Gore's Energy Goal Considered "Possible" Says Climate Expert

The head of a group founded by Al Gore told lawmakers on Thursday that the former vice president's goal of generating all U.S. electricity from clean, renewable sources within 10 years is ambitious but attainable.

Cathy Zoi, CEO of the Alliance for Climate Protection, told the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming that there were no technological or other obstacles in the way of clean power.

"Many Americans have a hard time thinking about our energy future, largely because their energy present is so challenging," she said. "Staying on our present track is an invitation to sustained higher prices."

Meeting Gore's challenge will require a three-pronged, approach involving energy efficiency, renewables and an updated national electric grid, Zoi said.

Read the full story.

-OR-

Look back at the headline-making speech Gore made:

::Full text of the Gore climate change speech on the Huffington Post
::Al Gore Asks Bloggers For Help
::Gore: No Way I'll Be VP Again

Comments

[Pleidian]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3906150623208373919&hl=en

[dadw5boys]

Too bad we don't have a President with a LOCK BOX who would have the money to invest in research for new power sources instead of old military weapons and new versions of old technology like uparmoured vechiles to protect solderis from roadside bombs. Just to think we would not even have gone into Iraqi with Gore as President.

[mamacat]

"I have a dream......", that we will put decent, honest, visionary people in government, and forever turn our backs on corruption and the politics of hate and fear.

[UnbiasView]

What do you think Al Gore is banking on right now? The politics of fear, his movie is diputed by nearly every scientist when he tries to exaggerate the coming disasters.

Not to mention, he stoe CGI footage from "A Day After Tomorrow" which is a disaster movie which is only fitting to make my point.

[noneIn2008]

You mean their real goal of shrinking the population to 2 billion people of European decent is possible

[lazywhiteamerican]

Wow. Paranoia peaks.

[DRaymond]

So many of the folks here are like the industy as a whole being focused on single solutions. I've never seen a proposal for a wind farm that had solar panels on the ground. Why not? Because we're selling wind technology here son!

So meeting the challenge will take a lot of different tactics.

1. Rooftop Solar
2. Large-scale solar
3. Wind
4. Clean Coal (Gore specifically included it in the list of possibilities)
5. Wave (a huge energy source waiting for a clever way to harness it.)
6. Efficiency improvements in transmission and usage.
7. Lifestyle changes (my carbon footprint is say lower than my neighbors simply from using ventillation instead of air condidioning.)

[UnbiasView]

And drilling.

[Agentlady007]

This world is innovative and thinks beyond potential. Wind and solar energy go together like a horse and carriage. The world will not stop turning, and people will always find solutions to global problems. It is part of human nature. Al Gore just makes people aware of this better than others.
The day we all are required to have a windmill in our yard is the day to wait for. However, if a president can make rules, this would be one I would stress is of the most importance. There's no other way out.

[UnbiasView]

Why on earth would you want a windmill in every yard? I would rather pay the high cost than have one of those.

[dadw5boys]

WELL GO AHEAD!!!!!

[mjt218]

Where's the 4th prong to "create jobs for every coal worker in the fresh air and sunshine" as Gore said in his speech?

[norkas]

30 years ago i had a client that was brillant and did at times top secret research for the goverment at times. He had is own comapny and often could not tell me what he was working on. He could not wait to tell me one of his recent discoveries and his idea of possiable usage. He told me he placed large magnets on a record turntable so each magnet would repel each other. The turntable starting spinning so fast that they had to run out of the lab. Moments later they heard a bang them went back into the lab. Some of the magnets was imbedded in the cement walls the rest was smashed to pieces. He told me from this experiment he figured out how to place a plane in the air without refueling for several days. Killer or anyone else have any ideas about this. Can you advance thisconversation. And do not yell at me i am passing information from a serious person that may of been wrong about his theory.

[dadw5boys]

Electrictrostratic buildup and material that slowed the discharge.

[mergina]

Go baby go. Help is on the way, (OR ALREADY HERE). Soon the human race will come to their senses and they will not have a choice whether to do so or not.

[NL207]

What does a climate expert know about this? Gore's proposal is an engineering, economics and logistics problem limted by the number of available suitable sites for wind turbines.

[max08]

HIstory lesson: Guess who created the Climate Change issue?

ENRON.

Why? Because they owned tons of gas pipelines and fields and had made a fortune off sulphur credits and wanted to do the same with CO2. Problem was CO2 isn't a pollutant, so they couldn't put the coal biz out of biz with the EPA. they needed something new.

So Ken Lay hit on Climate Change and the incoming Clinton admin to set up that profit base and create the Kyoto Protocol.

Read all about it. This is what we all missed with a year of OJ and another year of Paula Jones and then another of Monica Lewinsky:
http://WWW.investigatemagazine.com/mt/mt-tb.pl/298
http://archive.columbiatribune.com/2002/Feb/20020226Comm007.asp

[Now Gore is the head stockowner of the carbon credits biz, based out of London.]

[Exusian]

Gee, I thought it was the Intelligent Designer.

Honestly, one minute its global warming is a, the nxt minute it's climate changes all the time, now it's Enron's fault.

What's that saying about no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public?

[Exusian]

Opps, make that

Gee, I thought it was the Intelligent Designer.

Honestly, one minute it's global warming is a hoax, the next minute it's climate changes all the time, now it's Enron's fault.

What's that saying about no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public?

[leduck]

yu gotta be kidding

[DRaymond]

"were no technological or other obstacles in the way of clean power." No obstacles at all! We just need to completely replace the entire electrical distribution grid!

Environmentalists, you do not do yourselves a favor by trivializing the extent of what you are saying needs to be done.

[research]

False. Since we are initially replace coal plants, there is NO CHANGE TO THE GRID.

roof top solar DECREASES GRID LOAD.

See my profile.

replace Nukes, coal and oil with wind and solar in ten years for 1 trillion dollars.

The 1.4$ cost per watt of Wind is the lowest of ANY energy source. It includes the transmission lines needed to connect it to the grid.

20GW of wind was installed in 2007.

[KillTheMessenger]

20GW PEAK... you can multiply that with 25%, if you are lucky, and then it's a mere 5GW, the equivalent of five power plants. But we need 500 power plants... in the US alone.

Wind energy pricing was at $40/MWh, which, as far as I know is good, but it is nowhere close to existing hydro power.

But the pricing debate is useless, anyway. We can't build hydro out much more, so we will never get more energy that cheaply. There are limited wind resources, and beyond that we can pick between solar and nuclear with fuel re-processing.

Take your pick.

[DRaymond]

Yes rooftop solar puts production close to consumption. However needing to replace the entire gird with a smart grid was what the expert behind the article said was necessary to get the greater efficiency needed to meet the goal.

And Gore's own description of his challenge specifically mentions clean coal technology so the coal plants aren't going away.

[research]

Ops. yes 20GW nameplate. about 30% utilization. (getting as good as 45%)
So about 7 average GW of wind were installed in 2007

Thanks for pointing that out.

21 ave GW /per year in 4 years.

96WG ave GW/year in 10 years without accelerated development.

[texfly]

By the way. Gore's dream is possible. It can be done in ten years. We can have humogous amounts of zero-carbon, non-nuclear energy within 25 years. It can be done with existing technology. We just need the will to CHANGE and a YES WE CAN do it mentality. With a WW-II, Manahttan Project determination we can become the world's biggest source of energy and totally free from foreign oil.

[KillTheMessenger]

Call me when it has been done. In ten years.

Among all the people who say that it can be done NOT ONE has put a plan on the table HOW it can be done. Talk is cheap. But let me see you put the price tag on the table and then get political consensus to actually do it.

The Manhattan project was tiny, by the way. It is not that hard to build a nuclear warhead if you have good physicists. It's not that expensive, either. Pakistan could do it. India could do it. The Israelis have done it. China did it in the 60s. Russia did it in the 50s.

But this, this one is going to be huge. And it come at a price tag of probably $20-30k per family. Let me see how families which lack health insurance for their kids will like to pay for that.

[motu]

ReALLY?
What is your credentials to post so many 'facts'??

Here's one off the top of my head (see, I can do it too).
Take all the money you want to spend on Nuclear plants and so-called safe storage forever and apply it to solar & wind etc...

Oh and the price tag we're spending on oil & coal is extinction of the planet.

[research]

Hey, linear versus exponential, you already lost as regard transistors, how about losing on everything:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function

"s-curve"

5k per person should be sufficient to convert to wind and solar. Hey, that's realy close to a trillion dollars? Wow, what a coincidence.

[texfly]

As John Stossel would say "Give me a break!"

The technology that Zoi writes about and that American Superconductor experiments with are more hype than anything. It requires reaching a temperature of 100 K. That’s -294 F folks. That requires liquid nitrogen which takes lots of energy to make. Or it requires severe refrigeration -- which requires boo-coos of energy. Can you imagine cooling a million miles of cable to –294 F? Can you imagine trying to keep that cold 24/7? Unless they have come up with a superconductor material that reaches its critical temperature at room temperature this is absurd. Of course, maybe they think that renewable energy will be so prevalent that we can afford to use most of the “free” energy for cooling. Why not high-voltage-DC cable (HVDC)? You can bury them, reduce right-of-ways and carry more power than high voltage towers. If and when truly HTS (high temperature superconductivity) cables do come along we can replace the HVDC cables in the existing right-of-ways – like changing from copper telephone wires to fiber optics. My advice don’t hold your breath and don’t bet the ranch.

Give me a break!

[research]

we don't need superconducting cables. Existing technology can easily handle REPLACING coal nukes and oil with wind and solar.

[KillTheMessenger]

Nobody is talking about superconducting cables. That's an old hat. You can simply throw more copper (or aluminum) and longer isolators at it and be done with conventional technology. It could have been done 20 years ago.

The grid will be the cheap part. The expensive part is the solar generation capacity that it will take to power that grid. And the only viable alternative are nuclear power plants. Let me see how that goes in your back yard.

[texfly]

Hey Killer, why don't you read what Zoi had to say and follow the the links back to the source. You will find that superconducting is what she refers to. The thought of a superconducting grid at this point is STUPID. The grid is important and buried HVDC may be the best option.

[AlfredoENewman]

Why did they wait so long? The handwriting was on the wall long ago. Even Jack knew in 1978 what the answer was. That was 30 freakin' years ago. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/30/jack-nicholson-supported_n_115935.html
Hydrogen was the answer then, and is still the answer. No coal, no nukes, water.....

[nova07]

Now all we have to do is round up all that natural hydrogen in the enviornment. Too bad it doesn't exist. Which power source do you think we should use when we have to split the water molecules, to get all that hydrogen??? Natural gas or Oil???

[Exusian]

False choice.

Optimally sited wind and solar, so that supply is evened out when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining.

And nuclear, during off-peak.

We're going to have to learn to do it anyway thanks to peak oil.