Gore: Polluters Finance Research to Cast Doubt on Global Warming
SINGAPORE - Research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming is part of a huge public misinformation campaign funded by some of the world’s largest carbon polluters, former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday.
”There has been an organized campaign, financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community,” Gore said at a forum in Singapore. ”In actuality, there is very little disagreement.” 
Gore likened the campaign to the millions of dollars spent by U.S. tobacco companies years ago on creating the appearance of scientific debate on smoking’s harmful effects.
”This is one of the strongest of scientific consensus views in the history of science,” Gore said. ”We live in a world where what used to be called propaganda now has a major role to play in shaping public opinion.”
After the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made up of the world’s top climate scientists, released a report in February that warned that the cause of global warming is ”very likely” man-made, ”the deniers offered a bounty of $10,000 for each article disputing the consensus that people could crank out and get published somewhere,” Gore said.
”They’re trying to manipulate opinion and they are taking us for fools,” he said.
He said Exxon Mobil Corp., the world’s largest publicly traded oil company, is one of the major fuel companies involved in attempting to mislead the public about global warming.
Last year, British and American science advocacy groups accused ExxonMobil of funding groups that undermine the scientific consensus on climate change. The company said the scientists’ reports were just attempts to smear Exxon Mobil’s name and confuse the debate.
Gore said that with growing awareness of climate change, the world will see an acceleration in efforts to fight the problem, and urged businesses to recognize that reducing carbon emissions is in their long-term interest.
But while Washington should lead by example, he said developing nations also have to play a part.
”Countries like China, just to give an example, which will next year be the largest emitter in the world, can’t be excluded just because it’s technically a developing country,” Gore said. ”When you look at the absolute amount of CO2 each year and going forward, China will soon surpass the U.S.”
Gore said that as the Asian giant’s economy expands, China faces an increased risk from climate change and must leapfrog old, polluting technologies while maintaining growth.
The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency said in June that China overtook the United States in carbon dioxide emissions by about 7.5 percent in 2006. China was 2 percent below the U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions in 2005, the agency said.
Copyright 2007 Associated Press.
Exxon was spending 10s of millions of dollars every year to discredit the evidence. They got caught and said they would stop, but $10 million a year when you TAKE $40 billion per year in profits is nothing to them. They paid their former CEO $400 million for a retirement package.
I wonder what took Al Gore so long to finally talk about what has been known for years. His portly self must really be winded from running so long and hard to catch up with the parade he is trying to lead.
These are the last days of a very dark multiple thousand year cosmic cycle. It’s been called “the end of the barbarian age”. Environmental devastation, political corruption, infinite greed, war, & poverty will become things of the past IF we’re able to prevent them from going too far. Fight - fight - Fight!
“Non illegitimi carborundum est”
- Don’t let the bastards grind you down.”
Hey, wait a minute. Why would a major oil company like Exxon, spend money to debunk a serious subject like global warming? Does that make a lick of sense?
Exxon is an American Corporation based in Texas, they have gas stations in every state, they have joined forces with Mobil, the flying horse guys. Naw, this article cannot be so, don’t listen to it. I have an Exxon credit card and I’m a staunch republican who attends church. So there ya go. Gore can’t be right,___ he’s left.
Isn’t he the guy who was screwed by the Supreme Court and booted out the door so he couldn’t be our president? There ya go again, who’s right? Bush, Exxon, Cheney, Rove and Halliburton___ that’s who.
Think I’ll go watch Fox news now and get some more smarts.
This article reminds us how powerful money becomes when its goal is to distort the truths that would save us from our own excesses. Speaking of excess, if anyone has a direct tie to Gore, he needs to change his diet! He looks bloated and unhealthy and I would assume it’s from eating meat with starchy products together. I’d like him to have a long life because his message is one that needs whatever time mankind has left to take root. I honor him, not for any cronyism in his past, but for taking this all important SHOW on the road and standing up to the LIES of the oil-y carpetbaggers.
If our system of justice were functional, this type of craven corporate behavior would be a felony and these crooks would be in prison. We would revoke the corporate charter of any corporation that behaves so irresponsibly at such tremendous cost to the security of the country.
That we don’t shows that the stability of equity markets is the most important element of our society. The drive for market stability explains both the anti-global warming hocus pocus and the war in Iraq. The problem is the stability of the energy industry and the stability of the economy are too intertwined.
One blogger here wrote recently of Petrodollars propping up the entire US economy. I hope his analysis was wrong. If he’s right, we must either change the fundamental basis back to manufacturing using a crow bar and a sledgehammer, or continue attacking oil rich nations such as Venezuela and Iran to force them to use US dollars as the currency for oil transactions.
The crow bar could be a massive government investment in technology to reduce the level of greenhouse gasses, and a massive investment in alternative energy infrastructure. The reason this won’t happen is that no energy company wants to walk away from the obscene and rising value of untapped reserves.
Unfortunately, we cannot allow the untapped reserves to be tapped and converted to greenhouse gas. The party is officially over.
Al, keep on keeping on. You’re doing great, but I hope you will decide to run for the Greens in the near future, with Nader, Gravel or Kucinich as a running mate. We’ll get behind you and you will win. In my book, you’ve very much redeemed yourself from your mistake of running with Lieberman and other failings your mostly Republican detractors, scared of your winning possibilities, attribute to you.
BTW, if you decide to run, don’t take private aircraft. Take public transportation instead. As far as your weight problem goes, stay away from high fructose corn syrup.
When the PEOPLE have no control of their national natural resources THEY HAVE NO POWER, or control, over their government.
RE-regulation of natural resources is paramount if we are to have any say over the mega-corporations that are represented by “our” elected officials. (maybe “elected” should have been in quotations as well?)
May the revolution be as swift as it is peaceful.
Peace to you and yours.
“He said Exxon Mobil Corp., the world’s largest publicly traded oil company, is one of the major fuel companies involved in attempting to mislead the public about global warming.”
By funding at least 19 fake organizations and “think tanks” to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. AND YOU’RE ALL NOT BOYCOTTING EXXON WHY AGAIN?
Without our money, Exxon is powerless. Vote with your wallet.
frank,
I am with you on that one. Just yesterday my tank was on E and I had to grit my teeth and curse as I passed an Exxon station. I made it to the next station, and promised myself to stay far enough away from the E to never be tempted again.
Don’t forget MOBIL too, they are Exxon.
I don’t really have an Exxon card and I’m not a repub either. I was kidding.
So the big polluters are spending $10 million a year to deny global warming? So what, the global warming machine is spending around $5 billion a year between research and writing pretentious documents such as the latest IPCC AR4 report, not counting the cost of building, launching and operating data satellites. Doesn’t look to me that the fight is balanced.
al, if you’re out there listening, you have said that you want to champion the cause of defeating global warming. well, with the existing powers that be standing in your way the only way you can win is to run for president. run and prove to a desperate country that the rigged system can be dismantled. run and be that wild card that shuffles the deck on the current despots. run and shake the world upside down. i and alot more people than i ever imagined know the fight is fixed. know that the elections are bullshit. know that our entire country and its system have been hijacked. know that you are the only true liberal democrat left out there with any shred of integrity. quit yapping and do something about it! Gore/Kucinich 2008 or maybe since we are spinning the woman and the black thing in this election how about a black woman Gore/Mckinney 2008
The question is not about “balance.” It’s about what is actually happening to our environment and our future. You assume what you call “the global warming machine” is a fraud too. The funding of scientific study is far more extensive because good science does not assume. For instance, I watched a program about a research project being conducted in Greenland on the calving of ice bergs and the increased movement of a glacier. The scientists say that it may be ten years before they get all of their answers. In the meantime, there has been much research done long before most of our world’s population ever heard the words “global warming.” At what point in the process, especially when projections must be made as to where this is all going, do we start making political, environmental and economic decisions? Wrapped up in this global warming ball of wax is the reality that populations are being adversely impacted with disabilities, chronic illnesses and deaths. That needs to be counted too. For some weird reason, it is being ignored.
For all of you who think Gore is the same guy who used to be vice-president, I strongly
suggest you get a copy of his new book—”THE ASSAULT ON REASON”. This book could have been
written by Chomsky or Nader. As much as I like Kucinich, I would vote for Gore if he runs.
urthsong, you say “good science does not assume” and I agree with that. Unfortunately there are still a lot of assumptions in the IPCC WG1 AR4 report and yet they want to shove it down our throats like a gospel. Meanwhile there is perfectly valid research going on for example on the mechanism of cloud formation as an alternate climate driver. These researchers who BTW are not funded by big oil are having a heck of a time since they are cast as crackpots by the global warming machine which meanwhile is making manipulations of its own. Ever heard of the hockey stick, one of the main icons of previous IPCC reports but now discredited? Recently, in the same week, two scientific papers were issued, the first saying that GW causes an increase in Atlantic storms, the second that there is not global change except in the Atlantic that forms only 15% of global hurricanes, cyclones typhoons and other tropical storms. Then comes Al Gore who compares the atmosphere of the Earth and Venus. Protective of my planet? I am all for it since my carbon footprint is pretty small, living in the tropics without a car, unlike this paragon of climate virtue who has the same footprint as a whole village. But gullible, I refuse to be.
Poet, thank you for putting the focus on what REALLY matters–the appearance of the messenger. You must be very fit and attractive, I am deducing, therefore your points are valid.
I didn’t realize that Al Gore was so far behind the curve on global warming. I actually thought that as far as politicians go he was rather prescient. Thanks for setting the matter straight.
Jstevens, have you ever written to a solid block of concrete?
Yes, you just did.
Unfortunately, Al Gore has always had very intelligent things to say about the environment, as well as about the internet. He was touting alternative, renewable energy sources more than 20 years ago on the floor of the Senate. Unfortunate, because his behavior has been quite at odds with his intelligent, erudite statements.
Recently, I decided to torture myself by reading, “The Assault on Reason.” It is an astute, scathing assessment of the Bush administration and the modern media. At times, it stands as one of the most well-reasoned treatises on modern American government out there. But, within this treatise, Gore repeatedly stresses why it is that he is NOT the savior that his insights might lead us to believe. He insists on REPRESENTATIVE democracy as opposed to DIRECT. He insists that we NEED this buffer so that the momentary passions of the people are staid by the REASON of an elite minority. Never once does it occur to him that this system of government brought us the Cold War, Vietnam, McCarthyism, George Bush, the hushing of the attempted (now successful?) fascist coup in 1933, COINTELPRO, illegal wiretapping, then and now, illegal overthrows of regimes across time and space…all things that have been allowed, against the better wisdom of the people, because of this ELITE BUFFER. Gore refuses to acknowledge the corporate influence that has ruined his own party, though he, cautiously, observes it in the Republican Party. CAUTIOUSLY. He speaks in mythologies of America, which will not allow us to address the TRUTHS, resolving the problems we currently face. Mr. Gore needs to learn that America won’t improve by pretending it is a MORAL country, but it needs to take ON the REALITY of what we do to BECOME a moral, respectable (and RESPECTFUL) force in the world and at home. Mr. Gore will not acknowledge that we are not going to be led from the mire by HIS class, but that it is time for REAL democracy, the REAL voice of the people, instead of an aristocracy TELLING US what our voices are saying, What they SHOULD be saying. Enough puffy white guys telling us about the important lessons of Martin Luther King Jr., while ignoring the words of Malcolm X. Enough pretending that, behind the peaceful, non-violent message of Martin Luther King, were Black families SHOOTING BACK when lynching parties came to the neighborhood. Enough pretending that McCarthyism was a blip on the screen rather than a momentary excess of a consistent, underlying theme that got so bad even the rich folks hated it and had to speak out.
Read Al Gore, quote Al Gore, respect the intellect of Al Gore, but don’t VOTE for Al Gore until he renounces the DLC and all for which it stands.
www.unknown-arts.org/politics
Misinformation like this is one of the prices we pay for freedom of speech. In this case, it is largely recognized for what it is and I thank Gore for saying so.
China’s economy is growing fast and they have/will surpass the US in CO2 emissions. They are, however, deploying my favored (partial) solution to global warming: nuclear power. They have 11 operating power reactors and have 12 more under construction. They are also erecting 2 huge hydroelectric plants, one at 3 Gorges and the other on the Yalu river. Unfortunately, they are cranking out coal fired electric plants at an incredible rate.
Kem-do you have any updated information on the Chinese power tower?
JS Stevens and Kem Patrick–
Since neither of you really got the point of my previous message, I’ll go to the ding-dong school version.
Uncle Al is shocked, simply shocked at how oil companies are fundig research in order to butress their positions on global warming being a fiction.
Al is a former VP and these shenanigans were going on at that time and what did Al say or do about them–Nada, zilch. Running to get to the head of the parade is a metaphor to refer to such people whose postures appear to be more influenced by whatever is perceived to have mass public appeal rather than on principle.
I personally find Al Gore to be a 24 carat phoney and pledge to all the rest of the common dreamers to refrain from even commenting on anything he either writes or that is written about him from now on. Expect to be given a weekly dose of “Gore fever” from now through next year at this time.
UNKNOWN ARTS: Astute analysis!
BILLY-y4: You would make a great marine. Why don’t you sign up?
Blah Blah Blah. Poet. What I want to know is how much you WEIGH. Please reply so that we can have a real discussion.
By the way, the recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change prompted a slew of blatant bribery by Exxon Mobil. When Al Gore was VP, global warming was widely ignored and did not threaten the fossil fuels industry the way it does today. There is so much corruption impeding environmental reform that one might not know where to begin rebuttal. Perhaps exposing Exxon Mobil was not at the forefront 8 years ago, but this is most likely because misinformation wasn’t as pervasive.
Newsweek also chose this week to do a story (on the cover) about “well-funded [Global Warming] naysayers”.
I’m curious to know what politician you have discovered who has discussed global warming more thoroughly or in advance of Mr. Gore.
Kem Patrick: Thanks for your comment. I don’t think I’ve ever been called a ding-dong before either.
In which way is the IPCC latest report threatening big oil? With demand increasing continuously and supply pretty well near top production, Exxon is not about to put the key on the door. More likely, in the boardroom, they are having a good laugh at the report, why should they bribe anyone, especially at the tune of a paltry $10 million a year. Come-on, get real!
One of the reasons that corporations are running wild is that they are too large. No company aught to be able to have more than 5 to 10% of any market. When they hit 5% they should be told to spin off part of their business. When they hit 10% the government should do it for them.
Market forces only work for the good when the number of customers and suppliers is large enough that there is a market.
I like the sound of a green and a peace candidate and can see the headline, Sustainablity and shared vision trump greed!, that is if we vote.
“One blogger here wrote recently of Petrodollars propping up the entire US economy”
mirf59-
In 2000 Iraq started accepting euros to buy its oil
In 2006 Iran started accepting euros and yen.
From the BBC (May 2006)- Some reports have suggested Iran’s move may be part of a bid to undermine the importance of the dollar.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4990302.stm
For God’s sake Poet, get off your Anti-Gore rant. It’s OOOOOLLLLLDDDDD… You wonder what took Gore so long to talk about what’s been known for years? Good grief man, you are an idiot. He’s been fighting for the environment for the better part of 3 decades.
You’d be happy no doubt if he just shut up and said nothing. And the cause would suffer if that happened… and you’d be right in line with conservative Republicans… or are you one?
Siouxrose,
I pulled a stint in the army. It was enough for this lifetime. I did not fit the mold very well-I’m too people oriented and am not very good at the party line when I don’t believe it. Besides, next month I can be certified as a geezer.
I went back and reread my last post-It is not intended to be anti-Gore. It is intended to deplore the oil company misinformation but my intent can be misunderstood.
Methinks we are fighting God, the Source, the Force, or the Universe here. I’m sure that human beings are overpopulating the Earth, polluting the atmosphere and causing all sorts of health problems, as well as killing off species and destroying important habitat. But, I’m having a hard time believing that we humans, less than gnats in the Universe, can be having that much of an effect on the actual change of the Earth’s overall climate. I think we’re giving ourselves too much credit for having control over our planet. I certainly respect Gore for trying to do something to get people to change their ways to conserve and protect resources, but the Earth has gone through thousands of severe climate changes during it’s billions of years of existence. I’ve recently been reading some astronomy and astrophysics information, and cyclical changes to Earth’s climate have in the past been caused by changes in the Sun’s activity, asteroids/meteorites striking the earth, violent caldara/volcanic explosions - a very long time before homo sapiens chopped down the first tree and built a fire. There is plenty of documented evidence that changes in gravitational and electromagnetic fields, sunspot activity, and other galactic happenings are the likely causes of the rapid increase in the Earth’s temperature we’ve been noting for the past few decades. Let’s keep in mind that we’ve only been keeping really accurate records of this scientific data for about a century, if that, a millisecond in Earth history. I surely believe that the giant oil corporations should be reined in for very many econimic and political reasons, and I do my part to try and conserve Earth resources for future generations, however, I do not believe we should be foolish enough to think we can interfere in the natural cycles of the Earth/Universe. We should, however, prepare ourselevs for a very different lifestyle during this upcoming century.
GLOBAL WARMING REMISS It is remarkable that it took the documentary “Inconvenient Truth” to alert many to the impending dangers from global warming, which has been obvious to anyone who had made even minor efforts to be informed. The evidence linking carbon pollution to warming is as close to certain as science can be. Its causes, consequences, and mitigation requirements have been documented by many dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists, and chronicled in the press for years.
The dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data used by this administration to conceal and derail corrective measures for this threat and other vital environmental reforms has also been apparent. Contrary to their assertions, measures to reduce greenhouse gases could only improve our economy by lessening our trade deficits, and improving our security by reducing our dependance on foreign oil. We could also regain some of our lost world respect that has resulted from our opposition Kyoto while arrogantly contributing disproportionally to carbon pollution.
Often overlooked is the fact that the same measures needed to mitigate global warming would be necessary even if it were not an issue. Conservation, alternative energy development, anti- pollution refinements, etc are essential for other vital environmental reforms such as air and water quality, reductions in toxic waste generation, land preservation, etc.
The environmental and social damage from our indifference to carbon pollution and related environmental measures can only worsen if we allow these destructive environmental policies of this reckless and unlearned president, guided by his supporters in the energy cartel, to continue.
If Americans continue to tolerate these outrages, we will be judged as reckless and selfish by the rest of th eworld as well as our decendants.
Come on you guys. Nobody’s perfect. If you agree that global warming is the most important issue of our time, Gore is the man for the job.
You can read all about some of the organizations and individuals they fund at www.exxonsecrets.org
Also our NASA censored project is very active and want to inform everyone
we have auctions on eBay for some of our lunar material.
Thanks
S. Ray DeRusse
www.bccmeteorites.com
I agree that Gore’s heart is in the right place, but he has the charisma of a wet mop.
His “Assault on Reason” is a re-hash of what Michael Moore, Chomsky, and dozens of other “non-politicians” have been saying for decades.
It’s all good that he is out to protect Mother Earth (as Native Americans have been saying since whitey landed in North America 500 years ago), but I just wish the guy would hire an image consultant so the ignorant, unwashed masses would STOP VOTING REPUBLICAN.
And lest we all forget, in 2000, even before the Florida votes were recounted, Gore was on TV conceding the election to the scumbag Bush. He should have fought tooth-and-nail for justice seven years ago! Instead, he went into a depression, grew a Unibomber beard, and finally pulled himself out of it touting the environment.
There are no politicians with vision any more; Dems and Reps are six of one and half a dozen of the other.
But again, I think Gore’s heart is in the right place.
Of all the arguments against global warming, the one I find the most illogical is that which amitola above uses:
“But, I’m having a hard time believing that we humans, less than gnats in the Universe, can be having that much of an effect on the actual change of the Earth’s overall climate.”
We are probably not having much impact on the universe as a whole, but our small planet is undoubtedly overwhelmed by the careless actions of 6.7 billion people.
The Earth is about 4 billion years old. The oil and coal we are using today was formed hundreds of millions of years ago. Millions of years of carbon collections are being put into the atmosphere in just a few centuries.
The link between human activity and global warming is direct, well established and based on facts which no scientist disputes:
–Carbon traps heat in the atmosphere
–Burning fossil fuels has put about 37% more carbon in the atmosphere than was present 200 years ago.
More carbon = more heat.
This is grade school simple.
An increase in CO-2 levels of 5 % would be alarming. We are looking at a whopping 37%.
Even if you can’t find your answers in science, you can find your answers with a little common sense. Look out the window. Look at some pictures of what is happening in India, Africa and China. (Coal burning, slash and burn agriculture, population explosions) The world is packed to the brim with people. America still has wide open spaces, but much of the rest of the world is overcrowded.
Escualido: Exxon Mobil is doing smashingly well financially, but they see the writing on the wall:
Electric cars are on the way. (look at Tesla Motors)
Ethanol and bio diesel are already here.
Their favorite President has only one more year.
Al Gore is an international hero.
If they weren’t worried, they wouldn’t be buying scientists and websites.
Poet - Show us one other famous person, with at least half the weight of Al Gore who cares about the planet enough to do something about it. Are you pouting cause he doesn’t ride a bicycle to his presentations all over the planet?
ROBERT SETTGAST & JSTEVENS: Excellent rebuttal and/or explanation to the likes of AMITOLA. I have a friend who loves nature, acts as tour and kayak guide, yet listens to late night right wing radio. I hear the idiocies he touts from that source, and can’t believe with all his direct love and appreciation for nature, his mind can be so easily seduced. I guess it’s still that unconscious “if it’s on radio, it MUST be the truth” thing! What hubris to presume that all the cars pumping and power plants running and forests burning are not taken as a whole breaking down the long-established ecosystems set to regulate the necessary balance for species to continue!
BILLY-Y4: Your manners are commendable! I do feel that your sources of info are, however, influenced by those that do not wish the public to know what’s going on.
Money given in the name of research is anything but if the out come of the “research” is predetermined. Any good scientist knows that research has to be independently repeated/verified if it is to be considered valid. All others are suspect.
I have read Inconvenient Truth and Assault on Reason and I think they are both worth the time to read. As far as Al not speaking out as VP, there is a time and a place for things. As VP you are expected to do and not do certain things. Al is the son of a former Congressman, he was a Senator. He knows how to behave himself, even if others do not.
Jimmy Carter and Al Gore represent what civility used to be and what it can become again. Do not worry about Al’s weight, he will get back in shape, it just takes some time. In fact that shows how shallow some people can be obsessing about those things and ignoring the really important issues.
Siouxrose, you are always above the fray. Wise and peaceful and never resorting to the sarcasm or insults to which I sometimes succumb.
Please keep it up.
Yeah let’s talk about Al’s weight while climate change will cause our grandchildren to starve to death…
RE: Billy_y4 August 7th, 2007 7:18 pm
“They are, however, deploying my favored (partial) solution to global warming: nuclear power. They have 11 operating power reactors and have 12 more under construction.”
Billy, on a number of other threads I have posed this question to you and you have never taken the time to answer, but I will try once more…
Currently there are 438 nuclear power plants in the world. Several studies have shown 2,000 would be needed to supply the world’s energy needs, but the same reports state there would likely not be enough fuel to power them. Nuclear fuel is a finite quantity and just like oil it will run out (as an important aside I will add there was an article just yesterday relating ‘yellow cake’ from Niger in the past three years has gone from $10 to $150 per pound).
Ok, here’s the question. If nuclear power is a temporary source for meeting our energy needs why should we fund more very expensive nuclear power plants instead of pouring those billions into renewable sustainable ‘Green’ sources like solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, & tidal?
We’ve already had our discussions (and disagreements) about the ’supposed’ safety of nuclear plants, you’re on record as pro, while I stand opposed to all things nuclear, so let’s approach this issue where we might find some agreement. Prove to me building nuclear over renewable is sound fiscal policy.
On one point we definitely agree, that being the elimination of coal fired power plants is not an option, but a necessity.
Escualido,
You make the classic conservative mistake of thinking there are two sides with equal motivation in pushing their position. In nearly all circumstances the right is motivated to keep money in the hands of the few, whereas the left is motivated to distribute the wealth. In this case the right (i.e, Big Oil) has a huge incentive to discredit global warming, so that they can continue to make record profits. The left (i.e., global warming advocates) doesn’t have anywhere near the same incentive. The best you can come up with, I suppose, is perhaps a bunch of scientists keeping their jobs. So, please focus your skeptical eye on the ones who stand to lose/gain the most.
And amitola, you obvioulsy know nothing about the subject. Thinking that we cannot affect the planet because it seems so big and complex is the same as the creationists’ “intelligent design” argument.
I like the idea that every building can become a solar collector and give and take from the grid. Instead or centrally located power sources you have millions of micro sources of electricity. Just as much a part of the modern home as a refridgerator, a decentralized electrical system would make our infrastructure harder to threaten or hold us hostage over. Of course, all the big money takers would lose out, so you will see a concerted effort to provide “science” to discredit this approach as they are amoungst those who wish to control the sources of electricity.
There is no reason to think that science could not provide ever increasingly effcient solar cells when the money for research starts coming in. Just like my brand new “cutting edge” computer was pushed aside within 6 months of its purchase, the turn around could be very quick. I don’t think the same can be said for giant power plants. And, even though my computer is no longer on the top it will still serve me for many years. Upgrading your power system will become akin to buying a new washer. The power company will earn it’s money connecting and distributing power through the grid. This is not my idea, their are people out there trying to make this system a reality as we write.
JSTEVENS: Thank you for the kind compliment. I answer to “a higher authority.” However, if I depart from the ideal, you can gently remind me, even if I plead the “PMS clause.”
Paul,
Thanks for looking for the common ground. It is a welcome sign of civilization and civility.
Personally, I don’t look at nuclear power as a short term temporary solution, unless you mean a couple of hundred years as short term.
The known reserves of uranium at $25/pound is about 4.7 million tons (IAEA-2005 number). The annual demand for 2007 is projected to be 66,500 tons/year (World Nuclear Association). At current consumption rate, known reserves at $25/pound are thus better than 70 years.
The 2000 new reactors is about right if we want to convert all current electric generation world wide to nuclear. We don’t actually want to abandon the existing hydroelectric which, world wide, generates more electricity than nuclear does. Nor do we want to abandon the other existing renewable generation which equals 0.2% of the world nuclear generation (eia.doe.gov for 2004 numbers-latest available).
100% electrical generation with current technology would raise annual uranium consumption to about 425,000 tons. Current reserves at $25/pound would drop to about 10 years.
Other than Kazakhstan, there has been basically no uranium exploration in the last 20 years and reserves have been been stagnant (other than Kazakhstan which now has the worlds second largest reserve behind Australia). The reasons are several: The price was very depressed, as low as $6/pound. The weapon states had stopped accumulating uranium for weaponry and, starting about 6 years ago, began dumping their excess inventory and demilitarized uranium on the market. There was a wide perception that, because of TMI-2 followed by Chernobyl, that most nuclear power generation would fade out.
At the current market price of $125/pound, the world reserves are remarkably expanded although I don’t have a number. Because they have no domestic supply of uranium, the Japanese have been actively working on drawing uranium from seawater. They are not actively moving to deploy their technology but I have seen a number (sorry-can’t remember the source) that sea water extraction is a viable source of uranium at about $200/pound. This price is not prohibitive to economic nuclear power generation because uranium consumed per kilowatt-hour is really quite low.
Over 350 of the 438 reactors world wide are light water cooled. All of the 30 or so commercial reactors in the planning stage in the US are to be light water cooled. Light water reactors are a mature technology and have an excellent safety record. They will be the bread and butter reactors for the next 50 years or so.
Light water reactors are not very fuel efficient. They create more plutonium than they burn. They accumulate significant amounts of other transuranic elements in the fuel. About 95% of the uranium remains when the fuel is removed from the reactor.
To address the accumulated plutonium and other transuranics requires fast (no water or graphite) reactors. Fast reactors are more expensive to build and complex to operate than water cooled ones, hence there are none currently operating in the US. If you consider a water cooled reactor to get the equivalent of 20 miles per gallon on its fuel, fast reactors get about 400 miles per gallon. 50 years from now we need to be on the way to converting our nuclear fleet to fast reactors.
I have already been too long winded. We can address the relative costs of nuclear with renewables at a later time.
Regards, Bill
“Gorged”
If you understand Global Warming, you understand we don’t have much time left — alarmist? Right!!!
Gore is now FINALLY talking about ExxonMobil — ???
Their campaign has been going on for decades.
Where has Gore been to tell us.
And where is Gore –
And where are all of us to DEMAND that we nationalize our natural resources — including OIL — and that ownership no longer be in the hands of a few private families.
We can also — probably in just 5 years — replace every gas-guzzler on our highways with electric cars.
Let’s go, Al –
PS: ExxonMobil’s biggest propaganda SOAPBOX has been on the Op-Ed pages of the New York Times - for decades - !!
An unholy alliance between ExxonMobil and the NY Times.
We also have to look at our repeatedly failing system of Capitalism which works mainly to put huge wealth in the hands of the few — “a ridiculous King-of-the-Hill System.”
Unregulated capitalism — pretty much where we are again right now — is merely organized crime.
Siouxrose
Thank you for your gracious response to my Aug 8,12:30AM comment on Mr Gores article. It is apparent that this administration’s successes, with implementation of their dreadful policies stem from the fact that rhetoric is more appealing and quicker to grasp than logic for so many people.
Conscience: The political arena is full of people who have never mentioned the Exxon misinformation campaign. Why is it that Al Gore incurs all of your wrath?
He has been a champion of environmental causes for most of his adult life. He has no rival. Yet he is often criticized on this website for some trivial point–because his environmental crusade has not taken the exact form that his critic prefers. Or someone else hates him because he didn’t pursue the election long after it becaome a lost cause.
The Exxon story is big this week. It is really bad, but tragically it is just another chapter in the big book of corruption. There are a thousand other hideous corporate sins that need to be exposed.
“Where has Gore been to tell us” You have not been listening.
Where is your book? Your documentary? Why do you sit back and criticize as if it’s all so easy?
Did you stand before Congress with your CO-2 chart and all of your hopes and fears for the world on your sleeve, only to watch them shrug?
jstevens, I couldn’t have said it better myself. It is disheartening to see people criticize Gore because they are not aware of all he’s done. He’s written three books and has fought for these issues since the mid 70s.
He has given the green movement the biggest boost it’s had in years, and yet on this site, of all places, he is criticized b/c some haven’t read his books so criticize him for speaking out ‘now’ (as in this artilce) as if this is the first time he’s said anything in this vein.
Read his books, watch an Inconvenient Truth…. then form an opinion…
Billy__y4 __No sir, I have not read any thing lately about the Power Towers. I have read all of the comments here,including yours and Paul M Smith on this string. And I agree with you both and Jstevens, that we must stop burning coal as soon as practicle, for coal emmisions also put DU into our atmosphere among several other nasty chemicals.
I realize you do favor atomic power for that reason and Paul and I and millions of others do not favor nuclear power for many reaons.
The most important of those, is the deadly atomic waste, which must be SAFELY stored, for thousands of years.
It has been well proven, it’s not possible to safely store nuclear waste for even fifty years, much less for a hundred, a thousand, or forever, as it will be necessary to do. More nuke plants, more waste to store away. I love this, they put deadly waste in barrels , those in drums and bury the drums in ditches. Over time, the nuclear waste eats away at he metal drums and Oops, silent death seeping into the water tables and aquifers and it is out of sight and mind. That sir, is the crux of the problem.
I will not go into the numerous accidents that have already transpired with radiation leaks at several nuclear storage areas here in the United States alone. I will not go into use of the depeted uranium, which was promised to be “safely” stored forever by the nuclear agencies responsible for that. That alone, the use of DU for weapons and other items, is such an incredible mistake, that I honestly cannot believe it is happening. But it is.
Another big bone I have to chew on, in regards to the issue of nuclear power plants, is the potential for a disasterious nuclear power plant accident, which could easily steralize an area of land the size of Texas forever.__ FOREVER__ BILLY! Not to mention of course, it could easily kill millions of people. What are the odds? I don’t know, one in ten million would bother me, because if and when it does occur, the cost will never equal any gains we ever had by using nuclear energy for electrical power in the first place.
I can hear it now, just like the bridge that collapsed last week. “Oh no, how could that happen? This is a disaster that will awaken us”. Yeah, a nuclear accident due to an earthquake, a burst dam, a terrorist attack or any number of reasonable reasons will awaken us, those who aren’t killed in the accident.
I have no doubt that nuclear power plants are very well designed with built-in safety as a top priority. No sweat, they are safe___ for a few years they may be. Like bridges and dams, they wear out, anything man made wears out and sometimes at the most unexpected moment an accident occus, a failed valve, an internally corroded pipeline, a faulty switch. A failure of a part or wire. Just like a well designed Boeing 747 aircraft, a little inoxious part, or shorted wire fails, and BOOM!!! After an extensive investigation, the problem is fixed so it does not happen again, we’ve buried a hundred or so people, cleaned up the mess and go on with our lives. Shit happens. Well, when we lose a state or two forever, and bury a millon or so people, we probably will have very few comments like,__ shit happens.
Most of the nuclear plants now in operation are old in terms of mechanics. Some are located very near major earthquake fault lines, as is the proposed nuclear storage area in Nevada. “Safe, built to withstand an earthquake”, is what is broadcast by the NRC and those who love nuclear power. Let us remember, the last major quake in Northern California, the land rose twelve feet on one side of the fault line and that stretched all the way to Texas.
But that aside, the failure and a major disaster will likely be because of a simple little thing like a burst pipe, a faulty valve, or an electrical problem. We have not even discussed a human failure by a half asleep idiot on duty. The Titanic for example, unsinkable. “Oh my, tch-tch, imagine that”.
If we had put just half of the money into wind/solar energy, that we have put into nuclear power, there wouldn’t be any nuclear waste, or potential nuclear accidents to worry about. If we put our money into Wind/solar/tide and geo-thermal now, we could close all of the coal fired and nuke plants forever. In either event, we are going to be storng the nuclear waste we already have produced forever, and eventually, that deadly waste will crawl out and kill every living thing on this planet. Of curse the DU we are so stupidly spreading all over the planet now will do that anyway, and we don’t have to wait forever to see what is going to occur, maybe ten years or less.__ Oh Well, Shit Happens.
P\S Billy, You Take Care, Paul can give you some very good info on quake faults and locations of nuclear plants and waste sites.
Will it edit? We’ll see.
Kem,
You are right the nuclear waste must be stored for a long period of time. The most serious of that waste is the high level waste, the waste the Yucca mountain is intended to receive whether wisely or not.
If we continue to use only light water reactors, that waste will indeed be around and dangerous for a long, long time. That is one of the reasons that, in the long term, we will need fast reactors. With fast reactors, the really nasty long lived stuff (Plutonium, Neptunium, Americium and Curium) can be burned efficiently as fuel. If you can get rid of the transuranic waste, you basically have fission fragments left and they must be safeguarded for hundreds of years rather than thousands.
We have had some serious contamination problems in this country. The most egregious of these were in the weapons program where the DOE could hide behind secrecy. The cleanup effort has been woefully underfunded and tied up in political wrangling.
I don’t have a problem with either solar or wind power. All the numbers I have seen show them to be significantly more expensive than nuclear however. Short of compulsion, I don’t know how you make a private utility intentionally choose a more expensive option.
The main reason some utilities are now considering nuclear power is the expectation of some form of carbon tax. Coal is, without some form of CO2 penalty, generally less expensive than nuclear.
And the other problem of aged nuclear power plants that could create hell on earth with an accident? Billy, the waste is a given, we got it it’s ours. Actually it will be our next generations to hide out of sight. Don’t seem very fair, or very sensible. Money talks though, as you stated.
Billy, please return to the string about the DU causig cancers in GIs. Read the blog by minitru, Aug 8, 2:38 pm. It is better than great. I do believe it may help.
Fot those Gore fans who have short memories, or who have never heard of Occidental Petroleum, here’s a bit of important history:
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=468
ExxonMobil gives millions every year to so-called think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute. Like Mike Gravel said a few debates ago, Follow the money!