FishbowlDC  reports that actress Drew Barrymore swooped into DC last week to promote her new movie, “Big Miracle” where she plays a devout environmentalist, which is supposed to be in real life.

The operative words are supposed to be.  Fishbowl  noted that Barrymore flew into town  using a private airfield at Washington Dulles airport along with three friends and her fiancé.

It’s tough being green.

Looks like a case of do as I say, not do as I do.

The Obama administration is hailing the success of the $3 billion cash for clunkers program that saw nearly 700,000 people trade their older gas guzzlers in for sleek new energy efficient models.

If one were to judge the program solely on the basis of how many cars were sent to the scrap heap and the short term boost that the new care sales gave to the beleaguered auto industry then maybe it was a success.

But the program was a spectacular failure as a way to implement environmental policy.

According to Michael Wara an assistant professor at Stanford Law School and a faculty fellow at the university’s program on energy and sustainable development the program cost the government $200 to $400 per ton of carbon dioxide emissions avoided.   Compare that to the recently passed climate change bill in Congress which pegged the cost to be $28 per ton by 2020.

Wara’s most conservative estimate has the cost of carbon dioxide avoidance at $201 per ton but that is based on the assumption the clunkers would have been driven another 100,000 miles each.  With many of the cars barely running that is an unlikely scenario.

If the cars could have lasted another 50,000 miles the cost would double to $402 per ton  or  $303 per ton at 75,000 miles or more than ten times the cost estimate in the climate change bill.

Just like the climate change bill which will impose huge costs on businesses and the public to reduce greenhouse gases the cash for clunkers program has proven itself to be yet another wasteful government program that was promoted as both an economic stimulus and a way to help save the environment.

In the end our children and grandchildren will pay the price of this clunker of a program for generations to come.

The list of culprits that contribute to global warming just got a little longer with the addition of video games according to a new report produced by the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) , a New York based environmental organization.

According to the study conducted with the help of Ecos Consulting in Portland, OR, video game consoles are some of the biggest energy wasters consuming an estimated 16 billion killowatt hours of electricity per year- which is roughly the annual electicity usage of the city of San Diego.

The report not only attacks the energy use of the consloes themselves range from 20 watts for the Nintendo Wii to 150 watts for the Sony Playstation 3,  but states that if the systems were left on all the time that they would consume enough electricity to power two refigerators for one year.

To be honest I am all for saving energy.  I go around my home and turn off lights and unplug cell phone chargers at every opportunity.  Now I don’t profess to know how many people with video games leave their systems on all the time, but it doesn’t happen in my household and I doubt that it occurs as often as the authors of this study estimate.

I will give the NRDC credit though for picking on an industry that is ripe for attack.  With an estimated 92 percent of children between two to 17 playing video games, what better place than to develop the next generation of global warming scaremongers?

This will be an interesting battle as games become more complex and feature laden they like computers will require even more power.  Will the children be willing to trade the improvement of games and entertainment over dubious claims of saving the environment?  I think the environmentalists may have crossed the line and will face a stiff backlash from children everywhere.