Figures lie and liars figure

You know, $2400 a month for energy for a 28 room home with a pool is not bad. I paid more than that for my 5000 square foot lakehouse with a pool. :-( It's the pool that's the backbreaker. Thankfully, it's gone.

You were supposed to heat just the pool not the whole lake.....

Paul C

You don't want to know what it took to heat that pool. 75 gallons of propane a day and a 2-3 day head start to get it up to temp.

Hmmm... I take expection with the Snopes rumor:

Crawford, TX is not on the arid, high prairie. Elv. ~ 735 ft. , rain fall of ~35" exceeds 10"

When I lived in Dallas, I just let the sun heat up my pool. When it was 65 deg. F, I'ld get it.

I'm not sure you can take exception with it. Crawford, like any place in Texas will have its challenges with cooling in the summer as much as the Tennesee area has with heating in the winter. I guess the bottom line is one guy is talking the talk, and the other is walking the walk.

You don't want to know what it took to heat that pool. 75 gallons of propane a day and a 2-3 day head start to get it up to temp.

should've just bought the kids wetsuits for christmas...haha.

...When it was 65 deg. F, I'ld get it.

With or without a 7mil?

Comparing carbon footprints is a meaningless argument no matter where you stand on the issue. People who drive their Prius to the airport to get on their private jet are hypocrites, so what. The scientific issues remain. But I'd rather not debate it on a photography board.

Personal homes aside, Bush doesn't have much of a record as an environmentalist as we all know. Considering the wealth that each has, they can do whatever they want with their homes whether it's spending up front or spending each month. Where is the balance sheet that demonstrates that one home is truly more environmentally sound that the other? That needs to consider up front costs and material usage.

Bush's home is only 4000 sq. ft., compared to 10,000, but he lives on a ranch. I doubt the numbers involved represent the total of his energy expenditures. I doubt it's true for Gore's either. I think Gore's numbers aren't bad for his size home.

One is a hypocrite. The other isn't. It doesn't take a scientist to figure that out. Bush had nothing to gain by making his carbon footprint smaller, but did it anyway.

Bush doesn't have much of a record as an environmentalist as we all know

Just a general reminder to all to post carefully!

These discussions can go downhill like an avalanche ...

With or without a 7mil?

Depending on cloud cover, in my birthday suit or a speedo 65 deg. water will make boys out of the best of men