<http://www.politico.com>

*POLITICO Q&A: Al Gore*
By: John F. Harris and Mike Allen
December 3, 2009 11:59 PM EST

/Former Vice President Al Gore, who won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for 
his work on climate change, talked with POLITICO's John F. Harris and 
Mike Allen about climate issues and the upcoming United Nations 
conference in Copenhagen. Here are edited excerpts.
/
*On how the climate legislation in Congress matches up with Copenhagen*

I had hoped that we'd get a final comprehensive agreement by Copenhagen. 
But this problem is so big and so difficult, it's not unexpected to have 
them take a couple of runs at it, and the looming deadline has already 
forced a huge amount of change and progress. I think what is essential 
is that the outcome feel to the world community as if it's a major step 
forward that at least contains a binding political agreement that 
individual nations comply with as the final details are concluded during 
2010. At Copenhagen, we have to have a binding political agreement that 
the major countries --- both developed and developing --- sign onннн to.

*On the willingness of other countries, particularly India and China, to 
act on climate change*

The good news is that China really wants an agreement and is really 
prepared to accept obligations that move the world toward an agreement, 
and they've marked this as the key challenge for them --- there is broad 
consensus in every aspect. India has said the same thing, and China and 
India have created a partnership, a duality of purpose, on this matter. 
China and India are prepared to move.

Mexico and Bangladesh are among those nondeveloped countries that have 
now said they will contribute to the adaptation fund, not just look to 
be recipients from it.

I was in Egypt [recently], and the mood has completely transformed 
there. They've now begun to focus on the fact that 40 percent of their 
agriculture and a huge percentage of their population are in the Nile 
Delta, less than 1 meter above sea level of the Mediterranean. And the 
prospects of at least a 1-meter sea level increase this century --- 
that's the minimum that is coming --- really concentrated the mind, as 
they say.

*On criticism that the Obama administration has not acted forcefully 
enough on climate matters*

[President Barack] Obama has made a number of very impressive speeches, 
he's put together a world-class team, and there's no question that he 
brought about a sea change in our country's approach to this issue. I'm 
also impressed and grateful that he has consistently kept it as one of 
his top three priorities. And I understand how the health care struggle 
has lingered longer on the stage than anyone thought it would and has 
pushed the calendar for climate legislation back. Of course, I would 
always like to see more, but I want to put that in context.

I'm extremely impressed that the president was able to pass a very large 
green stimulus within a month of taking office. His [Environmental 
Protection Agency] has issued binding regulations that will require 
[carbon dioxide] reductions whether legislation is enacted or not. His 
EPA has also enacted regulations to require the public reporting of CO2 
emissions by large emitters, [which are] responsible for 85 percent of 
the CO2 emitted in the U.S. And you may remember the last time that 
device was employed was the toxins-reporting initiative back during the 
Clinton-Gore years. When newspapers around the country put the top 10 
toxic polluters in our city on the front page, there was a mass scramble 
to get the hell off that list. I will not be surprised if the public 
disclosure of CO2 emissions has a similar enervating effect on the 
largest emitters.

*On his role in Copenhagen*

Whatever role I can play that will be useful, I'm there to do it. But 
I'm under no illusions that I'm anything but a private citizen outside 
the process. I will be making a speech to the meeting, and I will be 
having meetings with delegations that have asked me to come meet with them.

The U.S. has so much at risk because, all around the world, the topic of 
conversation with regard to climate is: When is the U.S. going to act? 
We're the largest economy, one of the two largest emitters, the natural 
leader of the world in the eyes of nations on every continent, and this 
is, by far, the most serious challenge the world's ever faced.

*On the importance of the Internet to the environmental movement and 
politics*

There's been a dramatic shift in the nature of our political system, 
driven in significant measure by a radical change in the information 
ecology of politics, if you will, or the information marketplace in 
which our politics occurs. The shift away from the printed word toward 
the 30-second television spot and the dominance of television, still, in 
our political culture --- it's not corruption in any way, shape or form, 
but it's a pollution of the process that our Founders hoped would 
emerge. And even though that's the era in which we are now living, the 
Internet culture is rising and will soon rival the television culture 
for dominance in the information marketplace, relevant to politics.

As broadband becomes broader and more ubiquitous, it will cause 
television --- in the words of William Gibson, the digital novelist --- 
to sink into the digital universe. We're not there yet, but I think 
that's coming, and I think you're already seeing thousands of new reform 
movements in the U.S. and worldwide based on the Internet. Paul Hawken 
wrote a great book called "Blessed Unrest" that says that more than 1 
million, maybe 2 million, new [nongovernmental organizations] focused on 
the environment have sprung up around the world, most of them on the 
Internet.

The magic of Internet-based organization with people on the ground is a 
very powerful model now. Inevitably, this will lead to a 
redemocratization of the American political system, and the sooner, the 
better, as far as I'm concerned, because most Americans are really tired 
of the nonproductive nature of our present political system.

*On his new book, "Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis"*

The research for this book was unique in that over a three-year period, 
I conducted multiple so-called solution summits and gathered the leading 
experts in every subject that's relevant to a plan to solve the climate 
crisis. It was sort of a roundtable format, off the record to encourage 
the maximum candor. After finishing one summit, I'd prepare for the next 
and then find that there was another subject that sort of fell between 
the categories, so we'd organize one on that. And that was an important 
part of the process because, in essence, the book is based on the 
insights of these experts. There were a lot of "ah-ha" moments for me.

I'm interested in figuring out how to solve the climate crisis. Full 
stop. And that involves science; it involves politics. Turns out it 
involves neuroscience; it involves economics and other subjects. And I 
do enjoy digging into these areas and trying to pull out the things that 
are most relevant to solving the climate crisis.

й 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

        <http://www.irides.com>

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

<<attachment: homelogo.gif>>

<<attachment: irides.jpg>>

Reply via email to