View Full Version : ...A Tale of two houses.........

04-10-2007, 09:25 PM
A bit of useless information that is NOT intended as a political statement or troll.....but........ Some can talk the talk but don't bother to walk the walk......and I dunno like the shrub either......

House 1

The four-bedroom home was planned so that "every room has a relationship with something in the landscape that's different from the room next door. Each of the rooms feels like a slightly different place." The resulting single-story house is
a paragon of environmental planning.

The passive-solar house is built of honey-colored native limestone and positioned to absorb winter sunlight, warming the interior walkways and walls of the 4,000-square-foot residence. Geothermal heat pumps circulate water through pipes buried 300
feet deep in the ground.

These waters pass through a heat exchange system that keeps the home warm in winter and cool in summer. A 25,000-gallon underground cistern collects rainwater
gathered from roof urns; wastewater from sinks, toilets, and showers cascades into underground purifying tanks and is also funneled into the cistern.

The water from the cistern is then used to irrigate the landscaping around the four-bedroom home, (which) uses indigenous grasses, shrubs, and flowers to complete the exterior treatment of the home. In addition to its minimal environmental impact, the look and layout of the house reflect one of the paramount priorities: relaxation.

A spacious 10-foot porch wraps completely around the residence and beckons the family outdoors. With few hallways to speak of, family and guests make their way from room to room either directly or by way of the porch. "The house doesn't hold you in. Where the porch ends, there is grass. There is no step-up at all."

This house consumes 25% of the energy of an average American home. (Source: Cowboys and Indians Magazine, Oct. 2002 and Chicago Tribune April 2001.)

House 2

This 20-room, 8-bathroom house consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year. The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy.

In 2006, this house devoured nearly 221,000 kWh, more than 20 times the national average. Last August alone, the house burned through 22,619 kWh, guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year.

As a result of this energy consumption, the average monthly electric bill topped $1,359. Also, natural gas bills for this house and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year. In total, this house had nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for 2006.

(Source: just about anywhere in the news last month online and on talk radio, but barely on TV.)







House 1 belongs to George and Laura Bush, in Crawford, Texas.

House 2 belongs to Al and Tipper Gore, in Nashville,Tennessee.

04-10-2007, 09:30 PM
My WBF prediction....

"Gore gets a free pass"


Rick Starr
04-10-2007, 10:12 PM
I was hoping this was about romeo and juliet.

"Two households, both alike in dignity,
In fair Verona, where we lay our scene,
From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,
Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean."

Maybe, in a way, it is.

04-10-2007, 11:59 PM
"Gore gets a free pass"


No, Gore doesn't get a free pass. I'll say the same thing I said the first, second and third times this issue came up.... and the same thing I said when they said it about John Travolta.

This is silliness.

We should be interested in the habits of hundreds of millions of Americans and billions of citizens of the world. The personal habits of two familes makes no difference whatsoever.

Obviously, this kind of thing makes right-wingers salivate, but other than feeding your own personal poltical agendas, it does not have anything to do with global warming.

Despite Gore's gluttonous personal habits, he has had a much better net effect than Bush. Advocacy is a very powerful tool. He can (and has) affected millions of people --- and that saves a lot more energy than it takes to heat his swimming pool. I honestly believe that right-wingers are capable of understanding this concept --- yet deliberately choose not to, to suit their personal agendas.

Although it has become fashinable to critique carbon credits, it should be noted that Gore does more than just purchase carbon credits. He has actually signed up to have all of his electricity produced through renewable resources. That is a separate program than offsetting credits -- and it has a very real benefit.

Anyone who lives in reality understands that internal conflict is part of the human condition. Even the most perfect among us have their faults. It is not at all unusal for a person to have a genuine desire and understanding of what they should want to do.... and yet, for one reason or another, still do something else.

I had a friend once who was a tremendous and sincere environmentalist... he also drove a very large, very polluting car. Why? Because his grandma gave it to him when he started college and he never had the heart to get rid of it. Does that make him a bad person? Of course not.... it just means he's human.

Finally, I would like to point out that neither Bush nor Gore is a member of this forum. Gore's actions are not mine and do not reflect on me. As I have said before, I am quite comfortable with my environmental impact.

Let's not pretend that I (or anyone else) need answer for Gore anymore than Sam F. would have to answer for some of the less admirable members of the Catholic clergy. It is still possible to appreciate the benefits of an organization or movement without sacraficing oneself for one of the more prominent leaders of that movement.

04-11-2007, 12:03 AM
Does it really make sense to compare Bush's vacation home with Gore's primary residence and home office?

You do realize that Bush has another home don't you.... in addition to the vacation property at Camp David and his frequent use of his parents' place in Maine.....

I wonder what it looks like when you add that all up?

Never mind... it doesn't matter, other than to let the wind out of your sails a little bit.

George Roberts
04-11-2007, 12:40 AM
I thought that Bush lived in the White House. That seems to be very expensive to run.

In addition I believe he has Secret Service at his Texas house. We should count that consumption.


The numbers are all fake.

Paul Fitzgerald
04-11-2007, 01:35 AM
Politics are pathetic.
Get a life.

04-11-2007, 08:04 AM
It's the essence of free society whether or not the individual is hypocritical.
If I had to choose I'd pick house #1 to live in whether or not I have enough money to afford house #2. I'd use the extra cash to fund my sailing and traveling.

04-11-2007, 08:23 AM
The personal habits of two familes makes no difference whatsoever.

This is the coolest news!

Okay, I'm one family, and I drive big gas/diesel guzzling trucks, and a boat.

The first person to respond can be family number 2.

Together, ljb5 has given us the same free pass he gave Gore, and we can continue to spew carbon guilt free.

Who's in?


04-11-2007, 09:21 AM
Together, ljb5 has given us the same free pass he gave Gore, and we can continue to spew carbon guilt free.

Not at all Brian.... I still think that you are responsible for your consumption....

Just like Gore is responsible for Gore's consumption.

My only complaint is your fascination with Gore's consumption. Obviously, it strokes your political agenda, but other than that, it's of no consequence.

04-11-2007, 10:34 PM
My only complaint is your fascination with Gore's consumption. Obviously, it strokes your political agenda, but other than that, it's of no consequence.

I've never started a thread about Al boys consumption. In fact my contribution to this thread was more about how he gets a free pass, not about his carbon footprint.

Truth be told, it's your political agenda that hinders your ability to accept the irony. :)

Brian Palmer
04-12-2007, 08:58 AM
Bush's house is new, state-of-the-art.

Gore's house is old, not state-of-the-art.

I would expect there to be a difference. Even aside from buying carbon credits, Gore could still probably do some improvements to make it more efficient so he doesn't need as many credits. (I sure hope there aren't any incandescent light bulbs in it.)

I personally don't like Bush, but I am glad the house is so energy efficient. (Maybe it was Laura's idea? You know, maybe she's the closet Earth-Mother type.) It would be nice if he encouraged the building trades and developers to make all new houses so efficient.

-- Brian

04-12-2007, 01:21 PM
Truth be told, it's your political agenda that hinders your ability to accept the irony. :)

I'm just troubled by the fact that you're focused exclusively on the irony --- when there are much more important issues to consider. It would be okay if you could recognize the irony while simultaneously recognizing the scientific validity. Yet some people act like a little irony destroys all the science.

Issues like Al Gore and John Travolta are totally unrelated to the science and importance of the issue --- yet some people act like a complaint about Gore would somehow disprove the entire field of science.

Al Gore is not a scientist. He is a spokesman. He happens to be a very effective spokesman. Even if he were not an effective spokesman, global warming would still be a real problem.

The validity of the research does not hinge on Al Gore's personality. My personal commitment to environmentalism and scientific integrity is not diminished by the fact that some guy has a big, wasteful house.

Stories like this -- comparing Gore's office and primary residence to Bush's vacation property -- do contain some truth, but they are also highly misleading.