Share

The Climate for Change

by: Al Gore  |  The New York Times

photo
Former Vice President Al Gore. (Photo: San Francisco Sentinel)

    The inspiring and transformative choice by the American people to elect Barack Obama as our 44th president lays the foundation for another fateful choice that he - and we - must make this January to begin an emergency rescue of human civilization from the imminent and rapidly growing threat posed by the climate crisis.

    The electrifying redemption of America's revolutionary declaration that all human beings are born equal sets the stage for the renewal of United States leadership in a world that desperately needs to protect its primary endowment: the integrity and livability of the planet.

    The world authority on the climate crisis, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, after 20 years of detailed study and four unanimous reports, now says that the evidence is "unequivocal." To those who are still tempted to dismiss the increasingly urgent alarms from scientists around the world, ignore the melting of the north polar ice cap and all of the other apocalyptic warnings from the planet itself, and who roll their eyes at the very mention of this existential threat to the future of the human species, please wake up. Our children and grandchildren need you to hear and recognize the truth of our situation, before it is too late.

    Here is the good news: the bold steps that are needed to solve the climate crisis are exactly the same steps that ought to be taken in order to solve the economic crisis and the energy security crisis.

    Economists across the spectrum - including Martin Feldstein and Lawrence Summers - agree that large and rapid investments in a jobs-intensive infrastructure initiative is the best way to revive our economy in a quick and sustainable way. Many also agree that our economy will fall behind if we continue spending hundreds of billions of dollars on foreign oil every year. Moreover, national security experts in both parties agree that we face a dangerous strategic vulnerability if the world suddenly loses access to Middle Eastern oil.

    As Abraham Lincoln said during America's darkest hour, "The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew." In our present case, thinking anew requires discarding an outdated and fatally flawed definition of the problem we face.

    Thirty-five years ago this past week, President Richard Nixon created Project Independence, which set a national goal that, within seven years, the United States would develop "the potential to meet our own energy needs without depending on any foreign energy sources." His statement came three weeks after the Arab oil embargo had sent prices skyrocketing and woke America to the dangers of dependence on foreign oil. And - not coincidentally - it came only three years after United States domestic oil production had peaked.

    At the time, the United States imported less than a third of its oil from foreign countries. Yet today, after all six of the presidents succeeding Nixon repeated some version of his goal, our dependence has doubled from one-third to nearly two-thirds - and many feel that global oil production is at or near its peak.

    Some still see this as a problem of domestic production. If we could only increase oil and coal production at home, they argue, then we wouldn't have to rely on imports from the Middle East. Some have come up with even dirtier and more expensive new ways to extract the same old fuels, like coal liquids, oil shale, tar sands and "clean coal" technology.

    But in every case, the resources in question are much too expensive or polluting, or, in the case of "clean coal," too imaginary to make a difference in protecting either our national security or the global climate. Indeed, those who spend hundreds of millions promoting "clean coal" technology consistently omit the fact that there is little investment and not a single large-scale demonstration project in the United States for capturing and safely burying all of this pollution. If the coal industry can make good on this promise, then I'm all for it. But until that day comes, we simply cannot any longer base the strategy for human survival on a cynical and self-interested illusion.

    Here's what we can do - now: we can make an immediate and large strategic investment to put people to work replacing 19th-century energy technologies that depend on dangerous and expensive carbon-based fuels with 21st-century technologies that use fuel that is free forever: the sun, the wind and the natural heat of the earth.

    What follows is a five-part plan to repower America with a commitment to producing 100 percent of our electricity from carbon-free sources within 10 years. It is a plan that would simultaneously move us toward solutions to the climate crisis and the economic crisis - and create millions of new jobs that cannot be outsourced.

    First, the new president and the new Congress should offer large-scale investment in incentives for the construction of concentrated solar thermal plants in the Southwestern deserts, wind farms in the corridor stretching from Texas to the Dakotas and advanced plants in geothermal hot spots that could produce large amounts of electricity.

    Second, we should begin the planning and construction of a unified national smart grid for the transport of renewable electricity from the rural places where it is mostly generated to the cities where it is mostly used. New high-voltage, low-loss underground lines can be designed with "smart" features that provide consumers with sophisticated information and easy-to-use tools for conserving electricity, eliminating inefficiency and reducing their energy bills. The cost of this modern grid - $400 billion over 10 years - pales in comparison with the annual loss to American business of $120 billion due to the cascading failures that are endemic to our current balkanized and antiquated electricity lines.

    Third, we should help America's automobile industry (not only the Big Three but the innovative new startup companies as well) to convert quickly to plug-in hybrids that can run on the renewable electricity that will be available as the rest of this plan matures. In combination with the unified grid, a nationwide fleet of plug-in hybrids would also help to solve the problem of electricity storage. Think about it: with this sort of grid, cars could be charged during off-peak energy-use hours; during peak hours, when fewer cars are on the road, they could contribute their electricity back into the national grid.

    Fourth, we should embark on a nationwide effort to retrofit buildings with better insulation and energy-efficient windows and lighting. Approximately 40 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States come from buildings - and stopping that pollution saves money for homeowners and businesses. This initiative should be coupled with the proposal in Congress to help Americans who are burdened by mortgages that exceed the value of their homes.

    Fifth, the United States should lead the way by putting a price on carbon here at home, and by leading the world's efforts to replace the Kyoto treaty next year in Copenhagen with a more effective treaty that caps global carbon dioxide emissions and encourages nations to invest together in efficient ways to reduce global warming pollution quickly, including by sharply reducing deforestation.

    Of course, the best way - indeed the only way - to secure a global agreement to safeguard our future is by re-establishing the United States as the country with the moral and political authority to lead the world toward a solution.

    Looking ahead, I have great hope that we will have the courage to embrace the changes necessary to save our economy, our planet and ultimately ourselves.

    In an earlier transformative era in American history, President John F. Kennedy challenged our nation to land a man on the moon within 10 years. Eight years and two months later, Neil Armstrong set foot on the lunar surface. The average age of the systems engineers cheering on Apollo 11 from the Houston control room that day was 26, which means that their average age when President Kennedy announced the challenge was 18.

    This year similarly saw the rise of young Americans, whose enthusiasm electrified Barack Obama's campaign. There is little doubt that this same group of energized youth will play an essential role in this project to secure our national future, once again turning seemingly impossible goals into inspiring success.

    -------

    Al Gore, the vice president from 1993 to 2001, was the co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. He founded the Alliance for Climate Protection and, as a businessman, invests in alternative energy companies.

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

I have tremendous respect

I have tremendous respect for this man. I am hopeful that Obama will embrace Gore as a close White House adviser and give him power to help save our planet and people. Thank you, Albert Gore

Still, who knows whether

Still, who knows whether this is the right heading? In a dream world Poets tell it like it is. Women preserve order as they do in their own homes. Men are stewards of the planet and all its living things. As evening approaches, thoughts turn to dancing to rhythms they didn't know were there. Wars are unthinkable. Kashilinus

get movin' getgoin' get

get movin' getgoin' get tough!GET NOW!

Al Gore has it right. It

Al Gore has it right. It turns out however that the profit motive will have to be replaced by a motive to save the planet. Everything else is suicide for the human race. (The cockroaches will probably survive.

I believe that humanity must

I believe that humanity must act soon if we are to secure a future. The IPCC's "Six Degree" scenario provides a frightening possibility for our future. (I would recommend that everyone here read Six Degrees by Mark Lynas to get a full sense of what will happen if we don't act). I don't agree with helping the automobile industry though. Again and again, they have sabotaged emissions targets, tried to deny climate change, and now, they have the gall to ask for the money of taxpayers?! If it weren't for the jobs at stake, I'd say, let them go bankrupt. (In any event, automakers are increasingly outsourcing). Every single job, save for maybe the top white collar ones in cities like Detroit employed by the automakers will soon be overseas. I am however, forced to acknowledge the importance of changing from a hydrocarbon based economy to one that is more environmentally friendly. As for "clean coal", it is an oxymoron of sorts - the lies we've come to expect from the energy industry. Today we see what the last generations did with the nuclear arms race as insane. Tomorrow, our inaction on climate change will be viewed as insane.

I wonder if Al Gore would

I wonder if Al Gore would consider a position such as Secretary of the Interior? We've had some real losers in that position for a long time.

I lost my respect for Mr

I lost my respect for Mr Gore when he failed to challenge the 2004 election. That whole disgusting and highly questionable election and he failed to follow through with his duties as a former VP. He swore an oath to defend this country from all enemies foreign and domestic. If he truly has the courage now to "embrace changes necessary" to save ourselves then I will sing his praises but considering the past he's no better than the rest of them squabbling over money and power. GLOBAL WARMING is the result of the hot air coming out of Washington DC. People please research this "disaster" yourself. IF this is a myth then there will be a few people getting rich off it. A carbon tax is going to raise the price to use coal, one of our few natural energy reserves. We can't afford that with our unstable economy.

Truthout may wish to ask

Truthout may wish to ask Leslie Thatcher to translate Emmanuel Todd's interview in the 30 October 2008 edition of le Nouvel Observateur. Todd makes the case for curtailing laissez-faire globalization. His analysis says that when (recently) American consumerism collapsed, the basis for the global ponzi-scheme collapsed. He argues for regionalism(s) which will be responsive to local needs.

There is an great

There is an great bewilderment in the meaning of emergency, threat, and the like wrte to the long term impact of man's activity and the environment; but there is no respect for, or bewilderment about those who used their positions of trust to steam from the current world population their economy. The fate of mankind has been determined by a bunch of wall street crooks and their Federal Reserve compatriots. Fix the economy and then worry about the environment.

More Bechtel Boondoggles or

More Bechtel Boondoggles or Real Infrastructure Work? The Boston "Big Dig" was a 20 year Bechtel (inter alia) boondoggle. What did Boston get? A pretty bridge and a 2 mile highway tunnel. California is poised to spend 20 years building a "bullet rain" from Sf to LA. Hmmm... 20 years boondoggle work to end up with a 50 year old solution? Without any doubt we need a massive infrastructure renewal in this country and this world. However, let's not give it all over to Bechtel-Boondoggles-Inc, let's f'n do it right!

Al, if your lurking, where

Al, if your lurking, where do you stand on the Pickens Plan? He adds in the use of natural gas to retrofit our heavy vehical traffic as a bridge. -C

This is the vision of that

This is the vision of that which shall be. I believe that Obama has been outlining the very plans that Gore is laying out for us all. The unity of our constructive thoughts and beliefs is key to the timely implementation of these plans. We know that if we can imagine this together, with this leadership, it will soon be reality.

Green New Deal. A prior

Green New Deal. A prior commenter said: 'Fix the economy and then worry about the environment.' Note that Gore's proposal recognizes that by moving from petroleum to ethanol, say, funding start-ups and a nationwide network, you can address the economy, energy and the environment in one bold stroke. The Big-Oil companies will not like the concept but we need to get over non-renewable energy sources in the long run anyway and they are more a part of the problem than the solution. What President Obama should consider is a Green New Deal to put the unemployed to work building the new energy technologies that will save the environment. We need to start thinking holistically, not either/or, issue by issue, which got us where we are today.

"(The cockroaches will

"(The cockroaches will probably survive." They just made through the last election.

If you consider earthquakes

If you consider earthquakes a bad thing than natural gas extraction is no better than oil. We need to focus on energy sources that don't disrupt the natural balance of the Earth. And we had better act fast becuase the Earth is about to take a sustained dose of antibiotics and purge her system of industrial "civilization".

Imagine if the votes had

Imagine if the votes had actually been counted in 2000 and we'd had 16 years of really smart, concerned, people in the White House rather than the first embarrassment. To the person arguing to fix the economy first - you need to think FIRST CAUSE and "most critical" rather than the way you're doing. The well being of the planet and the possibility of an actual future for the species is a little bit more important than conversations about money and finance. -- Which, after all, is real? Money? Money's an idea; Planet Earth is real. -- My advice to all my fellow inhabitants of this very small planet is GET REAL.

Mr. Gore is on his last leg.

Mr. Gore is on his last leg. He must continue to back his statements by using 8-year-old data and the tainted results from a politic-driven psuedo-science organization. He asks us to forget the "imaginations" of an industry that currently fuels our domestic power supply while simultaneously embracing a vague and baseless commitment to "clean energy" sources that that are just as unproven and more expensive. We are to consider oil and gas companies as enemies while embracing the virtue and charity of our new communist overlords who want to take away existing freedoms, redistribute them, tax us for the favor, and then pay the extra-high prices for sub-standard energy services. And, they can't understand why anyone would be opposed to this scenario. "Wake up you mindless masses! Can't you see that freedom is ruining you!? Don't you understand how much better your life will be when I make all your decisions for you!?" Call me a "denier", but none of your intentions appear to be good for anyone but yourself.

India is building cars that

India is building cars that run on compressed air. Zero emissions. We could do the same. Solar-electric technology has finally come of age, and could indeed power everything in this country within a handful of years. We should be saving oil to make plastics, not burning it. We should, however, be capturing and burning methane, because if we just let it escape into the atmosphere, it will do lots more harm than it does after it is burned. I'd rather see more emphasis on making sure new home builds are extremely energy efficient, and on small, self-sufficient energy solutions, not giant infrastructural solutions. But then, I guess you can't expect a politician to support anything they can't directly control. I also agree with the writer who pointed out that Mr. Gore failed to challenge the obvious electronic voter fraud of the 04 election, or his own so-called "defeat" in 2000. Evidently, he is not so technically savvy as he would like us to believe. If we really want to save the planet, we will all have to educate ourselves, and start doing it ourselves. To this end, if Mr. Obama can fix the economy, it will give all of us who want to fix the environment more wherewithal to do so on the individual and local level where it must happen.

Mr. Gore stands well

Mr. Gore stands well positioned to assume a Sec. of Energy leadership position (or Interior or State). However, many of the responses also point out problems in the old solutions implied by his approach.. Notably, the suggestion that we need to embrace small and local solutions to energy generation. The citizens of Logan Utah did this some years ago harnasing a small tumbling mountain stream to power their town (and sell power surplus back to the grid) Mr. Gore's mention of a smart grid has appeal. Small independant energy suppliments working withing agreed guidllines could power a great deal. We do need to make up for our 8 lost years.

Bravo Al yes we can

Bravo Al yes we can