Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiFresh from winning the Nobel Peace Prize for his climate change evangelism, Al Gore is apparently considering an invitation from a prominent environmental group to engage in civil disobedience against the construction of new coal-fired power plants.
Rainforest Action Network issued the invitation to the former Vice President, according to RAN executive director Michael Brune. The San Francisco-based group has a twenty-year history of protesting against destructive logging practices and other causes of climate change; it specializes in targeting corporations as much as governments.
"We came across a quote from Gore in an interview with [New York Times] columnist Nicholas Kristof back in August, saying he didn't understand, quote, 'Why there aren't rings of young people blocking bulldozers and preventing them constructing new coal-fired power plants,'" said Brune. "We thought, 'Great idea!' That's the kind of activism we do at RAN. So we decided to invite Gore to join us."
Gore's office confirmed that the former Vice President had received RAN's invitation and was considering it, though no decision has been made.
"He has not accepted any of their offers to date," Kalee Kreider, a spokeswoman for Gore, said of the RAN offer. Kreider did not deny that this phrasing leaves open the possibility of Gore saying yes down the road.
RAN plans a national day of protest against coal on November 16, according to Brune.
If Gore did end up getting arrested during a protest against a coal-fired power plant, it would make front-page news throughout the world and put a spotlight on what some climate scientists and activists consider the single most important priority in the fight against climate change: halting the use of coal as the world's top source of electricity production. Coal is the most carbon-intensive of the three major fossil fuels (the others are oil and natural gas) whose combustion produces most of the carbon dioxide that is helping to raise temperatures and change climatic patterns on earth.
NASA scientist James Hansen, the man who first warned during testimony before the US Senate in 1988 that man-made greenhouse gas emissions were warming the planet, has called for a complete ban on new coal-fired power plants "until we have the technology to capture and sequester the CO2." That technology, Hansen estimates, is "probably five or ten years away." Any plants built without that technology "are going to have to be bulldozed," argues Hansen, if the earth is to avoid "dramatic climate changes that produce what I would call a different planet."
John McCain, the Arizona senator and Republican presidential candidate, reportedly told a crowd in New Hampshire this week that he would consider supporting a ban on new coal-fired power plants if he could be shown possible alternatives. McCain was responding to a question from activists with Step It Up, a grassroots organization pushing for bolder federal action against climate change, including a total ban on coal. Step It Up plans a national day of demonstrations on November 3, exactly one year before the 2008 presidential election.
The State of Kansas recently denied a permit for construction of a coal-fired power plant due to concern over the plant's CO2 emissions. "I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment if we do nothing," said Roderick Bremby, secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and the Environment, in explaining his rejection of the permit for the Sunflower Electric Power company.
In neighboring Iowa, Hansen is offering expert testimony in a lawsuit aiming to halt construction of the Sutherland Generating Station Unit 4 coal-fired plant. "Coal will determine whether we continue to increase climate change or slow the human impact," Hansen testified.
A native of Iowa, Hansen contended that a decision by his state to reject coal-fired power plants could be an important tipping point that would trigger broader shifts in public opinion and institutional behavior. "If the public begins to stand up in a few places and successfully oppose the construction of power plants that burn coal without capturing the CO2, this may begin to have a snowballing effect, helping utilities and politicians to realize that the public prefers a different path, one that respects all life on the planet."
Asked why he is focusing on Iowa when China is building many more coal-fired power plants, Hansen replied that China and other developing nations "must be part of the solution to global warming, and surely they will be, if developed nations take the appropriate first steps." The United States, Hansen noted, is responsible for three times as much of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere as any other nation.
True enough. But if China keeps building new coal plants at a rate of one every ten days, it won't much matter if US companies turn away from coal. The campaign against coal must be global if it is to succeed.
Al Gore could launch this campaign with a bang if he joined activists in facing down the bulldozers. But a word of advice, Mr. Gore: make a US power plant your first target, but don't leave out China and the rest of the world. Carbon is a climate killer, wherever it originates.
Mark Hertsgaard is The Nation's environment correspondent, a fellow of The Nation Institute and the author of five books that have been translated into sixteen languages, including Earth Odyssey: Around the World in Search of Our Environmental Future.
© 2007 The Nation
21 Comments so far
Show All"John McCain, the Arizona senator and Republican presidential candidate, reportedly told a crowd in New Hampshire this week that he would consider supporting a ban on new coal-fired power plants if he could be shown possible alternatives."
Well here you are, Senator: a plan to free the US from its reliance on fossil fuels AND nuclear energy in 30 years.
http://www.ieer.org/carbonfree/summary.pdf
And if that's not convincing, get yourself a copy of John O. Blackburn's "Solar Florida", which essentially outlines a similar plan, and which--if we had started implementing in 1993 when he wrote the book--we'd be half way there already.
I wholeheartedly support Kucinich with every ounce of energy and money I can muster to get him nominated.
Perhaps you have not noticed but I am a regular strong proponent of Kucinich, to me he is the only candidate in the race that is not a hypocritical panderer and of course I will vote for him in the primaries.
But right now Hillary has about a 50-point lead over Kucinich and as much as I want to keep the impossible dream alive, I fear Hillary will be the democratic nominee.
I will of course support Hillary if she becomes the nominee but I do not look forward to defending her but will do so only because her rival Rudy is a thousand times potentially more destructive for America.
At this point my thinking is that the only team that could possibly "stop" Bill and Hill from living in the white house again is perhaps Obama/Gore.
I have problems with all three of them, Hillary, Obama and Gore but would like to see a fresh new person in charge of our military rather than Hillary and Bill.
Kucinich is the only candidate that I have no problem with philosophically but I must be realistic about his chances and would like to hedge my bet with Obama over Hillary at this point.
Paul from Tx;
Touche, you are correct, in fact. Actually I agree with whatever you usually say here, if my memory serves me correctly. I was simply trying to say that I don't think Gore is really the responsible party in terms of what happened during Clinton's time as pres. Maybe I am wrong. Like I said before, I don't have some great love for Gore or think he should be president. I do, however, have GREAT RESPECT for what he has done regarding the environment. And that is, in fact, the subject matter of this article, not whether he would be a good president. I am a Kucinich supporter, on that subject, and have a near equal distaste for dems and repubs both.
I do think we would all be good to support Gore for the work he has done on the subject of global warming though. Let us all encourage anyone who sincerely promotes awareness on that issue and let's hope he accepts this invitation to protest and get himself arrested.
AND Kucinich is the only one who has the spine to stand up in Congress and ask for impeachment...which he will be doing before Thanksgiving. He says that someone will move "to table the motion" and the votes will be clear. Those voting "to table" are those who SUPPORT BUSH since the motion will be killed by that. Those voting to take the motion to the floor are the VOTES TO IMPEACH. CONTACT your congressperson right away to let him/her know that you understand this and DEMAND they vote to take it to the floor.
ruthru___ I think you are right about Gore and Obama. Hillary is the same problem, careful to not offend the high-rollers. Gore has done a great service with his environmental leadership, but that may not mean he should be president. Maybe we have had enough of people that were either born into wealth or made a bundle easily , such as Edwards with his legal career. Kucinich is a breath of fresh air, he seems to have the right ideas of what our country should stand for and will stick to them through thick and thin.
Sequoia,
Obama was complicit in legislating future war crimes by failing to do his job when the Iran resolution came to a vote. It shows a lack of resolve. No doubt we could expect to see his policy waver if elected president.
Gore is showing a lack of resolve by not taking the system head on. He's positioned high enough, and well suited for tackling the country's industries effectively. So, what's his excuse for not doing so, lack of resolve.
I am not attacking your candidates. I like both of them, but we need somebody who wants the job bad enough to risk his reputation or even his life. The man who has continued to step up to the plate time and again is Dennis Kucinich. He talks straight to the issues. He doesn't equivocate. He goes after 'em!
"By your logic, we could all surmise that you are also responsible for what Bush has done, Paul, because you are in Texas."
Nope, Texas is the second largest-population state in the US. I don't blame Texans for Bush (or Kennebunkport, Maine, for that matter), nor should I blame New Yorkers for Rudy Guiliani. Or the state of Illinois for Al Capone.
Number Two in a criminal presidential administration is a bit closer.
claudius: Well said!
I find Gore to be an amiable showman, but he was still a major cog in a criminal administration. That BushCo is MORE criminal doesn't cut any ice with me.
By the way, Bill Clinton reportedly attributed the Patriot Act to having been written by Gore. Any truth to that?
saffiyah and Paul in Tx;
Al Gore was one of the most invisible vice presidents ever. Do you think what happened during the Clinton years was Gore's fault? Clinton did what Clinton wanted to do with very little influence from Gore. Further, do you think that we should ignore Gore's strong leadership and message about global warming, which is, in fact, what this thread is about? By your logic, we could all surmise that you are also responsible for what Bush has done, Paul, because you are in Texas. Gore's first name is not Hillary. I am not saying I love Gore, but I do love what he has done for the cause of addressing global warming. What have you done, saffiyah and Paul?
About this thread:
Fabulous! Let's all hope Al Gore does accept this invitation and inspires countless others to follow suit.
wishiwasinagreenstate says
"in case you mis[s]ed the news, the guy just won the Nobel Peace Prize, so I hardly think he is a war criminal."
Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize and he was involved in the planning to bomb Cambodia and Laos. Too bad nobody has the stones to try and convict him for the genocide of hundreds of thousands of people.
safiyyah: Nice to hear a person who can focus beyond the propaganda of the two-party system.
We rarely hear any admissions about the sanction-based genocide that was waged against Iraq under the Clinton Administration. We don't hear much from progressives about the war in Kosovo, either.
Both parties are run by warmongers.
If Gore were to publicly announce before the primaries that he would agree to be Barack Obama's running mate, I think we might have ourselves a horse race.
It certainly seemed liked Barack was flirting with that idea today when he stated;
Quoted from MSNBC October 25, 2007:
"The Illinois senator said Gore would be involved in his administration in a "very senior capacity, if he's willing" but joked: "I will also be honest with you: having won the Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar, being vice president again would probably be a step down for him."
Sounds like it would make for a lively democratic primary season, watch out Hill and Bill it isn't over till its over.
OBAMA/GORE 2008
Has a nice ring to it.
How can you be tried for war crimes when there wasn't actually a war?
In case you miseed the news, the guy just won the Nobel Peace Prize, so I hardly think he is a war criminal.
I think economic sanctions were a sad mistake of the Clinton adminstration while they were trying to look like they were being tough on Iraq so as to fend off the warhawks, like those in the People for the New American Century, who were already bent on invasion of Iraq and found an opportunity during Bush II's administration to accomplish their goal. Since the sanctions had such a terrible impact on the civilian population, I hope it is a mistake we won't repeat.
We should concentrate on the good work for humanity that Gore is doing now rather than mistakes of the past. We have to remember that the Clinton era had a Republican dominated Congress that was out for blood and witch hunts. They blocked the Kyoto Protocol.
safiyyah - You have selective thinking. I suppose you close your eyes to the high war crimes and treason of bush and cheney??? I'M PROUD TO BE A PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL. VERY PROUD. We are for the future, while the regressionist (conservatives) want to stay in the past. Well, TOO BAD because this world is moving into the future and the Republicans will be dragged kicking and screaming. They are all a bunch of spoiled brats anyway.
If Al Gore actually joined RAN on this, my opinion of him might actually rise above zero. But since my opinion of him is someone who's good at writing books but who usually does just the opposite when taking actions that effect the world, I'm guessing he won't be joining them.
Hope it's not the peace of a new dark ages.
Nancy would call that "inappropriate".
Bad publicity being better than none, FUX would give us lots of free publicity. Gore could redeem himself for being a party to Clinton's bowing to conservative berserkers in order to improve the economy for everyone.
And Gore/Nader Green Party 2008 may not be so far-fetched. Nostradamus said that after 2010 there would be "a thousand years of peace", if you believe that sort of thing.
Al Gore getting arrested? Well he should be and as a war criminal.
Have people forgot how he and Clinton carried out 8 years of economic warfare against the Iraqi people. You and I would get jail time for this, but instead, nice good liberal folk seem to want to hug and love Bloody Gore. Go figure?
Gore leading the march this Saturday could send an even more powerful message.
Can you see the FUX News headline? Al Gore Eco-Terrorist BUSTED!
The wingnuts would have a field day with it.
As far as China/coal, Clean up our own kitchen before criticizing theirs.
And Hats off to RAN. A long history of public service.
Great. If Gore followed through and participated it would be another reason to vote for the man if he get in. My respect continues to grow for his unorthadox positions which are timely and needed most desperately now in this moment of HIS-story.