A Generational Challenge to Repower America
This speech was given today at the D.A.R. Constitutional Hall
Ladies and gentlemen:
There are times in the history of our nation when our very way of life depends upon dispelling illusions and awakening to the challenge of a present danger. In such moments, we are called upon to move quickly and boldly to shake off complacency, throw aside old habits and rise, clear-eyed and alert, to the necessity of big changes. Those who, for whatever reason, refuse to do their part must either be persuaded to join the effort or asked to step aside. This is such a moment. The survival of the United States of America as we know it is at risk. And even more -- if more should be required -- the future of human civilization is at stake.
I don't remember a time in our country when so many things seemed to be going so wrong simultaneously. Our economy is in terrible shape and getting worse, gasoline prices are increasing dramatically, and so are electricity rates. Jobs are being outsourced. Home mortgages are in trouble. Banks, automobile companies and other institutions we depend upon are under growing pressure. Distinguished senior business leaders are telling us that this is just the beginning unless we find the courage to make some major changes quickly.
The climate crisis, in particular, is getting a lot worse -- much more quickly than predicted. Scientists with access to data from Navy submarines traversing underneath the North polar ice cap have warned that there is now a 75 percent chance that within five years the entire ice cap will completely disappear during the summer months. This will further increase the melting pressure on Greenland. According to experts, the Jakobshavn glacier, one of Greenland's largest, is moving at a faster rate than ever before, losing 20 million tons of ice every day, equivalent to the amount of water used every year by the residents of New York City.
Two major studies from military intelligence experts have warned our leaders about the dangerous national security implications of the climate crisis, including the possibility of hundreds of millions of climate refugees destabilizing nations around the world.
Just two days ago, 27 senior statesmen and retired military leaders warned of the national security threat from an "energy tsunami" that would be triggered by a loss of our access to foreign oil. Meanwhile, the war in Iraq continues, and now the war in Afghanistan appears to be getting worse.
And by the way, our weather sure is getting strange, isn't it? There seem to be more tornadoes than in living memory, longer droughts, bigger downpours and record floods. Unprecedented fires are burning in California and elsewhere in the American West. Higher temperatures lead to drier vegetation that makes kindling for mega-fires of the kind that have been raging in Canada, Greece, Russia, China, South America, Australia and Africa. Scientists in the Department of Geophysics and Planetary Science at Tel Aviv University tell us that for every one degree increase in temperature, lightning strikes will go up another 10 percent. And it is lightning, after all, that is principally responsible for igniting the conflagration in California today.
Like a lot of people, it seems to me that all these problems are bigger than any of the solutions that have thus far been proposed for them, and that's been worrying me.
I'm convinced that one reason we've seemed paralyzed in the face of these crises is our tendency to offer old solutions to each crisis separately -- without taking the others into account. And these outdated proposals have not only been ineffective - they almost always make the other crises even worse.
Yet when we look at all three of these seemingly intractable challenges at the same time, we can see the common thread running through them, deeply ironic in its simplicity: our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels is at the core of all three of these challenges -- the economic, environmental and national security crises.
We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet. Every bit of that's got to change.
But if we grab hold of that common thread and pull it hard, all of these complex problems begin to unravel and we will find that we're holding the answer to all of them right in our hand.
The answer is to end our reliance on carbon-based fuels.
In my search for genuinely effective answers to the climate crisis, I have held a series of "solutions summits" with engineers, scientists, and CEOs. In those discussions, one thing has become abundantly clear: when you connect the dots, it turns out that the real solutions to the climate crisis are the very same measures needed to renew our economy and escape the trap of ever-rising energy prices. Moreover, they are also the very same solutions we need to guarantee our national security without having to go to war in the Persian Gulf.
What if we could use fuels that are not expensive, don't cause pollution and are abundantly available right here at home?
We have such fuels. Scientists have confirmed that enough solar energy falls on the surface of the earth every 40 minutes to meet 100 percent of the entire world's energy needs for a full year. Tapping just a small portion of this solar energy could provide all of the electricity America uses.
And enough wind power blows through the Midwest corridor every day to also meet 100 percent of US electricity demand. Geothermal energy, similarly, is capable of providing enormous supplies of electricity for America.
The quickest, cheapest and best way to start using all this renewable energy is in the production of electricity. In fact, we can start right now using solar power, wind power and geothermal power to make electricity for our homes and businesses.
But to make this exciting potential a reality, and truly solve our nation's problems, we need a new start.
That's why I'm proposing today a strategic initiative designed to free us from the crises that are holding us down and to regain control of our own destiny. It's not the only thing we need to do. But this strategic challenge is the lynchpin of a bold new strategy needed to re-power America.
Today I challenge our nation to commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years.
This goal is achievable, affordable and transformative. It represents a challenge to all Americans -- in every walk of life: to our political leaders, entrepreneurs, innovators, engineers, and to every citizen.
A few years ago, it would not have been possible to issue such a challenge. But here's what's changed: the sharp cost reductions now beginning to take place in solar, wind, and geothermal power - coupled with the recent dramatic price increases for oil and coal -- have radically changed the economics of energy.
When I first went to Congress 32 years ago, I listened to experts testify that if oil ever got to $35 a barrel, then renewable sources of energy would become competitive. Well, today, the price of oil is over $135 per barrel. And sure enough, billions of dollars of new investment are flowing into the development of concentrated solar thermal, photovoltaics, windmills, geothermal plants, and a variety of ingenious new ways to improve our efficiency and conserve presently wasted energy.
And as the demand for renewable energy grows, the costs will continue to fall. Let me give you one revealing example: the price of the specialized silicon used to make solar cells was recently as high as $300 per kilogram. But the newest contracts have prices as low as $50 a kilogram.
You know, the same thing happened with computer chips -- also made out of silicon. The price paid for the same performance came down by 50 percent every 18 months -- year after year, and that's what's happened for 40 years in a row.
To those who argue that we do not yet have the technology to accomplish these results with renewable energy: I ask them to come with me to meet the entrepreneurs who will drive this revolution. I've seen what they are doing and I have no doubt that we can meet this challenge.
To those who say the costs are still too high: I ask them to consider whether the costs of oil and coal will ever stop increasing if we keep relying on quickly depleting energy sources to feed a rapidly growing demand all around the world. When demand for oil and coal increases, their price goes up. When demand for solar cells increases, the price often comes down.
When we send money to foreign countries to buy nearly 70 percent of the oil we use every day, they build new skyscrapers and we lose jobs. When we spend that money building solar arrays and windmills, we build competitive industries and gain jobs here at home.
Of course there are those who will tell us this can't be done. Some of the voices we hear are the defenders of the status quo -- the ones with a vested interest in perpetuating the current system, no matter how high a price the rest of us will have to pay. But even those who reap the profits of the carbon age have to recognize the inevitability of its demise. As one OPEC oil minister observed, "The Stone Age didn't end because of a shortage of stones."
To those who say 10 years is not enough time, I respectfully ask them to consider what the world's scientists are telling us about the risks we face if we don't act in 10 years. The leading experts predict that we have less than 10 years to make dramatic changes in our global warming pollution lest we lose our ability to ever recover from this environmental crisis. When the use of oil and coal goes up, pollution goes up. When the use of solar, wind and geothermal increases, pollution comes down.
To those who say the challenge is not politically viable: I suggest they go before the American people and try to defend the status quo. Then bear witness to the people's appetite for change.
I for one do not believe our country can withstand 10 more years of the status quo. Our families cannot stand 10 more years of gas price increases. Our workers cannot stand 10 more years of job losses and outsourcing of factories. Our economy cannot stand 10 more years of sending $2 billion every 24 hours to foreign countries for oil. And our soldiers and their families cannot take another 10 years of repeated troop deployments to dangerous regions that just happen to have large oil supplies.
What could we do instead for the next 10 years? What should we do during the next 10 years? Some of our greatest accomplishments as a nation have resulted from commitments to reach a goal that fell well beyond the next election: the Marshall Plan, Social Security, the interstate highway system. But a political promise to do something 40 years from now is universally ignored because everyone knows that it's meaningless. Ten years is about the maximum time that we as a nation can hold a steady aim and hit our target.
When President John F. Kennedy challenged our nation to land a man on the moon and bring him back safely in 10 years, many people doubted we could accomplish that goal. But 8 years and 2 months later, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the surface of the moon.
To be sure, reaching the goal of 100 percent renewable and truly clean electricity within 10 years will require us to overcome many obstacles. At present, for example, we do not have a unified national grid that is sufficiently advanced to link the areas where the sun shines and the wind blows to the cities in the East and the West that need the electricity. Our national electric grid is critical infrastructure, as vital to the health and security of our economy as our highways and telecommunication networks. Today, our grids are antiquated, fragile, and vulnerable to cascading failure. Power outages and defects in the current grid system cost US businesses more than $120 billion dollars a year. It has to be upgraded anyway.
We could further increase the value and efficiency of a Unified National Grid by helping our struggling auto giants switch to the manufacture of plug-in electric cars. An electric vehicle fleet would sharply reduce the cost of driving a car, reduce pollution, and increase the flexibility of our electricity grid.
At the same time, of course, we need to greatly improve our commitment to efficiency and conservation. That's the best investment we can make.
America's transition to renewable energy sources must also include adequate provisions to assist those Americans who would unfairly face hardship. For example, we must recognize those who have toiled in dangerous conditions to bring us our present energy supply. We should guarantee good jobs in the fresh air and sunshine for any coal miner displaced by impacts on the coal industry. Every single one of them.
Of course, we could and should speed up this transition by insisting that the price of carbon-based energy include the costs of the environmental damage it causes. I have long supported a sharp reduction in payroll taxes with the difference made up in CO2 taxes. We should tax what we burn, not what we earn. This is the single most important policy change we can make.
In order to foster international cooperation, it is also essential that the United States rejoin the global community and lead efforts to secure an international treaty at Copenhagen in December of next year that includes a cap on CO2 emissions and a global partnership that recognizes the necessity of addressing the threats of extreme poverty and disease as part of the world's agenda for solving the climate crisis.
Of course the greatest obstacle to meeting the challenge of 100 percent renewable electricity in 10 years may be the deep dysfunction of our politics and our self-governing system as it exists today. In recent years, our politics has tended toward incremental proposals made up of small policies designed to avoid offending special interests, alternating with occasional baby steps in the right direction. Our democracy has become sclerotic at a time when these crises require boldness.
It is only a truly dysfunctional system that would buy into the perverse logic that the short-term answer to high gasoline prices is drilling for more oil ten years from now.
Am I the only one who finds it strange that our government so often adopts a so-called solution that has absolutely nothing to do with the problem it is supposed to address? When people rightly complain about higher gasoline prices, we propose to give more money to the oil companies and pretend that they're going to bring gasoline prices down. It will do nothing of the sort, and everyone knows it. If we keep going back to the same policies that have never ever worked in the past and have served only to produce the highest gasoline prices in history alongside the greatest oil company profits in history, nobody should be surprised if we get the same result over and over again. But the Congress may be poised to move in that direction anyway because some of them are being stampeded by lobbyists for special interests that know how to make the system work for them instead of the American people.
If you want to know the truth about gasoline prices, here it is: the exploding demand for oil, especially in places like China, is overwhelming the rate of new discoveries by so much that oil prices are almost certain to continue upward over time no matter what the oil companies promise. And politicians cannot bring gasoline prices down in the short term.
However, there actually is one extremely effective way to bring the costs of driving a car way down within a few short years. The way to bring gas prices down is to end our dependence on oil and use the renewable sources that can give us the equivalent of $1 per gallon gasoline.
Many Americans have begun to wonder whether or not we've simply lost our appetite for bold policy solutions. And folks who claim to know how our system works these days have told us we might as well forget about our political system doing anything bold, especially if it is contrary to the wishes of special interests. And I've got to admit, that sure seems to be the way things have been going. But I've begun to hear different voices in this country from people who are not only tired of baby steps and special interest politics, but are hungry for a new, different and bold approach.
We are on the eve of a presidential election. We are in the midst of an international climate treaty process that will conclude its work before the end of the first year of the new president's term. It is a great error to say that the United States must wait for others to join us in this matter. In fact, we must move first, because that is the key to getting others to follow; and because moving first is in our own national interest.
So I ask you to join with me to call on every candidate, at every level, to accept this challenge -- for America to be running on 100 percent zero-carbon electricity in 10 years. It's time for us to move beyond empty rhetoric. We need to act now.
This is a generational moment. A moment when we decide our own path and our collective fate. I'm asking you - each of you - to join me and build this future. Please join the WE campaign at wecansolveit.org. We need you. And we need you now. We're committed to changing not just light bulbs, but laws. And laws will only change with leadership.
On July 16, 1969, the United States of America was finally ready to meet President Kennedy's challenge of landing Americans on the moon. I will never forget standing beside my father a few miles from the launch site, waiting for the giant Saturn 5 rocket to lift Apollo 11 into the sky. I was a young man, 21 years old, who had graduated from college a month before and was enlisting in the United States Army three weeks later.
I will never forget the inspiration of those minutes. The power and the vibration of the giant rocket's engines shook my entire body. As I watched the rocket rise, slowly at first and then with great speed, the sound was deafening. We craned our necks to follow its path until we were looking straight up into the air. And then four days later, I watched along with hundreds of millions of others around the world as Neil Armstrong took one small step to the surface of the moon and changed the history of the human race.
We must now lift our nation to reach another goal that will change history. Our entire civilization depends upon us now embarking on a new journey of exploration and discovery. Our success depends on our willingness as a people to undertake this journey and to complete it within 10 years. Once again, we have an opportunity to take a giant leap for humankind.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Probably the most relevant and substantial speech on a change in American Policy in years, and it is already relegated to the Archives. What a shame.
OK! I'm excited! Where do I get my free panels and wind turbine? My sacrifice will be having the ugly things on my property!
Wow, 100% renewable electricity generation!
Just the possibility that we will become more efficient and energy independent is depressing oil prices. Go Al Go!
David????
You noticed that too? Oil is down.
Guys,,, all this,, decentralization seems impossible,,, at first glance, but lets break it down in components we all can understand. What would we need?
Wind and Solar. Got that. Check the net.
A grid. Got that.
Storage, as wind and solar have output limitations.
Money: Got that. Commuters are now pumping $250 a week into gas tanks.
Ummm???
Seems like Storage is the limitation.
Ok? OK!
Umm? GM is going to have to sell off all those huge SUVs that are now filling up car lots and USED car lots. Battery technology is the MOST expensive part of the Alternative Loop. WE aren’t going to find a government bailout like the banking industry. SO,,, what to do?
Decentralized Systems for power.
WE,,,, large in stature,,,, Americans seem to like SUVs since the “Get our of Dodge” (Fear Tactic and REAL panics) of Katrina and Rita, 911, California, Texas and Okalahoma BURNING, Bird Flue, Anthrax, Mushroom Cloud scares of the last few years.
After FEMA stuck 2 MILLION people on the Huston to Dallas highway,,,, AND,,,, guarded the off ramps with police and national guard,,,, the “Get out of Dodge”,,,, scenario has lost a lot of its appeal.
Lets get those Hummers and SUVs and convert them to Electrical operation. Electric Drive blows Internal Combustion away.
THERE. We will have all the STORAGE potential we need.
Our cars will be the answer.
Just a thought
All the best
Knute Neo-Lib.
yay! another "distributed power generation" advocate..
I ask anyone who says it's impossible to decentralize our power generation capability to go sit on the bench with all the people who said that the Personal Computer would never supplant large monolithic mainframe-type systems.
We have the infrastructure to do it today - those who oppose it are those who stand to lose billions of dollars in revenue from having their customer base generating it's own electricity.
We need to do a "reverse Enron" on them - generate our own electricity and create the political environment where people can buy and sell energy on the free market. Today in california you cannot get paid by the utilities for the surplus energy you generate. In other places, that is possible.
If it's financially beneficial, people will look closer at making the investments. There are many ways to generate an ROI on a solar or wind power investment.
But to say that we are stuck with these monolithic power generation facilities and as Mr. Gore puts it, our "crumbling" grid is to suspend critical thought.
If every housetop in America had a small photovoltaic array and if we had a commercial model where people could buy or sell energy, we could be through this problem in 5 years time.
maybe we could borrow 100 billion from china, saudi arabia, japan, etc. to get this off of the ground?!!!
- end money laundering at lobby
- restrain the federal reserve's power grab
- get rid of corpratism legislation (sarbanes-oxley act)
- open up the free market
- eliminate conflicting and special interest legislation
- protect the internet
- give the individual taxpayer many more incentives to go alternative
Dear Al,
Seeing as how you actually won the most votes in '00 I figure you still owe us a presidency. On the other hand I'm sure this is what you are supposed to be doing instead (life works out that way sometimes) and I'm with ya! Set the standard for the next WH occupant and Thank You.
Someone on this board suggested a corp or people like Habitat for Humanity that actuallly goes around the country building straw bale houses for people although I'd like to see that sort of program extended to people who will also do a "green up" of existing dwellings at bargain prices. Green has got to stop being an "elite" thing. It's nice that buildings can be "LEED" certified, but I"m Joe Blow with barely a median income and could care less about certifications. I just want a lower electric bill and grocery bill (whole foods, I"m talking to you..stop with the "healthy=gourmet" bit and focus on healthy foods for the entire population
Okay, enough of my rant. Al, I'm behind ya brother!
HuffPo please do not let this speach crawl down the bloggers list into oblivion. This challenge needs to stay front and center on the website.
Huff Po readers - America is already finding solutions.
All that is needed is the political will to encourage these technologies to prosper.
Is that too much to ask?
http://see
http://see
I only wish oil prices would drop like this companies stock.....
concentrated photo voltaic is an interesting technology
another one is solar thermal (CSP)
storage when the sun's down (through molten salt) makes it an viable source of base load electricity
desalination potential of CSP is an important extra, also when looking at potential if not looming sources of tensions and conflicts over water (= food)
for an ethical revival for the US (or for any actor taking the lead), showcasing and exporting this quadruple win (clean base load electricity + electric cars + desalination + green collar jobs, at home and abroad) this imo is an option without equals
see interview with Vinod Khosla on why he invests in CSP http://www
a paper on desalination with CSP http://www
and http://www
for electric cars, see http://www
imo, electric cars are the way to jump start this wonderful new lease on life.They (their psychological footprint with owners / desirerers) evoke a desire for clean electricity. After that, extending the movement towards the other wins indicated becomes feasable.
a link between CSP and electric vehicles is also easily made http://blo
Emil Möller
Maastricht, Netherlands
Dear Mr. Gore,
The last 2 years we had a discussion going on on the Elite Trader Forum about Al Gore for president in 2008. And we accumulated 500 comments on that debate until it became clear that you were not going to jump into the race.
Now my family and friends have switched from supporting Al Gore to supporting Ralph Nader in 2008.
We believe that Ralph Nader is the only candidate who can bring actual change and he is the only candidate in November 2008 that has real substance.
I am very disappointed that you did not run for president in 2008.
.
Dear SouthAmerica:
If you want to do something to help John McCain become president, diverting a vote away from Obama to Nader is nearly as good as voting McCain directly. Staying home and not voting at all is equally as good.
Nader has had his time. He is done.
Well, we have a ready solution to carry out Gore's proposal here.....N
I'm game.
Can we store the depleted fuel rods in your backyard?
You won't have any depleted fuel rods if you use fast reactors. As a matter of fact, you'll use up all the OLD depleted fuel rods to boot. Educate yourself, then ask your politicians why they pretend this technology doesn't exist.
No, but you can safely store them in a well prepared, centralized, secured depository, like Yucca Mountain. Spent nuclear fuel can also be reprocessed, and used again.
We alread have a place a to store them where there has been no incidents.
A very small and manageable problem, by any measure. All that's required is the political will to make it happen, whether it's Yucca mountain or someplace else.
Let's also develop antimatter fuel cells for cars. That'll solve the problem. Though, a car accident might take out a few city blocks.
Uranium is not a renewable resource!
Nuclear power is just a stop-gap tool to get us by while we are building the solar-electric system of the future.
Uranium is not the only fissionable nuclear fuel!!!
Thorium is four times as abundant as uranium in the earth's crust. Using new nuclear plant designs, thorium as a fission fuel solves most of the nuclear safety and waste problems, in nuclear core operation as well as in its pre- and post-processing phases. There are estimates that known deposits of thorium can provide all of mankind's power generation requirements for 500 to 3000 years. There are suggestions that undiscovered accessible deposits far exceed known deposits.
I'm right there with you, Al !!!!
Keep up the good fight, Al Gore. You make me proud. If you had rightly been installed nearly 8 years ago, this world would be an infinitely better place, and we'd be well on our way to fuel effiency and independance. The oil companies and those for whom a broken planet and high energy costs are a benefit will fight us with everything they've got. But we are determined to leave this world sustainable for future generations.
You are my hero. If you get asked to be VP again, or even head of the EPA, take it, for all of us.
And give Tipper a great big kiss. She would have made as great a First Lady as you would have made a President. You are my hero and an inspiration.
So, Al get the Federal Government to give me enough money and I will use geothermal heat to heat and cool my home. Give me somemore money and I will put up 50 wind turbines on my property.
Until that happens, don't insult me with this "we all have to work together" baloney.
Since the first earth day, 1970, I have recycle, used energy efficiently and conservatively and donated to organizations attempting to green our country.
Where did that get me. It got me the best elected representatives that corporate money could buy. It was business as usual for the last 38 years.
Gimmie, Gimmie, Gimmie.
The entitlement mentality on display.
If we take the 30 billion in subsidies that the oil industry enjoys each year, we could install 200,000 homes a year with solar panels at a $15,000.00 discount per home.
Bladernr1001,
Mr. Gore is on boards of alternative energy companies. No doubt his expertise on the subject matter is being put to good use. And I wish him all the best towards profiting from his investments.
Resistanceisfutile is concerned about economic ROI. It would seem that an ethical payoff is your cup of tea. The two can coexist.
Smiles are free.
In the past we had poor leadership with no vision. That's why nothing has worked yet. We must get leaders like Gore and Obama. We MUST have president who will, like Kennedy, commit to a 10-year plan. Then we can work together. We can do it if we have the leadership. Think of WW II -- we did it, all working together, and it was a great time for our country.
Too bad there is so much bad math in all of the Global Climate Crisis papers that it is easily proven to an exaggeration and just plain bad science.
http://sci
Dig deeper, read more and think for yourself!
You should take your own advice.
The hysteria that certain people are trying to create is absolutely amazing. It boarders of fanatasisim.
Or just open a window.
There are plenty of other factors that affect global temperatures that boldly ignored in Climate Change simulations. From ocean cycles to solar cycles depending on the report. Heck the relation between the expansion of concrete and asphalt across the world and global temps is another factor that is minimized.
The simple fact is there is no ideal climate for Earth. We can't kill this planet. We can make it uninhabitable for us but life and this planet will go on after. The past 8000 years or so have been relatively stable if you compare it to the history of climate change on earth but that is bound to change. Climate change will happen no matter what we do one way or another. So lets stop with the self important save mother earth BS and get to solving real problems that we actually control.
Mazlow01
"If everyone is thinking the same then someone isn't thinking."
If you look long enough and try hard enough, you will always be able to find someone who agrees with you. The "science" behind your link comes from somewhere other than the real world. Open your mind, remove your prejudices and do some reading:
http://www
http://www
Excellent speach Mr. Gore, Here is my vision of our future.
The first thing we need to start working on is decentralizing the energy industry. The perfect way to do this is with home solar panels. If we take the 30 billion in subsidies that the oil industry enjoys each year, we could install 200,000 homes a year with solar panels at a $15,000.00 discount per home. We will also need to mandate that all new home construction will be required to install solar panels. As the amount of homes with solar increase, a new power grid will also need to be setup to share the solar energy with the rest of the country.
CAFÉ standards need to adjust to at least 50 MPG. The auto industry will fight this tooth and nail as they always do for any change (i.e. seatbelts, airbags…). The technology already exists to work on achieving these new standards.
Start building elevated high speed trains for cross country travel.
What benefits could we expect from these modest changes?
1. Create millions of new jobs that cannot be exported overseas.
2. Generated cheap clean energy for all of America.
3. With a decentralized power grid it will not be as easy to compromise via a terrorist attack.
4. We will no longer be held hostage to oil.
5. Decrease in pollution.
6. We will no longer be funding the very terrorists who want to attack our nation.
That is all well and good but wou will not be able to dismantal any traditional power plants here. They have to be there and running 24/7 as a back up when the sun is not shining (you cannot just start and stop them all the time). What do people in Seattle do? The sun is not out very much there.
Also, I have seen increasing opposition to erecting solar arrays int eh desert and even some HOA's forbid them on roofs.
The better solution is nuclear. It is already a proven technology, it is clean and emits no CO2. You enviros got yourselves in a bind on this one...didn
I just saw on NOVA that if we wanted the workd to go totally nuclear we would have to buikd 10000 + more nuclear power plants to supply our current. Doesn't that give you a warm glow inside.
please don't forget the BILLIONS in coal subsidies, and the insane "gold rush" to kill off our deserts for Big Renewables (on your taxpayer dime AND land), plus the NIETC program to cover our nation with unneeded powerlines. The enormous tax breaks, buyback guarantees, socializing all costs onto ratepayers and the environment, endless freebies we don't get. You name it, ALL benefits go to Big Energy monopolies. NONE go to us.
What kind of "energy independence" is that? And how, exactly are we "saving the planet" by directly and permanently killing off millions of acres of our intact ecosystems? And that is just to meet NEW energy needs, which will endlessly expand, as will our destruction of our planet for Big Energy power plants. It will truly be a race against time to see if remote power plants and lines destroy the planet before global warming does.
Where is the Marshall Plan for conservation in this country? Al, you're such a fan of the Mars Rover, but wouldn't that money have been better spent on R & D for conservation that doesn't sacrifice quality of life?
You are totally right about DECENTRALIZED point of use solar and wind. We have destroyed so much land already, THAT is the only space that should be used for any new power generation.
NO MORE BIG ENERGY GIVEAWAYS AND MONOPOLIES! NO MORE WILDERNESS OBLITERATION!
Get us generous feed in tariffs like all civilized nations have and we will do the rest...
This proposal will fly to the extent that it can provides greater profit to the present major energy suppliers.
Congress has evolved over the years into a clearinghouse for business, you know.
Would you expect any business to operate at a loss?
Mr. Gore, thank you!
My husband and I were driving home from a long distance trip and we were flipping channels when we came across a talk radio station - as it turns out it was the Rush Limbaugh show (he wasn't broadcasting that day and it was some Rush wannabe) well, they were discussing the offshore drilling and he had Newt Gingrich on a call. They were claiming how we need the oil now...we need to start drilling here to get rid of our dependence on foreign oil ....in response, my husband and I were screaming at the radio (of course because what else can you do to a conservative talk show) why don't we invest that same money that we'd use for offshore drilling and put it into solar and wind power. Obviously they didn't respond, but their thoughts were you have to wait for the sun to shine or the wind to blow. I dunno...ma
Anyhoo, thank you again for all you are doing... I voted for you in 2000 and I would have voted for you again in 2008, but I'm glad that you are doing what you ARE doing...an
Drilling may not be the answer, but it probably won't cost the US taxpayer anything to expand offshore drilling or drilling in ANWR. Drilling actually raises money through lease bids and oil royalties.
Lease sales this spring in the Gulf of Mexico raised over $3 Billion.
http://www
Why not, expand offshore leasing with the caveat that all revenue from the lease sale, and all revenue from production (10 years from now) is used to subsidize alternative energy investment, and alternative transportation fuel investment? Better to come from new sources of revenue, than to try and divert funding from other government programs.
By opening up Florida, the coasts, and ANWR to drilling, the government would not be making a decision to invest in drilling over alternative fuels. The government would make money, not use it on the deal.
I think one of the major concerns with offshore drilling in some areas is the risk of spills and environmental degradation that could threaten the tourism industry. Tourism generates many billions of dollars in economic activity and tax revenue year after year. The amount of money generated from lease sales pales in comparison to ongoing tourism revenue.
Might want to ask the oil companies why they are not drilling the leases they already have...
Can you convert that solar power into gas so I can get to work?
Not required. Drive an electric car...
Yes, you can convert solar power into gas. Hydrogen gas can be produced via electrolysis. Any car with an internal combustion engine can be converted to run on pure hydrogen.
Not only will offshore drilling take a minimum of 10 years to bare any fruit (experts agree on this, including most conservative ones), but it will absolutely nothing about gas prices because of the economic boom in China and India (which is allowing thousands of people every day in those countries afford to buy a car like they never could before. So, oil demand will go up to the degree that any new oil flooding the market will do little to whet the appetite of those new economies.
We must be ahead of the curve. It is entirely in our interest to fund the implementation and development of alternative sources of energy. It will put millions of Americans to work, which will pump money back into the economy, which will lower prices in most areas, and will leave more money in our pockets to afford that high-priced gas until we are able to wean ourself off of oil.
Hydrogen is the long-term solution for portable fuel. All you need to produce affordable - and most importantly - clean Hydrogen is cheap electricity.
The oil companies need to drill on the 68 million acres of land they already own and are permitted to drill on but won't. The oil companies are pushing for this through Republicans because they know the population is suffering and will vote for anything that promises to alleviate the current crisis. So, it's a win-win-win : oil companies will prop stocks to their advantage and the Republicans will get votes from the desperate.
Oh, and I listen to Rush on occasion to remind myself why I avoid blowhards of all ideologies.
Correction: "Big Oil" does not "own" that 68 million acres of land, we (the United States of America) do. It is leased to them for the extraction of crude oil and natural gas.
Now, of course, we are being told that we will run out of oil unless we drill across all outer continental shelf areas. Balderdash! Big Oil and their ignorant and compliant minions might have a more persuasive argument if they were drilling in the lands and offshore areas WHERE THEY ALREADY HAVE LEASES BUT ARE NOT DRILLING!
This, along with their clever attacks on alternatives, like biofuels, etc., and extreme scare tactics, are simply means of getting their hands on more, more, more, and is at its bedrock the entire reason why we are fighting a war ON Iraq and threatening to take on Iran as well.
The Bush Crime Family(tm) and Big Oil are on the move and will stop at nothing unless we stop them.
Thank you, Al Gore -- please keep up all your good work. I'd rather you be the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, but I have complete confidence that you and Barack Obama will work closely together to make your energy vision a reality during his presidency.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
