Gore's latest attention-getting challenge: Eliminate fossil fuels as an electricity source by 2018

Summary: Since my blogging buddy Harry Fuller is on vacation this week, I need to pick up the gauntlet and ensure that we've got some good political fodder for those of you who want to debate the existence of global warming and the necessity of reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

Since my blogging buddy Harry Fuller is on vacation this week, I need to pick up the gauntlet and ensure that we've got some good political fodder for those of you who want to debate the existence of global warming and the necessity of reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

I'm here on the West Coast right now, where I met yesterday with the mayor of San Jose, Chuck Reed, about the green business activity and investment here in Silicon Valley (a conversation that I'll update readers about over the weekend).

So that means I wasn't in Washington yesterday where former Vice President Al Gore made a very impassioned speech yesterday at a function for the Daughters of the American Revolution. During the roughly half-hour talk, he challenged the United States to set a pretty amazing goal for itself: 100 percent of electricity from alternative, clean sources by 2018. That's right, just 10 years from now.

Here's a link to the whole video, it's about a half-hour long.

This blog entry from AlterNet does a particular good job of synthesizing Mr. Gore's speech.

Mr. Former Vice President, I sure wish you had been this vocal about this topic when you were in office. I have to thank you, though, for getting this topic out in the open in the slow news months leading into the election. Whomever we pick MUST be a leader on environmental policy and, none too soon to repair the damage of the last eight years. By the end of December, the current incentives encouraging investment in alternative energy research, development and deployment will expire mainly because our political leaders are too afraid to take a real stand in this election year. Our federal legislature needs to make this a priority NOW.

One thing I CAN tell you about my visit in San Jose yesterday: Mayor Reed says there have already been layoffs and production slowdowns here for local solar companies, because many businesses and utilities are reluctant to move forward until they see what happens. Hello, do we REALLY need any MORE reasons to put economic investments on hold? Financial services companies seem to be handling this just fine by themselves, thank you. Wouldn't it be nice to hear some positive economic news?

I, for one, really don't want to spend $5/gallon on gasoline, although that's our next millstone, isn't it?

OK readers, have at it.

Topics: Banking, Browser

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

22 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • The BIG LIE

    I post this before Global warming does not EXIST.
    The increase in carbon is due to the weakening of the earth's magnetic field. As it weakens the volumn increases. As it increase the gas in that volumn must increase equal to that increase.
    Stay on the bandwagon.
    So please keep passing of the LIE and when all those nice things you have at home that will not work any more due to lack of electricity please dont complain.
    Califnoria politics want to keep it's citizen in the dark.
    Doing solar other methods is up to indiviuals. Pushing it as an aganda to saving the climite is insane.
    can you make it rain?
    can you stop the lightning from causing fires?
    can you stop the earth from shaking?
    The above answer is the answer to you!

    NO
    if you didnt get it or understand
    Monosdeja
    • More Nonsense

      Global warming is a scientific fact. The amount of co2 is easily measured and it is increasing at a accelerated rate. I suggest you go and watch Al Gores movie "An Inconvenient Truth" and rid yourself of your obvious ignorance.
      chessmen
      • Another gullible fool....

        Man-made global warming is far from a scientific fact. There is nowhere near a scientific consensus on this issue, even Wikipedia labels it as a "controversy". However, this is about Albert Gore and his movie "An Inconvenient Truth". Why is it that Mr. Gore, when challenged to a debate on man-made global warming, will either decline or simply not show up after making a commitment? The reason is that Mr. Gore uses this Bravo Serria as a ruse to make money through the carbon offset scam. Even the British courts found nine misleading inaccuracies contained within this piece of propaganda garbage, and that was from a small sample of inaccuracies; many more exist, but the courts were not asked to look at those.

        If you believe Mr. Gore is so environmentally wise, why not look into the events that took place on his own property in Carthage TN. Zinc was extracted from the land Mr. Gore owns and the site allowed run off into the Chaney Fork river causing a dead zone nine miles in length. In fact, the site was officially listed with a "Notice of Violation" from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation. Oh yeah, that Gore family property was acquired from the President of Occidental Petroleum. Looks like old Al has good connections from all sides. What a hack.

        Heather, maybe you should get out of California and Washington more often. Both places lead to impotence of the mind and clouded judgment. Just look at the morons we have on both sides of the isle in Congress.
        deadbolt67@...
      • Understanding the english lanaguage

        my first statement is simple physics.

        I do not know if you know that or not.

        Physics is not something we change on the fly to support "wierd science"

        If you belive gore and his moive which has been proven in court to be false.
        Hundreds of info stating Global Warming does not exist.

        but that is ok.
        You can believe accept the LIE.
        That is what gore and politicans what you to do.
        Easy sheep for the slaughter.
        Monosdeja
        • Show me the Calculations

          Monosdeja, I am interested in your theory, please expound using precise mathematical analysis based on established physics. Show me the actual measurements indicating that the earth's magnetic field is weakening, also show me measurements that the earth's volume is increasing.

          If your argument against global warming is so compelling then it should stand up to scientific scrutiny please inform actual climate scientists:

          http://www.realclimate.org/

          In addition you should visit the following webpage:

          http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics
          FSC729@...
  • RE: Gore's latest attention-getting challenge: Eliminate fossil fuels as an electricity source by 2018

    http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/
    DSchrute
    • Info

      great info...to bad most want to stay on the bandwagon...politically correct view...passing the LIE around...then understanding Global Warming is a political tools to keep those we dont want in power to stay there.
      Monosdeja
      • .....

        frgough! Changed your name I see! ]:)
        Linux User 147560
  • Global Warming vs. Foreign oil

    The first line is two separate issues. Reducing dependence on foreign oil is one. Global Warming is something entirely different.

    Sweden has a new power producing method using sewage that is enriched with methane. That would reduce dependence on foreign oil, and there is little overhead cost because the infrastructure is already there. But methane causes more harm to the ozone than carbon. (Yes I realize there is more to it -- burning methane might make something else etc etc etc)

    Al Gore uses Global Warming in an alarmist fashion to put money in his own pocket, which is why Nuclear Power not only endorses his work, but pays him to do it.

    Al Gore makes money from the buying and selling of "carbon credits." If he really cared about the environment less efficient plants wouldn't be able to buy enough credits to meet demand -- they'd be forced to upgrade their plant to be more efficient.

    Don't mix up caring about the environment with global warming, and don't mix up dependence on foreign oil with either of those.
    Comnenus
  • RE: Gore's latest attention-getting challenge: Eliminate fossil fuels as an electricity source by 2018

    I think the best reply to this nonsense is a blog I saw on myspace by GA Freiman. He is an author and psychic that makes preditions about the US.

    www.myspace.com/gafreiman
    www.gafreiman.com
    Timboboy
  • Right Idea wrong Reason

    Its not the environment its the Economy, Increasing investment in alternative energy sources is good for the economy, it creates more jobs and that is a good thing. Also lessening out dependence on foreign oil is good for improving the trade imbalance the less we have to import the better.

    If we take the argument for "going green" out of an environmental argument and into an economic one more innovation will happen at a great pace because the only "green" that drives people and businesses to do great things is the color of the dollar.
    jfp
  • RE: Gore's latest attention-getting challenge: Eliminate fossil fuels as an electricity source by 2018

    It's real simple. Let's abandon our cars and shut off the main power in our homes. Mr. Gore - you first.
    TRIMTI
  • I've got a challenge for "Big Al"...

    "...for those of you who want to debate the existence of global warming and the necessity of reducing our dependence on foreign oil."

    1) Debate the existence of global warming - thanks for acknowledging that this *is* still an open question.
    2) Need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil - is this even a question? Of the two, this is the one that is a settled question.

    Ok, now for Big Al - I'll worry about where my energy comes from when you sell at least 3 of your 5 houses and cut your energy consumption down to appropriate levels. Oh, that's right...an appropriate level for you is more than what I'm allowed as an appropriate level.

    I'll tell you what's really going on here: the radical left is seizing what little agenda they can muster, not having any real, logical, workable ideas on issues such as improving education (you can only shrink class sizes so much, and costs are straining taxpayers to the hilt), healthcare (socialization is *not* the answer...again, taxes will soar and service will decline), economics (talk about anti-capitalist).

    Yet even their environmental agenda is failing - Americans are too bright to be duped into thinking the sky is falling, and we recognize that the recent push has been engineered for political gain. Not only that, but their over-the-top environmentalism is more of a strategy to take down American business, since the Dems see corporations as the devil.

    How about Al and his cronies take it and shove it! We're tired of gas in excess of $4/gallon while they preach about renewable energy and then return to one of their several mansions!!

    Oh, final note: why aren't the Dems outlawing Nascar and NHRA, etc., while they target fuel efficiency standards for cars? Because they don't really care about fuel efficiency. They care about taking down American auto-manufacturers and related corporations, and having American drivers dependent on them for help. It's all about conservation of power, people. Wake up!
    techboy_z
    • well said -nt

      nt=no text
      Comnenus
  • Cannot be done.

    We will need fossil fuels to run the equipment and machine tools to make the wind turbines and solar panels. This will take a century to make millions of turbines and panels. Unless you want to make these things by hand like a blacksmith in the 1800s which will cause the population to die off. Read up on the Haber-Bosch process that enabled the population to grow dramatically. Some folks are dumber than a bag of hammers.
    osreinstall
    • Not even worth debating these people

      Your basic argument rests on the assumption that a windmill factory cannot be powered by a windmill. And where do you get it would take a century to manufacture a million turbines and panels? Perhaps if the facturies where managed by morons such as yourself. I'll agree with you on one thing, some people are dumber than a bag of hammers. You should change your user name to "BallPein".
      jackbond
      • Another dumb one.

        A windmill factory could be powered by a windmill farm. But not a sole windmill. Those machine tools consume a lot of electrical power. There has to be critical mass before we can start to stop using fossil fuels. It takes time to ramp up production. Things are in flux, not static states.

        As for taking a century, hell yes. A wind turbine is a lot more energy intense to make than a car. I am not talking about a Bergey either. Try a Enercon E-126.

        Don't worry about my handle. Yours has a lot of creative license to it.
        osreinstall
  • Great to have Al Gore set a direction and challenge

    Finally, an initiative and a goal for America for energy independemce. The last time we had one of these was from John F Kennedy on mission to the moon.

    It's sad to see all these pathetic negative sally's in this forum poo poo Al Gore's challenge. What are you pathetic guys? Republicans? Shameful. I hope Al Gore inspires the positive, can-do thinkers in America to take up that challenge.
    Prognosticator
  • Good idea, though not yet pratical

    In theory Gore's idea is feasible, in practice it may prove difficult to do so. There are three things that work against the timing of the idea and they are time, scale, and cost.

    Time, to retrofit a significant portion of the US with solar panels and wind farms will take time. Not to mention that upgrading the electrical infrastructure to accommodate additional electrical usage will take time. Scale, though practical on a small scale, solar energy has a low density when compared to coal, gas, or nuclear, hence one would need to build immense solar farms, to collect sufficient energy to power our society. Cost, solar is expensive, though the price may drop if we invest in more efficient manufacturing techniques. Though the hurdles are formidable they are by no means impossible to overcome and one day we will have to overcome them.

    In the long run all fossil fuels will peak, and we will have no choice but to turn to renewable energy like solar, wind, and others. Might as well start now.
    FSC729@...
  • RE: Gore's latest attention-getting challenge: Eliminate fossil fuels as an

    Monosdeja, I am interested in your theory, please expound using precise mathematical analysis based on established physics. If your argument against global warming is so compelling then it should stand up to scientific scrutiny please inform actual climate scientists:

    http://www.realclimate.org/

    In addition you should visit the following webpage:

    http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics
    FSC729@...