Comments on: Gore, hypocrisy and the “politics of me” http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/ The blog of the mystery writer, screenwriter and CEO of Pajamas Media Thu, 16 Feb 2012 05:54:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Neo http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85446 Neo Sun, 04 Mar 2007 20:09:07 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85446 <i> And here a new idea for a <a href="http://environment.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn11287&feedId=online-news_rss20" rel="nofollow">welcome counter-balance to global warming</a> : regional nuclear war. Seems the climate models used for determining "Global Warming" can predict the level of "nuclear winter" from a nuclear exchange. Looks like it might be possible to nuke the hell out Iran and solve "Global Warming" simultaneously. Who knew?</i> This sounds like the initial idea for a (TV) movie. Imagine a lottery to see which country or state gets "nuked" as a sacrifice to Global Warming. And here a new idea for a welcome counter-balance to global warming
: regional nuclear war.

Seems the climate models used for determining “Global Warming” can predict the level of “nuclear winter” from a nuclear exchange.

Looks like it might be possible to nuke the hell out Iran and solve “Global Warming” simultaneously. Who knew?

This sounds like the initial idea for a (TV) movie. Imagine a lottery to see which country or state gets “nuked” as a sacrifice to Global Warming.

]]> By: pst314 http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85445 pst314 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 15:10:38 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85445 Given Gore's penchant for sanctimony, demagoguery and bullying, he deserves all the mockery that can be thrown at him. Nontheless, I have no problem with emissions trading per se, as it uses the free market to reduce pollution in a more efficient way. Given Gore’s penchant for sanctimony, demagoguery and bullying, he deserves all the mockery that can be thrown at him.

Nontheless, I have no problem with emissions trading per se, as it uses the free market to reduce pollution in a more efficient way.

]]> By: Buddy Larsen http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85444 Buddy Larsen Thu, 01 Mar 2007 22:47:52 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85444 "Memo: Thurs, flew NY to California, took change out of left pocket and put in right pocket, now clear for press questions" “Memo: Thurs, flew NY to California, took change out of left pocket and put in right pocket, now clear for press questions”

]]> By: Buddy Larsen http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85443 Buddy Larsen Thu, 01 Mar 2007 22:42:21 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85443 So Al buys his credits from <i>himself</i> ? I like that notion--"the health hazards of not going nuclear". So Al buys his credits from himself ?

I like that notion–”the health hazards of not going nuclear”.

]]> By: Jonathan Bailey http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85442 Jonathan Bailey Thu, 01 Mar 2007 22:38:16 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85442 A few people here have asked where Big Al is buying his carbon off-sets. It seems he's acutally buying them from himself: http://www.ecotality.com/blog/?p=350. He is the co-founder and current chairman of the company. He isn't buying offsets, he's buying stock. A few people here have asked where Big Al is buying his carbon off-sets. It seems he’s acutally buying them from himself: http://www.ecotality.com/blog/?p=350. He is the co-founder and current chairman of the company. He isn’t buying offsets, he’s buying stock.

]]> By: fred http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85441 fred Thu, 01 Mar 2007 20:26:49 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85441 More Gore hypocrisy via today's Best of the Web, first posting: http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110009730 which reports that Al Gore buys his carbon offsets via a company -- Generation Investment Management -- of which he is Chairman. The other interesting item of the day is the report that, according to SEC filings, during the fourth quarter of 2006, the Soros Fund purchased 1.9 million shares of (drum roll) Halliburton. More Gore hypocrisy via today’s Best of the Web, first posting:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110009730

which reports that Al Gore buys his carbon offsets via a company — Generation Investment Management — of which he is Chairman.

The other interesting item of the day is the report that, according to SEC filings, during the fourth quarter of 2006, the Soros Fund purchased 1.9 million shares of (drum roll) Halliburton.

]]> By: Bostonian http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85440 Bostonian Thu, 01 Mar 2007 20:05:57 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85440 In the interests of arming people with facts, I refer all to the wikipedia article on radioactive decay: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay See the last paragraph in the "decay timing" section: "This relationship between the half-life and the decay constant shows that highly radioactive substances are quickly spent, while those that radiate weakly endure longer." In the interests of arming people with facts, I refer all to the wikipedia article on radioactive decay: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay

See the last paragraph in the “decay timing” section: “This relationship between the half-life and the decay constant shows that highly radioactive substances are quickly spent, while those that radiate weakly endure longer.”

]]> By: Bostonian http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85439 Bostonian Thu, 01 Mar 2007 19:55:09 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85439 No, you should not be careless with any of these radioactive substances. I bring up the shielding issue because radiation was turned into a bogeyman where the public no longer has any true grasp of what's involved, no grasp of any of the trade-offs. I see others here have brought up the point of volume--the incredibly (comparatively) tiny amount of radioactive waste produced by nuclear plants. This point should also be factored into issues of containment. Again this is something the public has no clue of. Discussion was effectively shut down for so many years. And how many people realize that coal waste is radioactive (at a low level, to be sure)? How many people have an idea of the volume of THAT waste? When CA refused to use its nukes and instead bought power from out-of-state coal plants, how many people were aware of the adverse net environmental effect?! *** Plutonium was for a while described as the "most toxic substance known to man." The late Petr Beckmann had a standing challenge that he would ingest an amount plutonium if someone else would ingest an equal amount by weight of any poison. Funnily, nobody took him up on it. He is also the author of a wonderful book called the Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear. I really miss that guy. No, you should not be careless with any of these radioactive substances.

I bring up the shielding issue because radiation was turned into a bogeyman where the public no longer has any true grasp of what’s involved, no grasp of any of the trade-offs.

I see others here have brought up the point of volume–the incredibly (comparatively) tiny amount of radioactive waste produced by nuclear plants. This point should also be factored into issues of containment. Again this is something the public has no clue of. Discussion was effectively shut down for so many years.

And how many people realize that coal waste is radioactive (at a low level, to be sure)? How many people have an idea of the volume of THAT waste? When CA refused to use its nukes and instead bought power from out-of-state coal plants, how many people were aware of the adverse net environmental effect?!

***
Plutonium was for a while described as the “most toxic substance known to man.” The late Petr Beckmann had a standing challenge that he would ingest an amount plutonium if someone else would ingest an equal amount by weight of any poison. Funnily, nobody took him up on it.

He is also the author of a wonderful book called the Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear.

I really miss that guy.

]]> By: Always right http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85438 Always right Thu, 01 Mar 2007 18:22:46 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85438 Not just the physical shielding should be considered. It depends on how well you can "isolate" the waste. In other words, nothing is ever 100% proof. Once the radioactives get incorporated into biological systems (i.e., taken up by plants, food chain, etc.) the long half-life also come into play. Having said that, the benefits still outweighs the risk, imo. Not just the physical shielding should be considered. It depends on how well you can “isolate” the waste. In other words, nothing is ever 100% proof.

Once the radioactives get incorporated into biological systems (i.e., taken up by plants, food chain, etc.) the long half-life also come into play.

Having said that, the benefits still outweighs the risk, imo.

]]> By: ElMondo http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85437 ElMondo Thu, 01 Mar 2007 04:27:01 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/02/26/gore-hypocrisy-and-the-politics-of-me/#comment-85437 Buddy, I agree with you on that. The cost/benefit ratio does need a serious airing. Rational folks would find that, despite the serious costs, there are some very weighty benefits. Bostonian- Yes, that's true. It doesn't take much shielding; back in the 50's Queen Elizabeth was supposedly handed a chunk in a plastic bag in order to show her how warm it was, and to the best of everyone's knowledge (assuming the story is true) she's suffered no ill effects. But, labs everywhere do keep bringing up the inhalation danger, and I consistently see it listed as an issue in literature. On this, I'm trusting the experts caution about it's danger. So you're right about the blocking of alpha particles, but researchers still handle the stuff carefully. Buddy, I agree with you on that. The cost/benefit ratio does need a serious airing. Rational folks would find that, despite the serious costs, there are some very weighty benefits.

Bostonian-

Yes, that’s true. It doesn’t take much shielding; back in the 50′s Queen Elizabeth was supposedly handed a chunk in a plastic bag in order to show her how warm it was, and to the best of everyone’s knowledge (assuming the story is true) she’s suffered no ill effects. But, labs everywhere do keep bringing up the inhalation danger, and I consistently see it listed as an issue in literature. On this, I’m trusting the experts caution about it’s danger. So you’re right about the blocking of alpha particles, but researchers still handle the stuff carefully.

]]>