 | DrumBeat: July 18, 2008 | The Oil Drum | Looking for answers, a slight cough, and thoughts on Boone's plan |  |
244 comments on Gore sets goal of 100% carbon-free electricity by 2020
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
244 comments on Gore sets goal of 100% carbon-free electricity by 2020
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Personnel
Editors
Contributors
Peak Oil Primers
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Vital Trivia
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
I just watched it. Damn, Al Gore should run for President one day... oh, uh, nevermind...
Hmm, and imagine the world today if his victory had been recognised, and the resources and energy of the United States had been directed to efforts such as these instead of wars around the world...
It's worth mentioning that Gore was the one who watered the Kyoto Protocol down for the sake of the US, then helped make sure the US didn't even sign the thing. Had he got in with the 2000 election, he might not have been the same man he is today. We might have avoided the two invasions, but crash programmes for wind farms we would not see.
After politics, he's had a swing towards liberalism, compassion and care for the environment. It's this strange Former Statesman Syndrome, happens a lot, dunno why.
They're outside of the system that doesn't care for such non-standard thinking. That frees them up a lot to talk about things they otherwise wouldn't. As long as you're involved in politics, especially at the national level, you're in something akin to corporate culture that is not all that flexible.
It's not worth mentioning. Gore was VP at the time and VPs are told what to say and do. You do the man an injustice.
He chose to be VP. And it's not as if there haven't been deputy leaders who expressed opinions contrary to their main people from time to time.
I think it should be called PPC Syndrome. Post-Power Conscience Syndrome.
Please tell us who the VPs were of the U.S. who expressed contrary opinions.
What about one Dick Chaney?
You should include in this syndrome the fact that Gore was very active on environmental issues before becoming VP. Saw this happen a number of times during the Vietnam War. Some of us against the war would be cheered when a person who seemed to know what was going on moved from outside the power circle to within it. But very soon that person would echo the party line. Then when the person left the power circle they would revert to their previous position. That is my memory of it but I can't dredge up specifics. Speaking of dredging up memories, on TOD there has been mention of Pres. Carter being accurate about our energy situation. But IIRC what he got congressional approval for was heavily weighted towards oil shale. The compromises made!
Yeah, completely accurate to the point of scaremongering everyone to believe we would reach peak oil in the mid-80s. What a flop!
Flop???
Forget about the spurious topic of global warming for one moment.
Watch this video and tell me exactly where M King Hubbert was wrong and why you think President Carter was pulling our chain?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImV1voi41YY
If you listen carefully he stated that the peak of conventional crude production would occur in 1995, BUT HOLD ON ONE SECOND PLEASE: Because "...It appears OPEC was curtailing their production - that would push the peak back by 10 years..."
That was not a lucky guess, and infact, it was a calculation based on hard data that turned out to be correct to the exact year.
The peak of conventional crude did infact occur in the year 2005.
Correct me if I'm wrong but 10 years added to 1995 would put us at the year 2005. Right?
Do not confuse NGL's with Conventional oil.
Again I say - CONVENTIONAL CRUDE peaked GLOBALLY in 2005.
Hubbert made that calculation in 1976 at the beginning of Carters term as President.
I do not ever recall a speach by Carter in which he stated we would reach the peak of oil extraction globally in the mid 80's.
However, M K Hubbert was spot on with his calculations and gave us invaluable information on the crisis that was occurring.
There may be a plethora of answers to the crisis - and not everyone will agree on exactly what should be done to alleviate this unprecedented threat to civilization - but the warning was clearly given.
It should be quite obvious to most that President Carter was well aware of the global energy situation by having access to data that is not readily available to the general public; and he was well aware of the work of M King Hubbert.
Mr. Carter was absolutely correct in stating we were in a crisis as early as the 70's.
But of course, in the financial world, 'Cassandra' will always be the whipping boy and Reaganomics came along to save the day. - Until now.
Forgive my crudity.....Cassandra is about to kick the financial world's ass.
It's also worth mentioning that Gore was warning us about global warming before the vast majority of people had a clue what it was. Gore was not the President, so I don't think his watering down the protocol had anything to do with his true feelings; it was a function of Clintonian political calculation.
He did not have a swing towards liberalism or care for the environment; he was just freed up to say and do anything he damn well pleased. I see nothing strange about this, especially as one who has been in the government and understands the constraints.
WHAT? I mean, I am no Al Gore fan, but to simply state lies like that is no help at all. Much before he was VP he did talk about the ozone layer and the Global Warming issue. Kyoto wasn't signed because Congress didn't allowed it, despite Gore's efforts into signing it.
I mean, how can you even come to get history completely backwards? It's not even funny. Research a little more before regurgitating trash.
It's not backwards at all. It's exactly as I said: he negotiated for the US, got it watered down to be the most piss-weak treaty imaginable, and then it didn't get passed in the US anyway.
This is not correct. Gore was very active on renewable energy in the late 1970s as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science and Technology. I worked for another Congressman who was on the same committee.--Tom Gray, American Wind Energy Association, www.awea.org, www.20percentwind.org