Al Gore's Latest Inconvenient Truth - His Electric Bill!

Al Gore just confirmed that his next high profile award will be "!@#*$!&% of the Century."

Poor Richard


=========================
June 17, 2008
For Further Information, Contact: Adam King, 615.383.6431 adam@tennesseepolicy.org

Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month

Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite “energy-efficient” home renovations

NASHVILLE - In the year since Al Gore took steps to make his home more energy-efficient, the former Vice President’s home energy use surged more than 10%, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research.

“A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, President of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.”

In the past year, Gore’s home burned through 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity, enough to power 232 average American households for a month.

In February 2007, An Inconvenient Truth, a film based on a climate change speech developed by Gore, won an Academy Award for best documentary feature. The next day, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research uncovered that Gore’s Nashville home guzzled 20 times more electricity than the average American household.

After the Tennessee Center for Policy Research exposed Gore’s massive home energy use, the former Vice President scurried to make his home more energy-efficient. Despite adding solar panels, installing a geothermal system, replacing existing light bulbs with more efficient models, and overhauling the home’s windows and ductwork, Gore now consumes more electricity than before the “green” overhaul.

Since taking steps to make his home more environmentally-friendly last June, Gore devours an average of 17,768 kWh per month –1,638 kWh more energy per month than before the renovations – at a cost of $16,533. By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 kWh in an entire year, according to the Energy Information Administration.

In the wake of becoming the most well-known global warming alarmist, Gore won an Oscar, a Grammy and the Nobel Peace Prize. In addition, Gore saw his personal wealth increase by an estimated $100 million thanks largely to speaking fees and investments related to global warming hysteria.

“Actions speak louder than words, and Gore’s actions prove that he views climate change not as a serious problem, but as a money-making opportunity,” Johnson said. “Gore is exploiting the public’s concern about the environment to line his pockets and enhance his profile.”

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research, a Nashville-based free market think tank and watchdog organization, obtained information about Gore’s home energy use through a public records request to the Nashville Electric Service.

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research is an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization committed to achieving a freer, more prosperous Tennessee through the ideas of liberty. Visit TCPR online at: http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/.

IFMA Research Report Shows Energy Consumption Declining While Utility Costs Continue To Rise

Led by a dramatic increase in utility costs, the overall cost of running a facility is 10% higher than it was just four years ago, according to results from a recent International Facility Management Association (IFMA) research report. The study, Benchmarks V: Annual Facility Costs, shows that utility costs, which include electricity, gasoline, fuel oil, steam water, and sewage, have jumped 19% compared to similar data from 2006.

While the increase in utility costs may come as no surprise to some, it is happening at a time when energy consumption is down. When compared to IFMA's 2006 benchmarking figures, average electricity consumption, measured in kBTUs per square foot, has dropped from 93 to 81, while gas consumption has remained constant at 35 kBTUs per square foot. This decrease in energy usage could be attributed to companies implementing energy conservation practices, lighting improvements, and equipment upgrades at their facilities.

''In recent years, many organizations have invested in their electrical and mechanical systems to make them more energy efficient,'' said IFMA Associate Director of Research Shari Epstein. ''Performing simple measures such as installing occupancy sensors, adjusting heating and air conditioning controls, and performing preventive maintenance checks to keep equipment running efficiently can make a measurable impact in reducing energy consumption.''

Based on a survey of 1,032 facility professionals from across North America, the new report covers a variety of costs, including lease, maintenance, housekeeping, security, environmental, recycling, waste disposal, and space planning. The costs are on an annual basis and are displayed as dollars per square foot. Many of the costs are further broken down by industry, facility type, and geographic region.

This year’s report reveals that expenses associated with environmental initiatives are also starting to increase. For example, the cost of recycling has doubled in the past four years. While facility managers today are spending an average of four cents per square foot on recycling, they were spending two cents per square foot in 2004, according to a previous IFMA benchmarking study.

''In years past, organizations could generate a little income from recycling paper, cans, and cardboard materials,'' Epstein said. ''With the current emphasis on sustainability, more organizations are stepping up their recycling efforts even though it comes at an increased operational cost.''

IFMA annually conducts a benchmarking survey of its members in an effort to collect data that allows for easy comparisons of built environment costs and practices. These reports allow facility professionals to gauge their performance against similar facilities, whether in the same industry or a different one. This year’s report includes data from more than 1,000 facilities and is IFMA’s largest benchmarking study to date, with many survey respondents supplying information from multiple facilities.