BO Is Living Large In Hawaii

[loCAtek]

It's a compromise, as going to almost anyplace else in the country would have been more expensive.

For example: Camp David costs $100 million per year. I don't think the President chose Hawaii because it was 'luxurious'; he spent a lot of his time just getting some exercise, visiting family and military troops. Nothing more extravagant than attending church was done.

[Big RR]

It's a compromise, as going to almost anyplace else in the country would have been more expensive.

For example: Camp David costs $100 million per year. I don't think the President chose Hawaii because it was 'luxurious'; he spent a lot of his time just getting some exercise, visiting family and military troops. Nothing more extravagant than attending church was done.

lo--my point is that it is immaterial why he chose it, the fact is that it just looks bad for him to take a trip like this when so many are unemployed and we are all being told to tighten our belts. Perception is important, especially for a man who claims to be "one of us". I don't begrudge him a vacation (just like I don't begrudge the BP president for wanting his life back), but I do think he should consider the message he is projecting before he acts.

As for what Camp David costs, my guess is that this is a sunk cost, and it will be the same when whether he goes there 100 times or none.

[loCAtek]

Well, my take on it (and I haven't had a vacation in over ten years) is that; he IS one of us, and is doing his best. The only message I got was that he deserved a break, and yet he took as minimal of one as possible; he didn't isolate himself and his family from the public, but continued to show he was a member of his community, his church and his armed forces.

[Lord Jim]

lo--my point is that it is immaterial why he chose it, the fact is that it just looks bad for him to take a trip like this when so many are unemployed and we are all being told to tighten our belts. Perception is important, especially for a man who claims to be "one of us". I don't begrudge him a vacation (just like I don't begrudge the BP president for wanting his life back), but I do think he should consider the message he is projecting before he acts.

So what does that mean in real terms Big RR? That's it's wrong for him to take a vacation in Oahu, (where he grew up) but it would be okay for him to spend two weeks in Hoboken? He can take a vacation so long as he doesn't go anywhere nice?

Long Run's got it absolutely right. It's a complete non-issue. As I've said before, no President ever has a "vacation" in the way the average person understands the term. I don't begrudge any of them, regardless of whether I agree with them politically or not, the chance to get away from Washington to spend a little time in the venue of their choice.

[Big RR]

Wrong jim? I don't think so; he has a right to take whatever vacation he can and is entitled to. However, it seems a bit incongruous with his message about us al being in this together and how we all have to tighten our belts and do without for a while for the good of the nation, and he may well be criticized, rightly or wrongly, for that. It' not fair, but it goes with the job IMHO. He's there for 4 (or at most 8) years, and he has to put somethings on hold for political expediency, after which he can be on a government funded vacation for the rest of his life.

And FWIW, I think the criticism is based on the cost alone, not how nice (or crappy) his destination is. As far as I am concerned, I have no problem with any vacation he chooses to take, but I also think he should take the politics of the time into account and act accordingly. While I don't agree with them, I can understand how people can expect a president calling for sacrifice to lead the way by example.

[loCAtek]

As for his example; isn't he putting solar panels on the White House this spring?

[Big RR]

Well if he is, that is, indeed, a good example. Beats the one Reagan set by tearing out the rooftop solar water heater Carter installed.

[Lord Jim]

As for his example; isn't he putting solar panels on the White House this spring?

Wow, if that's true, talk about empty symbolism....

I wonder what percentage of the White House's energy needs solar panels will provide....

.00001% ?

Gee, why don't they stick a wind mill up there while they're at it?

If he really wanted to set a useful example on energy, he'd have a small nuclear power generator, (like the type that power Air Craft Carriers and subs) installed under building. Not only would that provide all the power needed, it would send a powerful message about the safety of modern nuke plants.

[loCAtek]

Obama To Install Solar Panels In 2011

What was unclear Tuesday was how much the White House solar project will cost, and how much fossil fuel-based electricity it would displace, since the system is not yet designed and the White House will not disclose how much energy is needed to keep the president's lights turned on.

Based on available roof space, administration officials expect the photovoltaic system will include between 25 to 75 panels and will convert sunlight into 19,700 kilowatt hours of electricity a year. That would save a typical household $2,300 on its electricity bill, based on commercial rates in Washington. The solar hot water heating system, based on government estimates, could save an additional $1,000 a year.

But the White House is far from a typical house, noted Danny Kennedy, the founder of California-based solar energy provider Sungevity, which offered to put solar panels on the White House for free earlier this year as part of a campaign called SolarontheWhiteHouse.

Kennedy estimates that outfitting Obama's pad with solar would cost about $100,000 if paid out of pocket. But the money would be earned back with savings on the electric bill in the first five years, he said in an interview from the Maldives, where he is installing 48 solar panels on President Mohammed Nasheed's private residence.

Kennedy said his calculations were based on a 5,000 square-foot California home, which uses 60,000 kilowatt hours of electricity annually.

"They use a lot more electricity than that," Kennedy said. "We had to make a few assumptions about what electricity cost was in the White House."

[Big RR]

As for his example; isn't he putting solar panels on the White House this spring?

Wow, if that's true, talk about empty symbolism....

I wonder what percentage of the White House's energy needs solar panels will provide....

.00001% ?

Gee, why don't they stick a wind mill up there while they're at it?

If he really wanted to set a useful example on energy, he'd have a small nuclear power generator, (like the type that power Air Craft Carriers and subs) installed under building. Not only would that provide all the power needed, it would send a powerful message about the safety of modern nuke plants.

The (albeit modest)savings from solar power bothers you all that much? A five year payback on investment seems pretty good to me--even 7 or 10 would be. And windmills might be useful given all the hot air generated by the gasbags in DC (rim shot).

But as for a nuclear power generator, imagine what it would cost to install--I doubt the saving would ever be realized before the white house crumbled to dust. IMHO nuclear power is part of a comprehensive energy policy, but personal nuclear reactors are hardly something that should be promoted.

[Lord Jim]

The (albeit modest)savings from solar power bothers you all that much? A five year payback on investment seems pretty good to me--even 7 or 10 would be.

His numbers don't add up....

Not even close:

Based on available roof space, administration officials expect the photovoltaic system will include between 25 to 75 panels and will convert sunlight into 19,700 kilowatt hours of electricity a year. That would save a typical household $2,300 on its electricity bill, based on commercial rates in Washington. The solar hot water heating system, based on government estimates, could save an additional $1,000 a year.

Kennedy estimates that outfitting Obama's pad with solar would cost about $100,000 if paid out of pocket. But the money would be earned back with savings on the electric bill in the first five years, he said in an interview from the Maldives, where he is installing 48 solar panels on President Mohammed Nasheed's private residence.

Even if you accept that $100,000 figure, (which seems extremely low, given the complexity of the project) if you take the total $3300 in projected annual savings, I make that thirty years (assuming no additional up keep or repair costs...a ridiculously optimistic assumption) to re-coup the tax payer investment.

A silly "feel good" waste of money designed to suck up to the greenies in his party....

Let the DNC foot the bill....

Kennedy said his calculations were based on a 5,000 square-foot California home, which uses 60,000 kilowatt hours of electricity annually.

"They use a lot more electricity than that," Kennedy said. "We had to make a few assumptions about what electricity cost was in the White House."

Uhh...yeah:

The square footage of the White House is 55,000 feet....( and that's just the public number...not including the classified areas)

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/histor ... hitehouse/

So additionally they seem to have picked somebody for the project who can't do basic math and doesn't know the first thing about the magnitude of the undertaking....

But as for a nuclear power generator, imagine what it would cost to install--I doubt the saving would ever be realized before the white house crumbled to dust.

Are you kidding? How long does it take to build a nuclear Air Craft Carrier from scratch?

[Gob]

Putting nukes under the White House? Good idea

[Big RR]

Jim--

That would save a typical household $2,300 on its electricity bill, based on commercial rates in Washington. The solar hot water heating system, based on government estimates, could save an additional $1,000 a year.

But the White House is far from a typical house, noted Danny Kennedy, the founder of California-based solar energy provider Sungevity, which offered to put solar panels on the White House for free earlier this year as part of a campaign called SolarontheWhiteHouse. ... "They use a lot more electricity than that," Kennedy said. "We had to make a few assumptions about what electricity cost was in the White House."

See the bolded portions above; I think the estimated savings are far in excess of the $3300 a year a typical home would receive.

Are you kidding? How long does it take to build a nuclear Air Craft Carrier from scratch?

I don't know, and fail to see how that is relevant. I imagine one could put a reactor in the WH and generate electricity; but also on't think the cost f that reactor would ever be recouped from the savings realized during the life of the WH.

[Lord Jim]

See the bolded portions above; I think the estimated savings are far in excess of the $3300 a year a typical home would receive.

Well it doesn't read that way to me if you include the first sentence of the paragraph that you cut off in your quote:

Based on available roof space, administration officials expect the photovoltaic system will include between 25 to 75 panels and will convert sunlight into 19,700 kilowatt hours of electricity a year. That would save a typical household $2,300 on its electricity bill, based on commercial rates in Washington. The solar hot water heating system, based on government estimates, could save an additional $1,000 a year.

They way that reads to me, is that if the "typical" (whatever that means) home was able to do what they are planning to do at the White House, and were able to "convert sunlight into 19,700 kilowatt hours of electricity a year" then they would save....

That meaning looks pretty clear to me, if you don't cut off the first sentence.

Why would 19,700 kilowatt hours of electricity generated for the White House have any greater dollar value than 19,700 kilowatt hours generated for any other building?

[Guinevere]

I thought it may be a good idea for them to start doing it ,dales.

Michele Obama got ripped up one side and down the other when she went to Spain earlier this year, for not spending her travel and entertainment dollars here in this country. And there are plenty of opportunities for foreign travel while in office.

[Gob]

Michele Obama got ripped up one side and down the other when she went to Spain earlier this year, for not spending her travel and entertainment dollars here in this country.

Can't win can they?

[Guinevere]

Nope. Welcome to America :-0

[Gob]

You're welcome to it!

[loCAtek]

More for us

[Guinevere]

You're welcome to it!

I wouldn't be a citizen anywhere else, thanks -- I'm happy to continue to do the work my great great greats started centuries ago.