The Edwards house. It's the greenwash stupid.

[Porcupine]

Once again, the reason the Edwards house matters is that it will be up to the Democratic party to spearhead Climate Change mitigation projects. This will require that every single american make significant changes in the way we live. In order to do that our leadership has to make these changes first as they will do it without a fraction of the personal sacrifice as the rest of us.

http://blog.johnedwards.com/
The Edwards house is excessively large and the Edwards have attempted a lame greenwash campaign to pretend they are going green. They're not and this is why.......

The Edwards claim they are changing to compact fluorescents as their incandescents burn out.

1)For a house that size the lights are changed by staff not family. The Edwards would have realized significant cash savings as well as carbon offsets by having a lighting designer go through and change out all lighting with the exception of dining and dressing areas to CFLs ASAP. Think of technicians with ladders and up to 20 recessed lighting cans in the living room alone. Just the savings in staff time to change spent bulbs would be worth the whole changeover cost. The carbon offset would fill several rail cars with coal.

The Edwards claim that they are set up to convert to geo-exchange heating and cooling "soon."

2) The pictures shown of the house show a new compound with unfinished landscaping. Due to the extensive digging required for geo-exchange units required to serve that volume it should be installed before landscaping. The cost of the system required is trivial in comparison to the cost of the buildings. The systems are off the shelf. They are cash-flow positive including finance costs. Exactly what are the Edwards waiting for?

The Edwards claim they have a solar thermal system for hot water.

3) In the pictures I've seen there is a very large roof area without solar PV panels and no ground-level panels near the house. Given the size of the compound ground level panels are reasonable and cost effective as space is not restricted. Again these are cash-flow positive including finance to somebody with the Edwards assets. The solar thermal panels (not visible) are a trivial add-on probably not enough to heat the pool, a greenwash. Again, these are off-the-shelf systems the Edwards can surely afford; what's the wait?

4) Points to the Edwards for choosing light colored roofing. That will save them some $$ on cooling.

The Edwards claim they have switched to driving hybrid vehicles.

5) The Edwards are moving into a new-looking house with no apparent neighbors. The two major contributors to GHG emissions in the US are transport and housing. I give them an F on housing.

Due to their isolated location they and the required staff (kitchen, housekeeping, landscaping, maintenance, pool, security and executive assistants) for such a large place will make multiple automobile trips daily. Are they buying hybrids for the whole staff? Could they possibly be providing housing nearby for their staff?

Even if every US driver had a hybrid automobile tomorrow GHG emissions would still climb primarily due to the large transport distances required by distributed suburban communities. Nothing could possibly keep this "house" from becoming an environmental disaster. Yet they try to convince us they are "Green" by claiming to change a few light-bulbs. Nice try.

All in all the Edwards house reflects the hypocrisy of the political classes on energy issues. I don't just give the Edwards an F, I think the whole Congress should share the grade also.

[xchrom]

1. then be sure you don't vote to show your disgust.

[donheld]

2. Some of you really have nothing better to do?

Where do the other candidates live, Teepees? :shrug:

[liberal N proud]

3. Why don't you worry about the houses that homeless DON'T live in

And spend a little less time deriding those who have achieved the American Dream.

[RiverStone]

48. I don't get it???

Rich or poor - JE's house or anyone else on this one great planet earth -it's all relevant.

I thought DU was a board filled with folks who have environmental ethics? Maybe not? Forget about John's house in particular; who ever we are where ever we live - our actions impact Global Warming.

As far as other people's business...what we do both individually and collectively as a society does impact this one great earth. This includes building either commercial or residential homes that are as energy wise as possible. I wish it were not true, but for my children's generation and their kids after that - what we ALL do today (politician or not) does impact us all.

per Al Gore:

www.climatecrisis.net /

[Kagemusha]

4. Ultimately it comes down to this: you know way more than the Edwards about this

You're taking this as a conspiracy against nature because you think like, everyone knows all this, and if they don't, it's their bloody fault, anyway. If despite all this ignorance, that house really is Energy Star compliant, Energy Star must be a very forgiving standard compared to yours. If this is so, that's fine; you're holding the Edwards to an exceptionally stringent standard. The fact most people don't have the knowledge or the money to live up to that standard, and the Edwards seem to have much more of the money than the knowledge, may not be so damning to other people, but it is to you. It's a matter of point of view.

It just seems more accurate to say they're trying to convince themselves and haven't done all the thought and calculations you have. They behaved too normally for that. You're taking it as a personal offense to your intelligence.

I'm not questioning your passion but, it does smack of a vengeful, rhetorical slap-down than raising the level of conversation. And it must be the 80th thread by now...

[Porcupine]

8. Edwards doesn't have an energy consultant on staff? Why not?

It's not like we go to war over this shit or anything. A few phone calls to the local university's energy conservation club would have fixed this.

Being ignorant is really no longer an excuse.

[Kagemusha]

10. I, have absolutely no idea what his staff consists of.

Nor do I have any idea if they'd blindly trust such a conservation club when hard money's involved. At least your opinion's crystal clear: doesn't matter, no excuse to you. As I said, that's fine with me.

For whatever reason, Edwards did not treat his own house as a political issue. Perhaps he should have.

[Porcupine]

12. A President should be prepared.

Are there any issues that trump energy right now? Even the war is largely an energy issue.

[Kagemusha]

24. I think you're off the reservation with that assertion.

Me, I think it's a little naive to make your campaign about poverty and build a house like this, green or not green, but naive's better than just plain callous any day.

[Usrename]

111. Right, he's clueless so that qualifies him to lead the free world.

Doesn't seem to be working out that well with the idiot we have now.

[marions ghost]

37. over-reaction is yours

the OP has a legitimate point. The house that John built is a political faux pas--a wasted opportunity to really make a difference. The Edwards' have the intelligence, access to consultants and money. If THEY don't get it re. their own impact, are they going to be able to make a difference in the area of energy and resources re. the rest of the country? The environmental issues are a very legitimate concern and this is an opportunity for people to express that.

Also, the image of lavish overconsumption is unfortunate when you are working to bring attention to the plight of the poor in this country. Houses are a symbol that everyone can understand. It's no wonder that people are reacting on a visceral level. How can you speak of "Two Americas" when you call this a house for 4? Many people are not going to buy that it's also a conference center for a "home business"-- although that is obviously what it is. Sure the swiftboaters are going to attack on this. I just wonder why JE would risk that.

John Edwards needs to know how members of his own constituency feel about this and he needs to address it. I am writing him and I hope others will too. It is not a small matter. I have confidence that he can and will address it.

[guruoo]

87. IMHO, this 'issue' will either burn out, or backfire n/t

[tomp]

124. it might take 80 threads for someone to get the point.

or perhaps more. be sure to check in for 81.

[StClone]

5. Zinc mines anyone?

Fake Purple Hearts and Wounds anyone?
GRAWWWWhh!!! Call of excitement anyone?

[Apollo11]

6. Wealthy people consume and pollute more than average

That's just a fact, not something that only applies to John and Elizabeth Edwards.

Even your average (not rich) American family is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than 2 average European families or about 20 average Chinese families. These are my rough estimates (not exact figures) but Americans drive longer distances in larger cars, use more lighting, watch bigger TVs and they use more heating and A/C than any other country in the world (as far as I know).

Hillary Clinton, Wes Clark, Barack Obama ... even Al Gore ... they all use energy. They all employ staff who travel around and stuff. As far as I know - none of them has yet reached the goal of "zero emissions".

Buying 10 Hybrid cars for your staff is not the greenest thing you can do. It costs a lot of energy and other resources to manufacture a new car. Evan a Hybrid uses fuel and emits CO2. So maybe the greenest car is to keep driving around in an older vehicle - but reduce the number of miles you drive each month? (Walk, bike, bus, train, etc.)

So to single out John Edwards for special criticism on this issue is unfair. Even though I don't agree with his trying to link his own Presidential campaign with the wider movement to raise public awareness about climate and energy issues. In contrast, Al Gore's site www.climatecrisis.net is non-partisan and is not linked to any site promoting an individual candidate in a particular election race.

It's an unfortunate fact of American politics that the only people who can even consider running for President are all multi-millionaires. I don't like it and I agree we should be working to change it but that's where we are right now and it's not the fault of any one individual. So if we blame John Edwards we risk missing out on seeing the bigger picture.

[Porcupine]

11. Oh. That makes it ok then?

It's the lame effort to claim green cred. while so obviously screwing the planet that pisses me off. Energy Star compliant is a 15 year old standard (older?) that is a joke compared to the scope of the climate crisis.

So when the next US city is destroyed by a mega-hurricane we should just say "Sorry, we insulated, too bad you're not rich" to the survivors? We have to make a better effort.

[wakeme2008]

7. Stupid post and

you now make my ignore list :grr:

[Porcupine]

9. It's a privilege.

edit: appease the spelling gods.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Porcupine]

23. Did you read my OP? Nope.

Here's a clue. I'm a commited environmentalist. I would like our leaders to do something about climate change that is more than bullshit greenwash.

If you were paying attention this winter you might realize it's a bit of a problem. Really. So do a search and look at my post record. I'll wait.....


Yep, I'm an environmental gadfly arent' I. I'm not attacking Edwards for political gain. I just want some attention to energy issues that isnt' bullshit.

Btw- Hillary isn't even in my top five.

[Dover]

26. This post is against DU rules. You are essentially calling a fellow DUer a troll

That also might be said just as easily about those who defend Edward's behavior. So it comes down to name-calling rather than debate or discussion.

[Skidmore]

15. What's a "privilige?"

[femrap]

97. I'm with you Porcupine....

100%. Our leaders have to get on board with this issue. And you're right about the Energy Star rating.

Thanks.

[Skidmore]

14. I want to know if you are this preoccupied with the rest of the wealthy?

Do you have your nose under Trump's curtains? How about Poppy and Bar? Can you tell me how many lightbulbs Paris Hilton turns on each night?

Right issue, wrong argument. Truth is that ALL people pollute and I would venture to say that the greatest amount of pollution in our nation can be attributed to corporations and businesses. Ever look at the number of lights on a car lot or at a mall?

[stanwyck]

127. No. The knives are only out for Edwards, just

like they were for another self-made man, Clinton. Both Edwards and Clinton come from lower middle-class families and were able to succeed through their intellect and hard work. We used to admire men like Edwards and Clinton in our country. Now, we get boy-kings who, as Molly Ivins said (co-opted recently by Huckabee) were born on third base and think they hit a triple. Everyone expects those boy-kings to cash in -- get baseball teams handed to them by Daddy's friends. Escape combat through avoiding their National Guard duty.
But Edwards and Clinton? How dare they make money. And build...houses.
I understand Edwards is being held to a different standard because he's a Dem. -- and we're supposed to be better. (and we are!).
But I admire people like Edwards and Clinton so much more than the annointed rich kids who continue to fail up.

[Hav]

16. .

Oh, I'm so outraged, too!!!!

[Mass]

17. Another attempt that comes short.

Somehow, I guess they got the criticism that the house has a huge environment footprint, so they trying to convey the idea they care. But, they come short miserably.

1/ If they cared, they would have made sure the contractors used the right types of bulbs, they did not.

2/ If they cared, they would not have built a house in the middle of a forest, where it is clear from the photo they had to cut a lot of trees,

+ All you said.

This said, it is probably that other pols have houses that are not environmentally friendly, but, at least, they do not waste energy trying to tell us the opposite.

If you are Edwards's friends, tell them to stop thinking we are idiots. Edwards has a wonderful theme: fighting against poverty. Rather than trying to be everything to everybody (one of the reasons he falls short), he should focus on offering concrete measures to just do that. And, if you care about the environment and the energy, understand that a few light bulbs is not what is going to change minds one way or the other.

[MannyGoldstein]

18. How Dare You Hold The Rich to the Same Standards As Everyone Else? K&R

Don't you realize that The Rich are different? God has given them a special dispensation to do whatever they please - and, if they call themselves a "Democrat", then you may not criticize them?

[Skidmore]

21. What a stupid assed argument.

Do you hold all people to this "standard" that you are haranguing on? Now let's get real about it? How much derision do you heap on your neighbors or the people in your community who violate these "standards?" If you approached me in my community with this sanctimonious inyouface crap, I'd tell you how to go and how fast you could get there. Then I would return to the privacy of my home and flip on my CFL as I walked in.

[MannyGoldstein]

25. At Least It's An Argument - Not Nonsensical Bluster

Yes, I hold all people to this standard: if they are phonies that do not practice what they claim to favor, I do not elect them to represent me.

What's your problem with that?

P.S. - "stupid assed" in your subject should be hyphenated.

[Porcupine]

28. In my neighborhood....

I helped build a co-housing community that has small townhouses with common walls to save energy. The landscaping uses large amounts of native plants to save water. I, myself, designed the community kitchen where shared meals for the whole community are held weekly. I, myself, dug up the hardpan left by construction and planted the first community garden. I helped plant the community fruit trees that provide fruit, shade and habitat for birds.

This project also has a shared pool for the 30 houses rather than the 10-15 pools that would have been the norm in the neighborhood. It also has solar PV panels to supply energy for the common facilities. Currently my mother, my ex-wife and kids, and my godmother live there. It's called "Valley Oaks Village" in Chico CA. Google it.

For the last several years I've worked as a maintenance manager for rental properties. I changed the policy of the maintenance staff so that we started installing CFL bulbs in every light fixture we changed out in order to save money for tenants and property owners. Where possible we also upgraded toilets, shower heads, water heaters, insulation and windows. Happy tenants pay their rent on time.

People are usually happy to make these changes once they realize that they will save them money within 2 year time spans. I don't have to harraunge anybody. Nobody has to read my posts.

Is that enough? I'm still at it.

[ShaneGR]

19. What about the toilets? too much water??

When should they start their yoga classes? Is 2pm too soon?

[maxsolomon]

79. what's the GPM? dual flush? waterless urinals for the men?

yoga should be held after sunrise, before sundown, in a room with windows, when there is sunlight available.

i think about this shit all day long. i'm LEED accredited professional architect. the Edwards should have hired one.

[Jim Sagle]

20. Actually it;'s the green washouts on DU, stupid.

They should be banned.

[Porcupine]

30. ban enviros? why not minorities? Enjoy your echo do you?

We all want to make DU an echo chamber when somebody disagrees with us. It would be so much fun then wouldn't it?

Please repost with a real arguement.

[BushOut06]

22. Please post pics of your house

And it damned well better be a fucking hovel. Unless, of course, you are willing to provide us with a clear and defined limit on how big a house can be, how much money one can spend on a house. And if you're willing to bash every other rich Democrat and liberal for their lifestyle.

[Porcupine]

29. I'm not running for president am I?

It's an 800 sq. ft duplex apartment. Is that small enough for you? You want a picture of my dream house: from here:http://tinyurl.com/2fkqb6

Yep, that's a dirt wall house with a dirt roof. But I couldn't afford the land or the permits right now. It should outlast Edwards house by several hundred years.

[BushOut06]

38. Okay, fine - but just so we're clear...

Please let us know what is and what isn't an acceptable size for a house. Because, if we're going to scrutinize Edwards, it's only fair that we scrutinize everyone else.

[Rosemary2205]

34. He's been there done that already

"800 sq. ft Duplex. 1 adult 2 kids.
2 bedrooms, 1 bath. "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=59410&mesg_id=59909

[SaveOurDemocracy]

27. bogus

[DainBramaged]

31. I wonder why the Reich wing of the Buh party are perpetuating this hogwash

There are more important fucking things to worry about than Edward's house.

Get over it.

[Hun Joro]

50. There are no more important things to worry about than the environment.

[DainBramaged]

57. BULLSHIT, thousands of our troops and innocent civilians in Iraq

are the priority. Trying to convince Edwards to green up his mansion doesn't take precedence over their lives.

By the way, how did Nader work out for you guys? His run for the White House contributed so much to the environmental cause.:sarcasm:

[Hun Joro]

62. I guess you can only focus on one thing at a time.

:eyes:

[DainBramaged]

72. Yes, and it includes ignoring you.

This hammering by pretenders here over Edwards' house is pure bullshit. I don't believe for one fucking minute that his house should be an issue. Do what YOU can to make your carbon foot print smaller and stop being assholes. Until we have a DEMOCRAT in the White House, all your efforts are crap.

[Hun Joro]

74. So my stating an opionion which differs from yours is being an asshole.

I don't understand why you're so angry. Ignore me, if it makes you happy. So far you haven't been doing a very good job of it. :shrug:

[XemaSab]

89. That's a poor attitude.

Whether there is a Democrat or a Republican in the White House, the world is still getting warmer and we're still beholden to the Saudis, who attacked us on September 11th. While the president can change some things, only the will of the people can change how much energy we use.

[DainBramaged]

113. No it's not THIS IS A NON STORY

I posted the criticism by the WAPO ombudsman about this story. IT WAS A RIGHT WING HIT PIECE. It deserves to be buried. You want to talk about pollution, let's start by stopping China from burning a hole in the ozone with their coal fired factories, or the processing of oil sands in Canada, THOSE are REAL environmental problems,, not the size of Edwards house.

[NickB79]

69. The irony is completey lost on you, isn't it?

Those troops are dying over there because we DON'T care enough about the environment to get off our oil addiction and drive vehicles that either use far less of the stuff or build commuter-friendly cities that negate the need for most cars. Yes, I am calling the war in Iraq a war to seize oil reserves.

Either solve or mitigate the environmental crisis that is fossil fuel useage, or you will be seeing a whole lot more US troops die in resource wars in the 21st century.

[DainBramaged]

73. Irony my wrinkled old ass, work to defeat the Republics of the Buh mis-administration

instead of hammering one of our presidential candidates (who you probably don't support anyway).

Make your fucking house green and show us proof then you can jump on the soap box and hammer whomever you want.


And with no profile you get ignore too. If you aren't proud enough to post your information, I ain't going to listen to you.

[LibraLiz1973]

108. You might want to look into that anger problem

Your being totally obnoxious

[DainBramaged]

112. Anger is what keeps us from bneing trampled by the trolls

who want this stupid story to live forever. And I don't care if you think it's a problem, this is another brick in my ignore wall.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003538622

[XemaSab]

88. Why do you think we are over in the middle east?

Here's a hint: it isn't to spread democracy.

We're over there to take their oil, so we can continue our wasteful so-called "standard of living."

I would like nothing better than to tell the Saudis to go f*** themselves, but in order to do that every American must make a real effort to conserve energy.

[DainBramaged]

114. THE SIZE OF EDWARDS HOUSE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR ARGUMENT

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003538622

[XemaSab]

117. That's an article about a totally different house of Edwards'

:shrug:

[femrap]

99. Connect the dots....

The war in Iraq is over OIL....you know, that stuff we use to HEAT/COOL BIG HOUSES.

[DainBramaged]

115. we knew this in 2003 AND i WROTE AN ESSAY ABOUT IT.

This thread has NOTHING to do with the environmental arguments, but about Edwards house, period, and you just don't get it. Piss on this thread I'm done with it.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003538622

[femrap]

126. OK, I get it....it's the Media's fault.

Right? Edwards' mcmansion has nothing to do with environmental concern or setting an example for the nation. It's the media's fault for reporting it.

If you don't see the connection, maybe you need glasses.

[DainBramaged]

129. Aw crap, get off of Edward's ass, why not bitch about Limbaugh or Cheney

Let's just keep eating our own. YOU are the one who doesn't get it. Oh, and how green is your house? How did Ralphie work out for us in 2000? And what executive powers did Guh just sign in by executive order to fuck with the EPA?

Get real, wake up.

[femrap]

130. gcy. nt.

[LanternWaste]

32. What is the precise and relevant sq. footage...

What is the precise and relevant sq. footage of house we can in good conscience live in?

What is the precise and relevant amount of wattage a family of five may use per year to stand in good conscience?

What are the answers based on?

[marions ghost]

39. questions

we all will be asking in coming years. And it won't necessarily be a matter of conscience then.

[Porcupine]

51. Read the OP. It's not about sq. footage.

It's about leadership on a crisis issue. It's about making real efforts instead of BS ones.

[LanternWaste]

66. think the question still stands as valid...

Well, as the OP made specific mention of his and his families' house, I think the question still stands as valid in regards to the topic-- what's the amount of sq. footage and wattage Edwards may use in good conscience to maintain an effective apperance of leadership on the issue? On what are the answers based?

He obviously hasn't met these standards yet and I'm simply wondering what the standards are? Do the standards apply to everyone? If so, are they applied as a percentage of income/energy usage or a base and absolute figure?

These are not tangential or indirect point... they are part and parcel of the overarching concern that is being raised.

[NickB79]

71. There are no hard guidelines

But my personal guideline has been 400 sq. ft per family member. So, a family of 5 should be fine in a 2000 sq. ft home, at least in my experience. My apartment is under 800 sq. ft., and my girlfriend and I have no problems with it, other than it needs more windows. My parent's house was less than 2000 sq. ft. and there were five of us. The key is that the floorplans for both were very open and gave the illusion of more space than really existed. My best friend's house, on the other hand, has a split-level entryway, numerous dividing walls, weird angles that make the place feel small and confined.

As for wattage, no idea. Again, our apartment currently uses less than 300 kwH per month even in summer when the AC is running some of the time. We use all CFL bulbs, but I leave a few on 12 hrs a day to provide supplemental light for my houseplants, and I play a lot of video games so I'm sure that uses up more electricity than I should be.

[XemaSab]

90. I dunno that it can be a hard and fast number...

I would say 600 sf for the first person, with another 300 for the second one, and so on.

But 7500 square feet per person is WAY TOO MUCH.

[DrRang]

33. Good for you, Porcupine!

I'm totally in agreement, and I've spent the biggest chunk of my working life designing and writing about sustainable housing. The point is not that John and Elizabeth Edwards own that house. The point is the utter bullshit wastefulness of much so called "green building" used to market wasteful, overly elaborate, El Bloato Grande houses.

Efficiency is not the same thing as conservation. A 6,000 square foot house that meets Energy Star or other efficiency requirements may still be a wasteful monster. Its total embodied energy has to take into account in the land disrupted to build it, the resources used to manufacture it, the energy burned to run it, and the power used to get to it. (I rant on about this at length in our book "Adobe Houses for Today.")

For that matter, Bush's new house on the "ranch" is said to be a marvel of sustainable technology. That doesn't make him a dedicated environmentalist any more than Edwards' new house makes him a land raper. Monster-sized "green houses" in the middle of nowhere are a bogus sales tool that dominate home marketing today, the same old Amerkin idea that yes, you and your family deserve to have everything with no downside.

[marions ghost]

42. well said

I'm amazed that so many people here at DU put down those who are bringing up the environmental (not to mention the 2 Americas) angle of this issue. When a person like JE builds a house, it does reflect on them. Obviously they had the freedom and resources to build anything they wanted. Reaction is natural and warranted. But the fact that such over-building and consumerism is the norm, is the real issue here.

Unless they've really made it a point to study the environmental impact of over-development, not many people understand what it really does to a place. Real estate people and developers are in the drivers seat. In most communities in America, there are no effective controls, no brakes. So people get the idea that it's all OK and therefore excusable. In actual fact, it's a disaster. Everyone will suffer eventually, from the excessive practices of today. I deal with a lot of biologists, marine scientists, medical people--THEY know. People just don't want to hear about it. Too scary.

Part of this is disappointment in our candidate's choices but the big picture is the realization that everything we do on the face of the planet has an impact. Everything.

[JudyM]

55. I agree completely. Edwards had the opportunity to advance sustainability

by designing/building to incorporate the latest advances in energy and materials - not all of us have the $ resources to do this. But it obviously was not of major importance to him/them. Building a home of enormous proportion is certainly his right but if he had to do it he could've done it more sustainably. Light bulbs? Puhleeze.

[EVDebs]

35. Hyannisport 'compound'...Hickory Hill...or Crawford compound and Key Biscayne nt

[Porcupine]

56. Show me where they greenwashed these.....

and I'll take them apart too. If you want to look at modest Dennis Kucinich's house is modest. I grew up in a bigger house. It's about what we CAN do with available resources.

If we are going to ask people to make major changes in their lives to modify climate change we have to take leadership. Did you forget your December temps? Translate that into summer temperature increases and we have a major problem.

[meow mix]

36. excellent points ive been trying to make myself, ty.

greenwash lol. pretty sad this is the best he can do, and then ask liberals to make him leader.

[The Backlash Cometh]

40. What the freepers are thinking...

"First, the liberals came after John Edwards..."

I don't disagree that there are many energy saving options that we should begin to use, but I suggest you don't lynch the man for his choices. Instead, find a way to encourage change without beating people over the head, because you will create unnecessary resistance if you come in strong.

[crispini]

41. "It's the ENVIRONMENT, stupid."

Ten years to make viable climate change happen or WE ARE TOAST AS A SPECIES. What part of this do people not get?

I will vote for the primary candidate that shows they get that.

Well done. K&R.

[leftofthedial]

43. thanks

:thumbsup:

[Norquist Nemesis]

44. Oh for pity's sake!

Is this race going to be another round of picking to the Nth degree with crapola like this? If a Con had an estate that was 100% solar and wind powered, constructed with 100% green materials like bamboo, filled with refurbished furnishings from Good Will and accomplished the mowing with a pedal driven mower...I wouldn't give a flying fuck and still wouldn't vote for them! Why? Because, overall, the Con is going to put forth an agenda that goes against the majority of things I believe in!

I still haven't made up my mind who I will support on the Democratic ticket. By the time I get to cast my ballot it's going to already be decided, and that's exactly why crap like this criticism on steroids over Edwards (and other candidate from the Democratic field) is so frustrating!

Give it a couple of weeks and the same hyped up OMG!!! will be headlined on Drudge working its way through the network of the RW echo chamber.

:banghead:

[jgraz]

45. Excellent, thoughtful post

I'm not sure where I personally come out on this whole house thing. On the one hand, it's stupid enough that I can't resist making my own smartass posts about it. On the other hand, I don't see how talking about the issue in an intelligent manner can be a problem for anyone.

What I DO have a problem with is the hordes of DUers telling their fellow posters to sit down and shut up -- that some subjects are off-limits unless approved by them. This is fundamentally undemocratic and a helluva lot more offensive than some big house.

To the attackers on this thread: what the hell is your problem with talking about issues like this? Why is it so inappropriate for someone to point out that excessive consumption is a problem and that we SHOULD be making it an issue in the 2008 campaign? What is it that is causing your knee-jerk reaction to attack those who merely ask the question?

Porcupine has been kind enough to post some new information on the topic, information that I find very interesting. If more people thought about and advocated for these kinds of considerations, it's very likely that the Edwards WOULD be building in a much more environmentally sensitive manner.

So enough with the attacks. At this point, we all have a pretty good idea how you feel. If you can't step up and participate in the discussion, then I suggest you simply stay quiet and let the adults have the floor.

[crispini]

46. Honestly, I think this whole issue makes people very insecure.

That's where I think the attackers are coming from, a lot of them.

First, because the whole issue of climate change is still an uncomfortable one for many people. The idea that if we don't fix this problem in 10 years, our whole species is royally fucked -- well, that's a hard one to take. AND, on top of that, people are very attached to their individual ways of life, both in an emotional sense: "I like my house," and in a practical sense: "I have to commute 15 miles a day one way to get to my job, and I have no other easy options available to me that I see."

So, people feel personally attacked because they are having a hard time coming to grips with the issue of the environment, and also because they are seeing themselves in the choices that Edwards has made.

Unfortunately, people need to do some soul-searching and think about this issue on a deeper level, or we may all wind up heads-in-the-sanding ourselves into extinction.

[TZ]

52. I know very well that global warming is important..

But can we at least worry about who is wasting what in what size house AFTER we get someone into power who is willing to change things?? This kind of nit picking crap has fractured the democrats for years (unlike some other political parties we welcome all sorts of diverse people and viewpoints). And what good is it to yell and scream about this and have a very divisive primary and then have so damaged our candidate that we have no chance agaisnt the Repuke..Come on people. :dem:

[crispini]

61. I don't see it as nitpicking at all.

I see it as a possible indication of whether or not Edwards "gets it."

We will all pull together after the primary, as we always do, and anyway, nobody outside the internet gives a rat's ass about this whole Edwards' House debate. This argument here on DU is not damaging Edwards in any way with the general public should he become a nominee.

[TZ]

64. oh trust me they do..

I am neither pro nor anti edwards but they will pick it up and use it to make him a "flip-flopper" type like they did to Kerry. In my mind I try not to delve too deeply into a candidate's personal life (see Bill Clinton) instead what he can do as a politician. In the end should he get the nomination the steps he could take (with the dems in congress obviously) will more than make up for whatever sins you feel he has committed with his house. To some extent alot of these guys don't practice what they preach. The only ones who do, tend not to win elections (nadar was the most honest but I didn't vote for him). As much good as Clinton did, he was like most, a bit of a hypocite with things but he accomplished a lot of good so I ignore the rest. It may be the same with Edwards. No doubt if he gets the nomination he will "see the light" on the house thing but like I said I worry about other things here. Personally in terms of green issues don't you think anything is better than what we have now?

[crispini]

70. Anything is better than what we have, yes, but

we are going to have to slam the lever way over to the left to compensate for the damage we have already done. I want someone who gets that. Phoo, if Al Gore doesn't run, I don't know WHO I'm gonna support.

[femrap]

101. Clark?

But I do hope Gore throws his hat in the ring.

[XemaSab]

92. I think it's a reflection of whether he IS willing to change things.

A man who builds a house like this can't in good conscience turn around and tell Americans to put on a damn sweater like Carter did.

[marions ghost]

59. insightful

there is a psychological component to this debate--obviously it runs VERY deep, as evidenced by those on both sides.

[femrap]

100. And a lot of people have bought into

this matialistic culture. 'It's my money and if I want a big house/car/pool/boat/family, I'll have it.' They think it's their right. It's sad that so many have tied their self-esteem to what they own.

When the scarcities start and Mother Nature starts to kick our ass, it's not going to be pretty. I just hope these materialistic people don't get violent.

[fed-up]

47. Well said-3K dead & 150K US injured-600K Iraqis dead-all for OIL/ENERGY n/t

[zulchzulu]

49. The big questions are...what do they eat and bowel movement samples

I want quantifiable proof that the Edwards family ONLY eats certified organic, non-trans-fat free-range soy products where the soy was treated humanely during the cooking process. All soy products that are eaten by the family should be available on the campaign web site for further analysis.

Additionally, bowel movement samples of the family should be analyzed for content and be available in chemical breakdown spreadsheets for further analysis and comparative resources.

Gannt charts of daily bowel movement projections and ejections by the family should also be made available on the site. We should be able to compare and contrast what Mr. Edwards eats and digestively processes with his wife's digestive processes, for this could show some other possible comparative issues to further investigate. Timelines and time per eating session should also be available as downloadable Excel spreadsheets.

We need to get to the bottom of this!

:sarcasm:

[Porcupine]

54. Um, I'll stick to household energy use.

If you want to start your own thread I'll watch it with interest but I don't think I'll participate.

[zulchzulu]

60. Dude, what the Edwards house is or isn't is NONE of your business

I don't care if Edwards has a house that rivals Kennebunkport...it's not an issue...or it is if you're some kind of uber-purist that is hell-bent on trashing a candidate no matter what.

Edwards is not my candidate of choice, but picking on him because he's not slapping solar panels and geothermal units everywhere is at best silly.

I'm all for green technology, but I don't think it should be a reason to find fault in someone who doesn't use it.

[july302001]

120. ha ha ha

I got a real laugh out of this. However, I think that the services of an energy consultant are more appropriate in this case than the services of either a plumber (yuck!) or an M.D.

If you live in California, you can have your electricity use metered by time of day...more expensive at 4 pm in July when everyone runs the a/c and cheaper at 3 am.

Also, a basic allotment of electricity is charged a basic rate....but if you have a hot tub and run the a/c at 68 degrees in August...the electric use over and above the basic allotment is charged at a higher rate.

I think that's only fair.

And, no, SCE is not trying to invade their customers' privacy - just trying to avoid building power plants if they don't have to.

[LittleClarkie]

53. It won't make me not vote for him

I'd have to have a better reason than that.

[mnhtnbb]

58. The Edwards claim that they are set up to convert to geo-exchange heating and cooling "soon."

The compound is NOT finished. They have plans to build two more separate houses: one for Cate, and one for visiting family and friends.

It's possible that they are waiting for that construction to be completed
before digging for required geo-exchange units, isn't it?

[Porcupine]

67. Seriously? 2 more?

Hubris doesn't mean anything nowadays does it?

As for the geo-exchange question; generally these units are installed before you occupy the building so that the place can be heated. I assumed that the Edwards response was a form of "oh shit" with some ass covering following.

The environment WILL be a major issue in 2008. Australia is in serious trouble, the weather in the US is nuts and we still have 2 hurricane seasons to go. Considering that we will spend several BILLION dollars on the '08 elections a little environmental ass-covering on all sides is advisable.

[mnhtnbb]

76. According to Elizabeth in her book, "Saving Graces", there

are two more houses planned for the site (which probably also explains all the trees that are cleared)

[LibraLiz1973]

109. Oh JESUS

You've got to be fucking kidding me.....
2 more? The house for Cate I'll overlook.
But in a house the size they have now they need ANOTHER house for visitors?
HOLY. SHIT.


:banghead:

[Reterr]

63. k&r.nt

[Zenlitened]

65. Serious question: Do we know for sure that the house photographed/being discussed....

... actually belongs to the Edwards family?

[mnhtnbb]

77. Yes. from Chapel Hill.

[NickB79]

68. I really, really don't understand how people can keep debating this

Supporting the right of someone to build a 30,000 sq. ft. home, yet still claim to care about the environment.

If someone here tried to argue that they have the right to drive a huge Suburban or even a full-blown Hummer on their daily commute, they would be slapped down hard by almost everyone here. That would be the end of the debate, because we all know how wasteful and harmful to the planet it is to drive a vehicle that gets 10 mpg! Yet we still go on and on about how, dozens of posts on Edwards, if you have the money to afford something, you have the right to buy it?

[XemaSab]

94. Exactly

We're all in the boat together. :)

[DainBramaged]

75. For all of you lurkers trying to give this non-story legs, read this

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003538622

NEW YORK More criticism arose within The Washington Post on Sunday concerning the paper's recent front-page story about the sale of former Sen. John Edwards' local house.

The article by the Post's Lois Romano and John Solomon -- and its placement on the front page -- had earlier been criticized by another Post reporter in an online chat. Solomon, in his own online chat this week, defended it.

Recently hired as a politics reporter by the Post, he had been criticized by liberal bloggers repeatedly for previous stories about Sen. Harry Reid and other Democrats when he was still at The Associated Press.

Today, the Post ombudsman, Deborah Howell, wrote a column finding fault with two Post pieces, charging that even accurate stories "can be misleading."

Why aren't you folks spending the time and effort commenting on the Scooter Libby trial. THAT is more important than this non-story.

[omega minimo]

78. Thank you

So much happened in the past few days of enormous impact, it is astounding that this is so all-consuming.

The very issues/crimes/treasons that all the non-impeachment types ignore are highlighted by these events.

Are people's heads in the sand?

[JacksonWest]

80. My God.

Hate to kick it, but enough already. Edwards house is his house. His after tax income. Free country...ect.....

[mzmolly]

81. Would you mind doing a similar report on all the candidates, so we have a "purity" comparison

thanks. And, don't forget to include people who own multiple homes. Also, I'd like an analysis of the Kennedy compound, anyone? Lastly, would you mind sharing who measures up to your standards for President on this issue?

[marions ghost]

82. GOOD idea

I second that :)

[Quixote1818]

83. Many of the other candidates homes have been posted on DU

Most were around 4,000 sf or so. Hillary's is a very modest home as are Clark's and Gore's (if Gore runs). They were also all existing homes and 50,000 trees were not killed in the process of building them. (50,000 trees were cleared around Edwards house.)

[marions ghost]

85. thanks

I saw a couple of the pix. Yes, the Edwards complex makes the others seem modest anyway...despite their pricy neighborhoods.

Where are you getting this figure of 50,000 trees being cut down? I have a hard time believing that since I know this was the site of an old farm.

Still I have to agree that this extravagant complex does not quite send the right message. Edwards should just own up to it being a development, not a "house." And then there wouldn't be the problem of comparisons so much.

To expect candidates to be immune from assessments of their lifestyle is unrealistic, as much as I like Edwards. It's not the worst mistake he could have made, more like a missed opportunity to do something
more positive. We have to be critical of Dems as well as Repugs on the environmental questions. I realize he can still work for the poor from this location, but he has lost credibility with those concerned about energy and environmental issues. He'll have to fight his way back on that.

[fujiyama]

86. 50,000 trees?

I've seen that number tossed around several times. Where is a link for that?
I don't really have a problem with anyone discussing this, since it does touch on several important issues like environmental sustainability, global warming, consumerism, and personal sacrifice, but let's be honest here.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

104. I've read Al Gore has 3 homes ...

Do we add the square footage together, just to be fair? What about maintenance, operational and utility costs?? Just wondering, as it seems it should be all inclusive.


Since this has become the #1 DU 2008 Presidential Eligibility De-Terminator I think we need to investigate all the potential candidates homes. I want to know about all their residential holdings ... vacation homes, rental properties? What about other automobiles ... 2nd, 3rd, and 4th vehicles? (Gotta have a big one to trailer that boat to the lake) Motorized recreational vehicles ... jet skis, snowmobiles, ATV's? Do their gardeners hand-prune, or use gas or electric powered clippers? Goats or lawn tractors? And the ever important ... battery or electric powered vibrators? I don't think they are available gas powered, but ... I could be wrong.

[Laurab]

91. That's a really good idea

I want to see ALL their houses - if they own more than one, they all need to be included. I will then decide who I want to vote for - it's almost better than "a guy I'd like to sit down and have a beer with", like so many felt about pResident buhshit. Just a damn good way to choose your candidate!

[XemaSab]

95. Here are the 2004 Candidates' houses

Including W's houses. :P

http://www.boston.com/realestate/galleries/pres_res/1.html

Based on these I would vote for Kucinich. Yes, that is a Ford Focus in the driveway. :D

[Laurab]

96. Well, I dunno - his house looks too much like my last house

almost EXACT except for the color, and me running the country would worry me! Then again, I think even I could do a better job than the current pResident.

I actually moved down, not up (got married and moved to a double because my husband insisted), and I miss my old house!

Thanks!

[XemaSab]

98. LOL!

You're welcome!

[crispini]

102. Thanks, that was fun!

I enjoyed it! :D

[Porcupine]

107. I like Al Sharpton's best.

Howard Deans is about the size of the house I lived in when I was in high school. It says good things about Dean that he still lives there.

John Kerry gets points for living in a townhouse in the city. Close to everything he saves transport load on the climate. The massive size of it is a bit much but expected of his wife's money. It probably doubles as office space for the couple. Kerry has not been as rabid an environmentalist as I'd like.

George Bush's Crawford ranch house is noted for being an environmental machine as well as a very effective bunker. It belies the fact that a quantity of staff must be housed very near. A masterpiece of image.

The others aren't notable except for the extreme modesty of the Kucinich home; almost austere.

Does anybody have any links to any other candidates who have bragged about their environmental cred?

[XemaSab]

116. Looking at the houses

Gave me a LOT more respect for DK, a bit more respect for Howard, a bit less respect for a bunch of people, and a lot less respect for Sharpton. Where the hell is he getting this money from? :o

[Quixote1818]

84. I still like Edwards but I agree 100% with your post..

I just don't like Edwards nearly as much as I did two days ago.

[femrap]

103. What a sane comment....

you have restored some of my faith in DUers.

thx.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

106. My, my, my ... how self-righteous...

I can only imagine my comments will be judged insane. :silly:

[femrap]

125. For someone who wants to save Democracy,

you have a funny way of showing it.

(And if the shoe fits....)

[Seabiscuit]

93. What

a steaming pile of putrid manure.

And what an utter waste of bandwidth.

[toddaa]

105. I'll be expecting reports on Clinton and Obama shortly

As well as all the other Democratic candidates.

[Prophet 451]

110. You're right

To an extent but, and this is the most important point, in comparison to Bush? After the devestation that this administration has inflicted on, well, virtually everything it's touched, I'd vote for Edwards if he won the D nomination (and I was allowed to vote). Hell, after this insanity, I'd vote for Bobo the clown taking orders from Lex Luthor over the Rs.

[july302001]

118. This is a good post

Contrary to comments from the blind loyalists who see every issue in black-and-white terms of "mansion-vs.-cardboard-box" the original poster knows what he or she is talking about.

North Carolina has a Green Building Technology Database.

New construction is the *best* time to make a building energy-efficient. Ever try making an old Victorian energy-efficient, when it was never designed that way in the first place?

There are just so many things that can be done with a large budget to create a spectacular, yet ecologically sustainable home. How about large south-facing windows with roof overhangs so that winter sun comes in...but hot summer sun doesn't? Or, how about an adobe wall angled in such a way to keep the summer heat away from the house?

There are also private consultants available who will help with energy efficiency. They can do a lot when the budget allows for investments of a few thou.

[LittleClarkie]

119. So opposing viewpoints are mere "blind loyalists"

so much for discussion.

[Porcupine]

121. NC projects with comparable sq. footage. Built better.

Westwood Cohousing Community

A typical mid-size house of 1265 SF sold originally for $137,000 in 1998 and resold in 2004 for $198,000. That size house bears the following approximate yearly utility costs (for 2003): Heat for both space heating & hot water $380, water $75, water treatment $96, electricity $286.

(bolding mine)

EcoDorm at Warren Wilson College
Image of EcoDorm

Other resources:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_energy_building

Thanks for reading all the way down here. I was the OP and I appreciate your attention to environmental concerns. I think that those of us with resources have responsibility to steward the environment as we demand that those without respect our laws protecting it.

[nicknameless]

122. After the giant moat is installed, maybe they plan to use tidal power?

Okay. A cheap shot. I'm very pissed about Edwards' war mongering on Iran.

[MissWaverly]

131. Ha, Ha!

Miss Waverly

:-)

[DiverDave]

123. Just amazing

this crap has got to stop.

Keep your eye on the BALL!! damnit, lets get these assholes out of power...but NOOOOO, we gotta "eat our own"

Good job of furthering the repuke agenda.
Don't you see this plays right into their hands?
Nope, you don't, then they get another 4 years, and you "feel good" because you put that asshole edwards in his place...brilliant.

[stanwyck]

128. Let me guess. Hillary is the one

behind this smear campaign on Edwards. Just like she was the one behind the faked Obama is a Muslim terrorist story of last week.
Hey, it's a two-fer. You can slam Edwards and Hillary at the same time.
Any truth to the story that their daughter has a pony?