An inconvienient comparison.

HOUSE # 1:

A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas.
In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern “snow belt,” either. It’s in the South.

HOUSE # 2:

Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

Who owns which house people. Regulars here are conservatives so they know the answer already.

To those who wish to dispute do your own googling and linking, I’m not your mother.

Al is.


4 Responses to An inconvienient comparison.

  1. krm says:

    Walk the walk or talk the talk? Apparently talking is enough.

  2. Murray says:

    Why would he walk when there are private jets to travel in?

  3. ZenTiger says:

    It’s not what you consume, but how much tax you charge for consuming it.

    Conveniently, Al offsets his carbon usage by paying money into a company that invests in Green ideas.

    Thus, he is “off the hook” and his conscience (such as it may be) is clear.

    Inconveniently, he owns the company he “donates” money to. I wonder if the dividends the company declares equals the money he “invests”?

  4. krm says:

    Murrray – according to the talk, he should be walking – in shoes made solely from organically raised hemp fibers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: