Questions for Al Gore on Meet the Press

When I heard that Tom Brokaw will interviewing Al Gore on Sunday's "Meet the Press," I asked for help coming up with questions to ask the former vice president about his energy plan.

I got some good suggestions and put together what I think are the three most important questions I'd like to see Gore answer. I've listed them below, along with questions written by the folks at Gristmill. As you'll see, we agreed on one question and differed on two others.

Collaborating with Gristmill is a good step toward opening a dialogue that sticks to the facts rather than on baseless accusations.

A joint question for Al Gore from Grist and ACCCE:

1. How did you come up with the year 2018 as a hard-cap goal for total renewable electricity generation? Is that goal scientifically based? What research did you use?

ACCCE questions:

1. Renewables are great — we SHOULD increase their use. But they don't provide baseload power — that is, we need electricity 24-hours per day, not just during the hours when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. How would you address baseload power concerns?

2. How do you balance your environmental goals with the current economic climate in which Americans cannot afford increases in electricity prices?

Grist questions:

1. What practical measures will we take to get to zero emission electricity in 10 years? Let's say Congress passes a resolution to aim for carbon-neutral electricity in 10 years, what would be the next step?

2. Is there room in your plan for private investment? Or, would the installation of a modern electric grid become a completely public undertaking?

Comments

[Charles M D.]

I would like to know more about solar energy, and for auto use, hydrogen progress.
Most importantly, why are small asthmatic inhalers which spray bronchcial medicines into the throat of
patients with serious respiratory attacks, being
removed to protect the environment? What about the personal benefit of this type of medicine being administered
in this manner to deliver quick relief to avoid emergencies? Isn't this like
going after gnats to get to the Elephant?
Thank you,
Charles M.DeLettre
Jacksonville

[Kevin Cox]

In Australia there is a considerable debate on the introduction of an emissions trading scheme. This may or may not work but there is a method that will work.

First the question of whether there is enough renewable power available. There is plenty of renewables available in Australia for the whole world as there is in the USA. One hot rock geothermal field currently being developed has enough energy for all Australia's energy needs for at least 200 years. See http://cscoxk.wordpress.com/2008/07/18/emission-neutralit ... for some calculations.

It is not a question of is there enough. It is a question of the amount of investment to develop the renewables. The time frame is dependent on the amount of money to spend.

The issue is how to persuade the coal industry how to invest in renewables without sending the country broke. The way to do that is to pay them. Australia exports more coal than any other country and we should be in the forefront of this approach. We can pay the countries to whom we export by giving them the money we now collect in royalties and other taxes on coal exports but require them to invest in renewable projects in Australia that they partly own. Read the following to see the idea expanded and why Australia will do very well out paying countries to buy our coal:)

http://cscoxk.wordpress.com/2008/07/20/zero-net-greenhous ...

Before anyone asks I have used different number of years in the two examples to illustrate it is a number we can set and know it will be met.

Before anyone else says that paying people to buy coal will send us broke think it through. The suggestion is that they finance our renewable energy infrastructure that they will have access to. Australia is awash in too much money because we are currently a big net exporter of energy resources and we do not need the royalties for other purposes so what better idea to build energy sources that go on forever before someone else does. You do not go broke by investing - rather the opposite - and it does not matter who notionally "owns" the investment if it is sitting on your land. I have no issue with the Chinese or Indians or existing power generators owning our renewable energy sources. The coal industry should welcome this approach as there is more long term value in coal as a feedstock for the chemical industry than there is burning it.

[Tom Bardeen]

I greatly admire Al Gore, Barrack Obama, and others, concerned about the environment and "Global Warming". However, I am cynical and disbelieving, because NO ONE wants to talk about the REAL PROBLEM which is OVERPOPULATION! If we had 150,000,000 people in the U.S. and 2B in the world, as when I was growing up, we would have NO GLOBAL WARMING. The solution is to ZERO POPULATION GROWTH, and we should devote ALL our energies to this theme in coming years. The rest will solve itself.

[Dan Barnes]

I often feel hopelessness when about the future of America. I feel terrible for the how diminished America will be when my son is my age. Zero population growth will never happen in America (don't blame me,I did what the Chinese do). Republicans and Democrats spend all their time raising money to keep themselves in office rather than working on a vital compromise so America itself will not be transferring all it's wealth to foreign countries. I identify myself as a "liberal" on many issues but I'd be happy to allow for offshore drilling, nuclear power and CERTAINLY clean coal if Republicans would agree to spend the kind of basic research money in clean energy technology. (I don't mean a few token plans but a massive commitment to basic energy rearch). Of course none of this will happen as long as Americas energy problem is hostage to politics.