UPDATE: I missed this in the interview, since it wasn’t in the publicist release, it would be a shame not to highlight it.
Would there be hurricanes and floods and droughts without man-made global warming? Of course. But they’re stronger now. The extreme events are more extreme. The hurricane scale used to be 1-5 and now they’re adding a 6.
People send me stuff. Apparently, WaPo is so proud of this interview, they had their publicist send it out. I don’t think Al realizes that the “raging” he perceives is actually raucous laughter. – Anthony
From The Washington Post publicist:
Washington Post’s Ezra Klein spoke with Al Gore about why he’s so optimistic about stopping global warming. Excerpts are pasted below and the full transcript can be found at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/21/al-gore-explains-why-hes-optimistic-about-stopping-global-warming/
EK: Do the policy failures of the last decade put more pressure on technological advances to be the source of the solution?
AG: No, I seem them as intertwined. To some extent, the failure of policy at Copenhagen and before that in Washington has put more emphasis on the hopeful developments in technology, but as the conversation is won on global warming — and it’s not won yet but it’s very nearly won — the possibilities for policy changes once again open up.
EK: What do you think of the Obama administration’s intentions to push regulatory approaches to limiting carbon emissions?
AG: I’m very encouraged. I thought the president’s speech on climate was terrific and it followed the inspiring comments in his inaugural address and his post-election State of the Union. And remember the impact of policy direction on business calculations is forward-looking. When business begins to understand the direction of policy, they have to start adjusting to where the policy is going. When you look at the EPA process, it’s undeniably clear that there will be a price on carbon one way or the other. Then when you look at the movement in other countries and the states and local measures being enacted, the direction is now quite clear and businesses are making plans to adjust to it.
EK: Give me the optimistic scenario on what happens next. If all goes well, what do the next few years look like on this issue?
AG: Well, I think the most important part of it is winning the conversation. I remember as a boy when the conversation on civil rights was won in the South. I remember a time when one of my friends made a racist joke and another said, hey man, we don’t go for that anymore. The same thing happened on apartheid. The same thing happened on the nuclear arms race with the freeze movement. The same thing happened in an earlier era with abolition. A few months ago, I saw an article about two gay men standing in line for pizza and some homophobe made an ugly comment about them holding hands and everyone else in line told them to shut up. We’re winning that conversation.
The conversation on global warming has been stalled because a shrinking group of denialists fly into a rage when it’s mentioned. It’s like a family with an alcoholic father who flies into a rage every time a subject is mentioned and so everybody avoids the elephant in the room to keep the peace. But the political climate is changing. Something like Chris Hayes’s excellent documentary on climate change wouldn’t have made it on TV a few years ago. And as I said, many Republicans who’re still timid on the issue are now openly embarrassed about the extreme deniers. The deniers are being hit politically. They’re being subjected to ridicule, which stings. The polling is going back up in favor of doing something on this issue. The ability of the raging deniers to stop progress is waning every single day.
When that conversation is won, you’ll see more measures at the local and state level and less resistance to what the EPA is doing. And slowly it will become popular to propose steps that go further and politicians that take the bit in their teeth get rewarded. I remember when the tide turned on smoking in public places. People thought the late Frank Lautenburg was crazy for proposing a ban on smoking in airplanes, but he was rewarded politically and then politicians began falling all over themselves to do the same. That’s the optimistic scenario. And it’s not just a scenario! It’s happening now!
Don’t get me wrong. We’ve got a long way to go. We’re still increasing emissions. But we’re approaching this tipping point. Businesses are driving it. Grass roots are driving it. Policies and changes in law in places like india and China and Mexico and California and Ireland will proliferate and increase, and soon we’ll get to the point where national laws will evolve into global cooperation.
—
Molly Gannon
Senior Publicist
The Washington Post
Ever since Obama gave his “Climate Speech”, the stock market has dropped. This must be due to businesses looking forward.
952 comments and some are raging. Big Al is none too popular.
ShrNfr –
same writer, but it’s all about “longevity” here:
21 Aug: Bloomberg Businessweek: Lynn Doan: California 2016 Carbon Trading Surges After Permits Sell Out
Futures contracts for a record 1.83 million 2016 allowances for December 2015 delivery cleared today on the IntercontinentalExchange Inc. (ICE:US), settling at $12.50 each, Brookly McLaughlin, a spokeswoman for the exchange in Atlanta, said by e-mail. The previous high was 960,000 allowances on May 21.
“There is now conviction that this program will be here for a while,” Lenny Hochschild, managing director at the White Plains, New York-based environmental broker Evolution Markets, said by telephone.
California’s Air Resources Board sold all 9.56 million permits for 2016 at $11.10 each during an Aug. 16 auction, 39 cents above the clearing price of all previous sales, the agency said in a report on its website today…
The sellout for 2016 permits “really shows that these companies, probably the big oil companies, are preparing for the longevity of this market,” Emily Reyna, senior manager of partnerships and alliances for the Environmental Defense Fund, said by telephone from San Francisco…
The agency (Air Resources Board) doesn’t disclose the names of winning bidders…
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-08-21/california-carbon-allowances-sell-at-a-dollar-below-forecasts
Elmers was the most humorous.
I like Pams. Maybe G-spot?
Chad Wozniak says:
August 21, 2013 at 5:48 pm
@Hardy Cross –
Since carbon taxes make fossil fuels more costly, and provide subsidy for renewables, alarmist investors in renewables can make money on otherwise uneconomic uinvestments. There is definitely a motivator here. Also, cap-and-trade, which is a form of carbon tax, creates an increment to fuel costs which becomes a tradeable instrument, also a vehicle for making money. Both of these result in an effective redistribution of wealth from lower to higher income people.
————————————————————————–
And wait until you see the b>hedge funds they create from these “new instruments”.
That’ll be the real money.
cn
14 instances of “resilient”/”resiliance” in this single article! could some academic please do a study to find out when “robust” turned into “resilience”?
NOAA, U.S. Geological Survey, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers all involved in this story:
20 Aug: CNS News: Susan Jones: Gov’t. Remapping of Sandy-Damaged Areas May Curb Coastal Development
If your seaside home or business washes away in a coastal storm, will you be allowed to rebuild? Or would sand dunes in place of buildings make the area more “resilient”?
The federal government announced on Monday that it is remapping storm-damaged areas of the East Coast, a move that will contribute to new “resilience standards” for the post-Hurricane Sandy rebuilding effort…
Resilience Institute
Interior Secretary Sally Jewell went to New York last week to announce the establishment of a new Science and Resilience Institute at Sandy-ravaged Jamaica Bay, in Queens. She also announced a $100 million competitive grant program to build “safer and more resilient communities.”…
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/govt-remapping-sandy-damaged-areas-may-curb-coastal-development
Al Gore is the Al Sharpton of climate.
Luther Wu says:
August 21, 2013 at 4:11 pm
“So where’s the divine intervention, now?
I can’t imagine (nor do I want to ) a worse scenario for our nation than what has come to be the routine and frequent usurpation of power, by this current administration.”
We were given eight years to do better but we blundered. We need a conservative party that serves main street rather than Wall Street. If we could find a presidential candidate who addresses the important questions and who clearly states the facts and the choices, the way Anthony does in his recent climate video, he would win with the largest landslide in history. Need I say that Anthony should serve as an inspiration to us all – no, I need not.
Besides the Tippering point, didn’t he also claim 400ppm that was retracted? Someday he will defeat ManBearPig.
Jay Davis,
“has an annual “carbon” footprint larger than half the population of Tennessee.”
Is that singly or all together? It wouldn’t surprise me if Al’s carbon footprint was larger than some of the smaller states.
Al Gore keeps referring to “the conversation” yet calls people who disagree with him deniers and the equivalent of racist homophobic alcoholics who support slavery. Some “conversionation”! No wonder he is losing.
@Chuck Nolan –
Spot on – and throw in the puts and calls and short sales and all manner of other derivatives.
Good article on why science & politics don’t mix. The Goreacle should read it, he’s the worst I’ve ever seen when it comes to presenting scientific information, facts & figures etc.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-20/why-science-and-politics-don-t-mix.html
On the WaPo story page, the 97% of commenters really do have no doubt Al Gore is a fraud.
Should you decide to check the statistics yourself, be careful not to count the same two or three trolls trying to control the conversation. Earlier pro Al G. comments were very rare. Now the paid blog hitmen working for the pro-Al side are resorting to the usual tactics of name calling and questioning the education and innate intelligence of the commenters on the other side. The degree to which the trolls have mastered the tactics of debate and the facts are obvious. And they think they are winning. What they are doing is boring the audience to death.
What the Secret Service thought about Past Presidents and First Ladies:
From the Secret Service/Very interesting snippets from Ronald Kessler’s book about our presidents
Snippets from a book of “Impressions & Observations” of Secret Service personnel assigned to guard U.S. Presidents/First Ladies, and Vice Presidents.
*ALBERT GORE
* An egotistical ass, who was once overheard by his Secret Service detail lecturing his only son that he needed to do better in school or he “would end up like these guys” — pointing to the agents.*
From ‘Money Morning’
Al Gore Won’t Like This
Thursday, 22nd August 2013 – Melbourne, Australia
By Kris Sayce
In 2010, Al Gore was looking for an office building in New York City. It was to house his firm, Generation Investment Management. The VP settled on the new Bank of America Tower in the Bryant Park area of Manhattan.
At the ceremonial opening of the building in 2010, VP Gore said:
‘Any serious effort to solve the climate crisis must start with recapturing the enormous amounts of energy wasted due to inefficiency. Roughly 30 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions here in the United States come from heating, cooling, and lighting buildings. I’m honored that my firm, Generation Investment Management, is based here and I applaud the leadership of the Mayor and all of those who helped make this possible.’
The Bank of America Tower was the standard for green buildings. But three years later, VP Gore may not be so enthusiastic about the Bank of America Tower…especially if he read a recent article in the New Republic…
Beware the ‘Toxic Tower’
Just three weeks ago, the New Republic reported:
‘Gore’s applause, however, was premature. According to data released by New York City last fall, the Bank of America Tower produces more greenhouse gases and uses more energy per square foot than any comparably sized office building in Manhattan. It uses more than twice as much energy per square foot as the 80-year-old Empire State Building.’
Oh dear.
That is a surprise. One of the world’s supposedly greenest and most environmentally friendly buildings turns out to be a ‘Toxic Tower’.
Interestingly, VP Gore’s investment firm still resides at the Bank of America Tower. We wonder if the ‘Veep’ is still honoured to be based there.
I guess we’re all flat-earthers… oh, wait…
Gunga Din says:
August 21, 2013 at 3:03 pm
Once again I’m reminded that when I first noticed “Global Warming” being talked about I didn’t pay much attention. But when Al Gore started talking about it, I didn’t become skeptical. I became suspicious.
———————————————————————————————————
I’ll second that.
Does anyone else see the duplicitous use of Hurricane Sandy by Mr. Gore?
Early in the article he says that no one would ever predict water so early at the WTC memorial site but it happened just last year on October 29th. So obviously the seas are RISING AT HUGELY ADVANCED LEVELS!
Later he goes on to show that Hurricane Sandy on October 29th of last year is an example of EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING!!!
So which is it? Was water at the WTC memorial an example of rising seas, or an EXTREME WEATHER EVENT?!?!? Seems pretty dishonest to be quoting it one way as an example of rising seas when it was quite obviously a hurricane. By that logic I suppose all of New Jersey and the New York seaboard have also seen rising sea levels cause they had a hurricane once, which is pretty out of the ordinary, being seaside states and all…
In other news, an early scene of Gore calmly explaining the consequences of global warming has surfaced:
I, for one, don’t fall into fits of rage, I tend more toward gales of laughter. I think we’re at the point now where it takes only a few minutes to deprogram a relatively intelligent person (who, like many of us, used to believe because they didn’t look too closely at the data).
Now, you compare the “Climate Scientists”, like Mann, Gavin, Hanson, etc. reaction to someone pointing out flaws or errors… THOSE are fits of rage. Blind, frothing rage.
And no intelligent person ever “switched” from skeptic to believer. None. The believers are flocking to the skeptic side, however.
Just like his politics, al-Gore is completely backward in every possible way.
“Jimbo says:
August 21, 2013 at 4:02 pm”
I knew Gore had acquired much of his wealth from oil and coal through the family company Occidental and was about to post something similar. But the other involvements were an eye opener.
If there is a real problem for the climate on this rock through our burning of fossil fuels then these clowns need to lead by example and not impose taxes on the rest of us and the poor to support their lifestyles. I don’t see that happening.
Our dear George Monbiot also equates flying with child abuse….
Except when doing the rounds to promote a book I guess……
“The ability of the raging deniers to stop progress is waning every single day.”
“They are not in Baghdad. They are not in control of any airport. I tell you this. It is all a lie. They lie. It is a hollywood movie. You do not believe them.”
Big weird Al confuses me with his childish babylonian slams.
Apparently his IQ dropped when his carbon footprint stocks crashed.
Who denied a warming trend, or climate change (it happens throughout history)?
Us deniers deny the causation and the dystopian predictions.