"That actually means he pays other folk to use less dirty power themselves"
"It's a bit like paying someone to starve so you can gorge."
Al Gorge
What a bloated gas-bag this guy is...
Posted on 02/28/2007 8:11:39 PM PST by grandpa jones
Al Gore buys carbon offsets as forgiveness for his sin of producing too much carbon dioxide, or something like that. BUT who does he buy these offsets from? According to a story published at Ecotality by Bill Hobbs, he buys them from Generation Investment Management, a company he co-founded, and serves as chairman.
Gore helped found Generation Investment Management, through which he and others pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe…As co-founder and chairman of the firm … he “buys” his “carbon offsets” from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself. To be blunt, Gore doesn’t buy “carbon offsets” through Generation Investment Management - he buys stocks.
And it is not clear at all that Gore’s stock purchases - excuse me, “carbon offsets” purchases - actually help reduce the use of carbon-based energy at all, while the gas lanterns and other carbon-based energy burners at his house continue to burn carbon-based fuels and pump carbon emissions - a/k/a/ “greenhouse gases” - into the atmosphere.
I wrote previously that Gore has decided to try and re-frame global warming as a “moral issue”, and the irony of the neo-moralists™ who reject any semblance of traditional faith, but have embraced the global warming cause with true religious zeal. It has become a matter of unquestioned faith - even though Gore himself admitted that the premise of his film was based on exaggerated rhetoric that he described in a 2006 interview as “over-representation of factual presentation”.
(Excerpt) Read more at nukegingrich.wordpress.com ...
Did you hear Rush say that he was going to start the "Al Gore Diet"?
That is where he will eat all he wants and then make you diet.
Man, I hope Gore runs. I so want to see him have to answer for all this sort of thing...
The son of a pig is essentially saying, "I paid for it, so shut up!"
Bump !!!
preshate 'dat
this guy has no shame!
What is a "carbon credit"?
Thisssssss.... is a REAL snake-oil salesman.....
Maaa-an... I didn't think Algore had it in him....
(Not THAT smart.... methinks)
I stand corrected..
What is a "carbon credit"?
It's a get out of jail free card for polluters
That is right on the money!
BTW, I can set you up with carbon offsets at prices you wouldn't believe.
Get right with Gaia!
They should call them what they are...eco-indulgences.
This buying of "carbon credits" requires a secular Luther to expose it for the fraud that it is...as Luther exposed the fraud of "buying indulgences (get out of hell free card) and touched off the Protestant Reformation.
The bottom line is the individual. This individual, Al Gore, is telling everyone else how to live and he doesn't want to live that way himself. He buys someone off, hoping we'll all look the other way and PRETEND that Gore doesn't still use more than his "fair" share of energy.
Gore's problem is his Marxist view of things. His beliefs about "fair share" are the problem. On top of that, he has bought into the Marxist idea of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" and he sees himself as one of those whose enlightened capability makes him able to claim more than his "fair share" on the basis of his exalted position. He knows that saying that in public....that he's better than the rest -- more equal in George Orwell's terminology -- would not fly with the public. Therefore, he plays this shuffle game with carbon credits.
What a crock.
The real truth is that some earn more, have more, and use more. The marketplace will decide who has more resources and who has fewer.
You need to copyright that term and make a few bucks off of it.
Back when Rush's belly burned with the fire of righteous indignation and before his own plunge into compromised matrimony and con-sumptuous greed, he ripped the hypocrites to shreds daily with such cutting comments and built an audience far and wide.
While the Democrat takeover may have rekindled his turgid commentary, it will take a lot more than just one clever one-liner to get me back in his camp.
We can't vote our way out of this march to the sea; someone is going to have to stand on the shore and beat the Lemmings back one at a time.
If you have a farm and agree to plant, but not harvest, an acre of qualifying plants or grass you can get paid for 3/4 of a metric tonne of carbon dioxide you didn't emit; someone else buys this credit and emits the 3/4 ton of CO2 from his sludge pots without penalty of purse or pain of social opprobrium.
Are they only good for agriculture? How long is the credit good for? Who checks to verify if the terms are complied with, or if the credits were sold twice for the same land, or if in fact no plants were harvested from the land? What is the carbon output to process the credits and their regulation? Does the credit equal the loss in revenues from not selling the crop, plus taxes? What happens if the buyer's carbon output increases during the term of the credit?
There are a number of schemes and the list is likely growing, but in each case the tradeoff is based on one party using less of a fossil fuel while others use more in order to ostensibly strike a balance.
This link is illustrative as much for what it doesn't say as for what it barely clarifies; it seems that the dream of the Environmentalists has been largely achieved in the sense that they are both at the forefront of advocating for a global reduction in consumption while serving as arbiters for regulations forcing cutbacks in production.
What isn't clear here and seems to be based on the impossible dream is the age-old dilemma of having one's cake and eating it as well.
None of this will remove one molecule of CO2 from the atmosphere we now all share.
What the Greens celebrate is, at most, the fascination for which they are famous with otherwise more wise people who are apparently overwhelmed by the tide of emotion that has come to play such a dominant role.
Rather like a wheel within a wheel all whirring wildly without end, going nowhere.
You pay someone to plant trees. The trees absorb CO2 . . . viola! You are credited with the CO2 absorbed to offset the JP4 you oxidized in your private jet.Unless of course a termite or a forrest fire eventually oxidizes the tree you planted . . .
A field on which crops are grown but not harvested is not going to be much of a CO2 sink. A far better CO2 sink would be a tree farm where tress are grown and then hopefully turned into something that won't be burned for awhile.
Strange you would say that because ManBearPig owns quite a bit of forest land.
As a matter of fact, he uses this (already existing) forest as part of his offset bank.
What an inconvenient truth for Algore.
Cheers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.