Al Gore at TED

Posted by David Roberts at 11:59 AM on 09 Apr 2008

Al Gore addresses the TED conference, March 2008:

Pretty intense. You can see how he is consciously attempting to transcend politics -- he's shooting for something bigger now.

For story: Al Gore at TED
18 Comments | Post a Comment

Quickly in numbers

As Al says so eloquently. We need to move quickly and together in big numbers.

That is the way internet movements can work. Get it going like a viral army. I suggest video that spreads from computer to blog to cell phone.

Barack's campaign works this way, what can we learn from that?

Can we muster a million people to march on DC? Or 10,000 to protest a coal plant?

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

by amazingdrx at 12:48 PM on 09 Apr 2008

Connection to poverty

I liked how Gore made the connection between the climate crisis and poverty. It was a great addition to the presentation.

Max Gladwell

MaxGladwell.com The Nexus of Social Media and Green Living

by maxgladwell at 2:14 PM on 09 Apr 2008

Great, could be even better..

...heh heh, hard to critique Mr. Gore, no?

His speaking style is getting better, more passionate, certainly no more wooden-ness. As usual, his description of the problem is most effective.

And, in addition to talking about poverty, he was emphatic that this needs to be a global movement -- as hard as that will be.

I'm glad he's picking up topics like "optimism", an important point amid such warnings.

But -- I think his "we just need to price carbon" is too simple. I think his group should produce some graphics, just as fancy as the global warming graphics, that would show what a zero emission city, town, or building would look like. People need to be able to envision the future. As he said, there is a spatial hierarchy -- local, regional, global (another important point) -- and they need some good graphics.

A must see.

by Jon Rynn at 2:41 PM on 09 Apr 2008

Just don't criticize the system!

I just don't know why he can't bring himself to criticize corporations. (I think it's because he believes in them so much.) So although he criticized the media for the lack of global warming questions in the debates, he's unable to tie that into the corporate ownership of the media. The idea that we need to curtain corporate corruption of government (as Ross Gelbspan emphasizes) seems beyond the pale. As long as corporations are endowed with personhood and free speech rights, their power and money will overwhelm genuine citizens. Thus, our fate may be already sealed when "our" greatest voice substitutes happy-speech for impartial analysis.

by Colin Wright at 5:05 PM on 09 Apr 2008

Could Gore follow MLKjr's path...

...and become more radical as the crisis becomes greater? I assume most of his funding comes from very wealthy individuals and corporations, so right now he's in the same position as most of the Democratic party -- you can't bite the hand that feeds you.

But like MLK and RFK, the "objective" situation may bring some evolution that we can't see yet. After all, he's come quite a way from his VP days.

by Jon Rynn at 6:08 PM on 09 Apr 2008

More from Gore?

Interestingly, he did mention the exorbitant cost of the Iraq War, implying it could be diverted to combatting global warming. So that could be a sign of progress for him? (I don't recall him mentioning the war before, but I could be wrong.)

I thought this talk was much more up-beat than his movie. That could be the result of giving his previous talk 2000 times. But I think I would have "preferred" a little more doom-and-gloom to balance the unrestrained optimism. That could be just me.

by Colin Wright at 8:16 PM on 09 Apr 2008

Well, the doom-and-gloom contradicts Gore

because Gore advocates putting a price on carbon, what the author calls "Scenario A", but if we're in an emergency, "Scenario B", then

Today's nascent climate change mitigation measures, including carbon taxes and cap and trade, remain completely within the gradual, linear, conventional wisdom. This level of mitigation does not address the big ice sheet melt as a crucial tipping point. No governments anywhere - not even those governments that have led in acknowledging climate change as a real and serious problem - are even remotely considering mitigation measures of an immediacy and scale needed to try to return atmospheric CO2 emission levels below 350 ppm.

In other words, governments the world over would have to intervene directly into the economy, diverting trillions into mitigation efforts. That's not what Gore is advocating -- at least, not now. But it will be interesting to see what happens when he hits this contradiction -- of course, it would be nice if there were massive global movements that would make his particular change of mind not very important.

by Jon Rynn at 8:47 PM on 09 Apr 2008

and it contradicts Romm as well

Romm has written extensively about the dangers of going over 350ppm, and he keeps promising to write about what a "World War II" type effort would look like -- I'm all ears (er, eyes)

by Jon Rynn at 9:06 PM on 09 Apr 2008

Yep more

I think so Jon, more is needed. 100 billion per year in subsidy shift to renewables and conservation. And similar moves in all major national economies around the globe.

With developing nations benefitting by having the latest smart grid stuff installed with World Bank and other aid institution's help.

That would look like a WW 2 like effort. The corporations whose subsidies are shifted out from under them won't like this. Their political shills will fight it.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

by amazingdrx at 10:04 PM on 09 Apr 2008

Sell 100 billion

Sell 100 billion in CO2 emission permits? Would that be possible? 7 billion tons total CO2. So 12 bucks per ton?

Then subsidize renwables and conservation with the money? Sounds feasible. But don't let hedge funds trade the permits.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

by amazingdrx at 10:22 PM on 09 Apr 2008

amazingdrx --

I think those are great ideas (RFKjr has an article at vanity fair saying oil and coal get $1 trillion in subsidies, I don't know where he gets those numbers), but I want to raise the possibility of trillions of dollars, per year. That would actually be closer to a WWII type effort.

by Jon Rynn at 7:44 AM on 10 Apr 2008

Well Jon

It would be trillions per year worldwide and with private funds matching the public money. 100 billion in government subsidy would atract how much in private investment?

If solar panels and geo heat exchange systems payed off in a few years with the subsidies, they would sell like hotcakes. As Malachi Constant's (from Vonnegut's "Sirens of Titan") financial advisor put it, companies selling these systems would become "Hotcakes Preffered" stocks.

Profits and market cap would soar, a boom attracting plenty of private capital would be off and running.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

by amazingdrx at 8:09 AM on 10 Apr 2008

Or, trillions up front...

...to be repaid by the energy savings, as in Berkeley's solar funding system, in which they provide the money for solar panels for buildings, and the building owners pay back with part (not all) of the savings.

by Jon Rynn at 9:49 AM on 10 Apr 2008

that river... the big one...

Am I the only one who noticed that he doesn't know where the Mississippi river is?

But seriously, one of the things I didn't like about An Inconvenient Truth was the overemphasis on change-the-light-bulbs solutions, so this is definitely a step in the right direction.

by mihan at 12:18 PM on 10 Apr 2008

Make the Trip

We have not had a president visit East Kentucky sinse Lyndon Johnson. I know Al did not win his bid for president but if he is serious about one nasty form of carbon, coal, he should come down here and show the nation where it comes from and how they are mining it.

The nation would be so repulsed by MTR and valley fills he could make a big impact on coal and it's contributing to the Co2 problem.

He could at least stop a practice that is destroying appalachia, save a mountain, a valley and a fresh water stream or two.

Most people think coal is mined by the underground mining process, they would freak if they could see how it is really mined in East Kentucky and West Virginia.

The eons of time and nature was good to us down here. It was not until we become civilized that destroying our habitat become fathomable or fashionable.

by Pompey Road at 2:17 PM on 10 Apr 2008

Subsidy diversion

Naturally my own senator, Sen Russ Feingold is trying to get this done Jon. We want 100s of billons per year.

The senate would not pass a bill that only diverted 13 billion, as Russ writes in an email reply to my support of the PTC for wind:

"...during debate on H.R. 6, I supported a proposal to repeal nearly $13 billion in tax breaks for oil and gas companies over ten years and use that money, among other things, to provide multiyear extensions of tax credits for wind and solar projects. I was disappointed the Senate narrowly rejected a motion to include this tax plan in the bill."

13 billion over 10 years defeated, but narrowly. So the concept of subsidy diversion is well placed in the legislative spotlight.

A million eco-peaceful-warrior march sure would help! Non-violent clog-in for subsidy diversion. 100 billion per year, yah, yah, yah... but seriously it might work.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

by amazingdrx at 2:44 PM on 10 Apr 2008

Citizens for subsidy diversion

Million green march!

Make corporations go off welfare and start to work on renewable energy and conservation. Take away their cash. It's the only thing these kids understand. They only see as far as the next quarterly earnings.

Drag them kicking and screaming into this energy boom. For our own good. they'll get most of the credit and cash as usual, but we will all benefit. Especially mother earth.

Let's have a revolution!

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

by amazingdrx at 2:52 PM on 10 Apr 2008

Al Glore is pathetic

Al Glore has gone terribly awry.
He thought cliamtae change could be tackled by changing some light bulbs.
Now he wants to put a price on carbon.
Belief and optimism
And everybody is cheering.

Eric

by ericauciel at 7:19 AM on 19 Apr 2008

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.