choices. Sad, but true.

many people consider him a hypocrite

Actually, they don’t. Some people, influenced by the PR hammering and yammering of the few global warming skeptics, may think that, but not “many.”

Which actually reinforces tgirsch’s point: The whole business about Gore’s “hypocrisy” arises from a PR campaign designed for the specific purpose of discrediting him and hopefully through that, the idea of global warming. No matter what Gore did, no matter how he chose to live, these folks would find some way to attack him.

PR is all about image. In this case, we’re supposed to picture Al and Tipper shuffling around this huge house all by themselves. Except the place also holds Gore’s office. And the offices of his staff. And space for the Secret Service. I’m sure the private living quarters are quite spacious, but still, the business about Gore’s home, especially when a little context is included, is merely – and is intended to be – a distraction from the actual issue at hand.

Yeah, Al Gore should have special dispensations from living like he wants the common people to live. As the minister of his flock he is too important to live like his congregation. Go start up that polluting jet so he can make it to his next missionary station to fleece the flock. (I wonder if he has an air conditioned dog house.)

“And space for the Secret Service.”

Are you sure that former VPs have Secret Service protection? He may have security personnel but I don’t think it is SS.

Morris:

Re “special dispensations”: That’s a stale snorer of an argument that embraces the very PR campaign I was criticizing.

Re Secret Service: On that, you’re correct. SS protection for a Vice-President ends 6 months after leaving office. The security staff is not SS. My bad. However, in considering the size of Gore’s place, space for security staff still needs to be taken into account.

Instances such as Gore’s PR stunt when he received his Nobel prize is another indication of his hypocrisy. He travelled by train while his luggage travelled in a limo. And you wonder why people would call him a hypocrite.

Look, you wanna criticize his home, and say that the relevant opulence he enjoys is in contradiction with the essence of true environmental sustainability, that’s fine.

You wanna throw in some quick jabs about his luggage traveling in a limo, I guess he’s left himself open to that.

But, the fact that he travels by plane to meet a very demanding schedule, of which promoting environmentalism is a big part, is not hypocritical. That is the kind of charge that is agenda-driven.

Slight tangent, but does Al Gore really need full-time security personnel? Are there really people trying to kill Al Gore? I think half of these people who employ full time security only do so to feed their ego and validate their inflated sense of self-importance.

Digg:

I wasn’t aware that I had “heaped praise” on Gore, either here or in the past. Defended him against what I view to be unfair criticisms? Sure. But heaping praise? I don’t think that’s a fair characterization by any stretch.

And I have to repeat, I’m not saying that Gore couldn’t do more to reduce his carbon footprint. I’m saying that, shy of having a carbon footprint of zero, that criticism will always be valid, no matter how much he does or doesn’t do. He already does far more than most, so those attacking him for not doing even more are, in my estimation, either disingenuous or missing the point. I think LarryE sums it up quite nicely.

The bottom line is that if you allow people to use quality of living as a way to attack an environmental advocate, you’re helping to pretty much eliminate any chance the environmental movement has at making progress. You might not want to push it to the 400-sq-ft apartment extreme, but you can rest assured that the enemies of the environmental movement will.

Does that mean I think Gore should be immune to criticism? Of course not. I just think that we don’t do ourselves any favors when we look at obviously trumped-up charges born of an obvious anti-environmentalist agenda and say “you know, they have a point…”

“But, the fact that he travels by plane to meet a very demanding schedule, of which promoting environmentalism is a big part, is not hypocritical.”

Who said it was hypocritical? I don’t think it’s hypocritical. That is how he has to travel to conduct his ministry.

TG,

I think it was the title of the post that gave me the impression of you giving Gore too much praise.

I also don’t think I looked at obviously trumped up charges and extolled their credibility. I think I made some reasonable observations with the intent of putting things into perspective. I don’t think that not living up to your principles in the absolute purest and unequivocal sense makes you a hypocrite, by that definition nobody is ever truly dedicated to anything. So, I’m not going to fret over the possibility of somebody taking my words and morphing them into an intellectually-disingenuous and ideologically-driven attack on somebody I’m “supposed to” support. I’m just going to trust that people (especially those with the general level of intelligence that characterizes those here) are going to see those kinds of comments for what they are.