CHARLIE ROSE: Al Gore is here. Since he published a book called
"Earth in the Balance" as a young senator from Tennessee, his name has been
synonymous with environmental issues.
After his vice presidency and the 2000 election, he returned to his
passion for environmentalism. His 2006 documentary "An Inconvenient Truth"
galvanized a movement to address climate change and led to an Oscar and a
Nobel Peace Prize.
Today he is perhaps the world`s most passionate spokesman on the
environment. Next month he will travel to Copenhagen for the pivotal
United Nations Climate Change Summit.
He also has a new book called "Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate
Crisis."
In the interest of full disclosure, I should they he and I are
business participants in a very small way.
He was last week on the cover of "Newsweek" magazine "The Thinking
Man`s Thinking Man."
(LAUGHTER)
Having said that, welcome.
AL GORE: Thank you very much. This is a thinking man`s show.
CHARLIE ROSE: Well, I hope so, when we can get people like you on
here.
So talk about Copenhagen. You`re going to be there. We don`t know
whether the president is going yet or not, but you believe he will.
AL GORE: I hope he will. He hasn`t told me he will, but I hope he
will. Much depends on whether the Senate passes legislation before
Copenhagen, and the protracted negotiations over the health care bill have
wreaked havoc with the Senate`s calendar all year long.
CHARLIE ROSE: We will have health care this year, though.
AL GORE: It remains to be seen.
CHARLIE ROSE: You think so? Because they can`t get any remembers in
the end it`s at risk?
AL GORE: Well, I think ultimately they will get health care, yes.
The role played by the Congressional Budget Office is much larger in recent
years than most observers realize.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because they give numbers and it suggests how it will
impact the deficit, or what?
AL GORE: Yes. And this is down in the weeds, but it requires for
these large bills a lot of time to analyze the budget impact. And that
really introduces a new time consuming element in the deliberation over any
large piece of legislation.
CHARLIE ROSE: Help us understand what is supposed to happen at
Copenhagen and what different nations will come, and what might come out of
it that will make a difference.
AL GORE: Well, this is a continuation of a process that actual began
in `92 in Rio de Janeiro at the so-called Earth Summit. The Kyoto Protocol
was the first iteration of how to get those commitments into a binding
form. And, of course, the U.S. never ratify it had Kyoto Treaty.
So Copenhagen has outsized significance for two reasons. It`s a
second chance for the world community to come together, this time with the
United States and with binding obligations in some form on China and other
large emerging economies.
And it`s significant because the scientific community globally has
ratcheted up their sense of alarm and you are general they we really don`t
have too many years to begin reducing the global warming pollution that is
driving the earth`s ecological system toward catastrophe.
CHARLIE ROSE: Stay with that. They say ten years. The window they
say is ten years essentially?
AL GORE: Yes, and they said that three years ago.
CHARLIE ROSE: And catastrophe means what?
AL GORE: There are certain elements in the earth`s ecological system
that could be pushed beyond a kind of tipping point. The phrase is
controversial.
But if the Greenland ice pack, for example, was induced to melt so
rapidly that it could not be stopped, then that would lead to catastrophic
sea level rise, similarly in west Antarctica. Either would produce a six
to seven meter increase.
The disappearance of the north polar ice cap the size of the
continental United States -- it`s been there for three million years, a key
element in the earth`s ability to cool itself. If it disappears it would
not come back on a timescale that would be comfortable for human species.
And also that could lead to the thawing of the permafrost around the
arctic that contains so much frozen carbon that the amount in the
atmosphere could double, and that would make the task of restoring a
favorable climate balance for humanity much more difficult.
There are other such tipping points, but the earth`s system is very
complex. And years ago a distinguished scientist in this city, Wally
Brucker, said, "It`s an angry beast, and we`re poking it with a stick."
And without getting into details, we`re now at a point where the most
serious and distinguished scientists who have studied this are warning that
we are real playing with fire where the future of human civilization is
concerned.
CHARLIE ROSE: Help educate us as to the terminology for how we will
measure emission standards.
AL GORE: Well, there`s a baseline for every country that describes
how much global warming pollution they`re putting up each year. And...
CHARLIE ROSE: And the U.S. and China now do about, what, 20 percent
of it?
AL GORE: About 40 percent. Well, roughly 20 percent each. And the
world as a whole is putting 90 million tons every day into that thin shell
of atmosphere around the planet. It`s building up, the heat is being
trapped.
And nations around the world, some nations, have set goals for
reducing their emissions by x percent by 2020. Most have said 80 percent
reductions by 2050 in the industrial countries.
But the long-term goals, like 2050, are less relevant in the political
world than nearer term goals like 2020 and 2030 because the politicians and
leaders and office today can be held accountable for those kinds of goals.
CHARLIE ROSE: Which presents one of the problems, does it not, which
happened at Kyoto, which is the notion of the United States saying "Well,
we want the same standards as they have in India, and we want India and
China to have the same standards we do."
What`s the politics at Copenhagen?
AL GORE: Well, the politics still are characterized by this divide
between the rich nations and the poor nations.
CHARLIE ROSE: Underdeveloped and developed world.
AL GORE: Correct. And our per capita emissions are just off the
scale.
But to take China as the most prominent example, even though their per
capita emissions are only a fraction of ours, with 1.3 billion people,
their overall emissions have just exceeded those of the United States.
So while they are technically classified as a developing country,
they`re really in a different category, an emerging economy with tremendous
growth and dynamism.
CHARLIE ROSE: And they say we need to burn fossil fuels to maintain
the economic growth, which is essential to our own development.
AL GORE: Yes, even though they also now have set their own goals for
shifting toward renewable energy. In fact, they have in some ways a more
impressive program than the United States does. They will soon be the
number one wind power, the number one solar power. They`re building the
largest, most sophisticated super-grid.
They`ve planted two and a half times more trees than the rest of the
world put together in each of the last three years. They`re evaluating
their party officials partly on the basis of how effective in reducing CO-
2.
They`re rightly concerned about the melting of the ice and snow in the
Himalayas because that serves as the most important source of water for
their agriculture and for drinking water.
CHARLIE ROSE: Right.
What will be the conflict with the United States when they get to
Copenhagen?
AL GORE: The nature of the commitment that`s binding on China,
whether or not it is binding in terms of Chinese national law, what kind of
enforcement of the standards are involved.
The key phrase is "common but differentiated responsibilities." That`s
diplomatic speak...
CHARLIE ROSE: So this is a gap we can bridge?
AL GORE: I think we can. I think we can.
I spoke with the premier of China at some length just last week in
Beijing, and I judged him to be extremely sincere in saying "We want an
agreement. We will not be an obstacle to an agreement."
And the Indians have now said that they will accept binding
obligations. Countries like Mexico have said they will contribute to this
international fund, not just draw from it.
The dawning realization on the part of many developing countries that
they have so much at risk is changing the nature of the debate.
I was in Cairo last week, and 40 percent of their agriculture and a
huge percentage of their people live in the Nile delta bordering the
Mediterranean less than one meter above sea level.
This can be a looming catastrophe for many developing countries,
generating hundreds of millions of climate refugees were the sea level rise
to go above one meter, which it probably will now. The question is whether
it would go much higher than that.
A six-meter increase could generate 450 million climate refugees, not
to mention those that would be generated by making southern Europe a
desert.
These are possibilities that sound almost like a science fiction
novel. But, unfortunately, the reality is in the last hundred years we`ve
radically altered the relationship between the human species and the
ecological system of our planet.
We quadrupled population in a hundred years, we got the widespread use
of technologies, a million times more powerful than those our grandparents
had available to them, and we`re running through the carbon fuels in the
earth -- coal and oil principally, and emitting all of this global warming
pollution that`s trapping the heat from the sun.
CHARLIE ROSE: Let me go back to China one second, though. They`re
adding a coal-burning plant...
AL GORE: Every eight or nine days.
CHARLIE ROSE: I was going to say every week, but every eight or nine
days. What are we going to do about that?
AL GORE: Well, there`s a joint -- there`s an effort to develop a
joint program between the U.S. and China to try and capture the carbon as
it`s emitted and compress it and sequester in the repositories deep in the
earth.
I`m concerned -- I have a whole chapter on this in "Our Choice" -- I`m
concerned that the cost and implausibility of doing this on a big scale.
It may be a barrier.
But it`s conceivable that with enough R&D they`ll find more cost
effective ways to do it. They`re upgrading the efficiency of their fossil
fuel plants. They`re going to coal gassification, which makes it somewhat
easier to capture the CO-2.
But there`s no doubt that their economy is very dependent on fossil
fuels, even more than ours. And it is a major challenge for them. They
are focused on it. They are trying to change.
We need to have a global effort to put a price on carbon so that it
is integrated into the economic calculations everyday and then let the
market help us to find the most effective ways to reduce this pollution.
CHARLIE ROSE: Speaking of markets, what impact did the recession have
on ideas and plans for our climate change?
AL GORE: A surprising impact. Surprising, because many thought it
would stop this green transformation dead in its tracks, but it had the
opposite effect.
Because of the unavailability of interest rate reductions, they were
already so low, most governments around the world, including ours, were
pushed to stimulus programs as the only macroeconomic tool available.
And building new infrastructure led to an emphasis on a green
stimulus, not only here, but in China and Korea. Almost 80 percent of
their stimulus was oriented toward green infrastructure and green
technologies.
And now and the first results show that it really does create a lot of
jobs, and the kinds of jobs that can`t be outsourced.
Here a second face is now focused on retrofitting homes and businesses
with better lighting and windows and insulation, and those jobs are in
every community, and they are beginning to put a lot of people to work.
CHARLIE ROSE: Looking at the Congress and the cap-and-trade that was
passed in the house...
AL GORE: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: Where does it stand in the Senate? What do you expect
to come out of the Senate?
AL GORE: Well, there`s a lot of optimism, partly because some
Republicans -- not too many -- but some have now joined in an effort to get
legislation.
John Kerry and Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid have been doing a
spectacular job in trying to put together a consensus bill.
I think likelihood is they will get 60 votes. Whether they get it
before the Copenhagen meeting is now in question.
CHARLIE ROSE: And if they don`t get it, the president is unlikely to
go to Copenhagen, you think?
AL GORE: I wouldn`t say that, because I think the focus will now
probably be on getting a so-called political agreement at Copenhagen than
sets new rules of the road and that charts a new course, and then return to
the binding elements of the treaty next year.
I wish that were not the case, but a change like this is so difficult
they have to have a couple of tries at it.
CHARLIE ROSE: And as a former legislator, when you look at the
legislative process, my understanding is you say, look, we`ve got to get
something here, and let`s not let perfect be the enemy of good.
AL GORE: Right. Not least because this is a complex system, and if
you can start the process of change, you have a big impact on the forward
planning by businesses and governments. And the best managed businesses
will run out in front of it and get down the road.
You already see, for example, on television almost every industry has
companies out there saying "We`re greener than our competition. We want to
solve the climate crisis."
Just today the Chamber of Commerce changed positions, not courtesy of
the Yes Men with that stunt in Washington a few weeks ago, but they`re now
saying, surprisingly to me, and I`m glad about it, that they want to get
legislation and they`re working with the sponsors of the bill.
CHARLIE ROSE: The CEO of ExxonMobil said to me he`s in favor of a
carbon tax rather than cap-and-trade. And so were you at one point.
AL GORE: And I still am. I`m actually in favor of both. And the
countries that have done the best job do have both. They work together.
CHARLIE ROSE: But it`s not in the American Congress a politically
viable idea because it has "tax."
AL GORE: It doesn`t yet seem to be. And some of those -- I won`t say
the CEO of ExxonMobil is in this category, I just don`t know. But
certainly some of those on the right who have advocated the CO-2 tax see it
as the best being the enemy of the possible right now.
I don`t want to tar him....
CHARLIE ROSE: Basically they support it because they don`t think it
will pass, is that the idea?
AL GORE: Well, some cynics believe that. I don`t reach that
judgment, but it`s certainly a possibility, yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: So the bill that will come out, what`s the best bill
that you think has a possibility of coming out of the House and the Senate
that the president will sign?
AL GORE: Well, the Senate bill will be similar in many ways to the
House bill. And it would call for reductions of roughly a fifth within the
next ten years. And that`s not enough in my view.
CHARLIE ROSE: Exactly, that`s where I`m going.
AL GORE: But if we begin this process, it can become self-
reinforcing.
There`s some history here. Many draw an analogy to the first crisis
of the global atmosphere. You will remember the hole in the stratospheric
ozone layer. Without getting into that, the treaty talks in Montreal in
1987 produce a treaty that was bitterly criticized in the environmental
community for being too weak, for not phasing those chemicals causing that
crisis out quickly enough.
But once businesses started to adjust to the restrictions that were
enacted, they found, as they often do with pollution reduction, that it was
far easier than they thought, they found substitutes, they found better
technologies.
And only three years after that treaty, Margaret Thatcher called all
the nations of the world to London, and those standards were greatly
toughened. Two years later toughened again. Now it`s working.
That`s what I hope will be the pattern followed with the Copenhagen
agreement.
AL GORE: What would you like the standard to be? What would Al Gore
like to see the standard?
AL GORE: We ought to have 80 percent to 90 percent reductions as
quickly as we can.
Knowing how difficult and implausible that sounds to people, I believe
the best way to get there is to start the process, to have encouragement to
go faster, get the market system on our side so that it`s an ally instead
of an obstacle, and drive it as quickly as we can.
But this book, "Our Choice," is intended to inform and empower people
at the grassroots level with the knowledge about each one of these
solutions, whether renewable energy or sustainable agriculture.
CHARLIE ROSE: So that they will do what if they`re informed?
AL GORE: Act as citizens. As important as it is to change the light
bulbs and the windows, it`s more important by far to change the laws and
the policies.
And our democracy has been sclerotic, lethargic. And only by raising
the level of knowledge and passion on the part of the people at the
grassroots level can we engender enough public support to put pressure on
legislators in both parties to act and to act boldly and quickly.
CHARLIE ROSE: The conventional wisdom was when oil was at $144 a
barrel -- the argument was that alternative sources of energy become much
more attractive, economic feasibility much more attractive. At $82 or $85
a barrel, are these alternative sources economically feasible?
AL GORE: Some of them are now and others are coming down in price
quite rapidly. They will come down even more rapidly if there`s a
perceived demand in the marketplace in the next few years.
You`ve know of course, you`ve reported on Moore`s law and how that
transformed the computer chip industry. Photovoltaic cells are made out of
silicon for the most part still now, and we`re beginning to see a cost
reduction curve there that`s very impressive.
If we make a choice, and that`s why I titled the book "our choice,"
then the market will respond.
CHARLIE ROSE: You`ve put together this book by a very interesting
way. You put together a series of seminars, almost, summits on particular
issues.
AL GORE: Correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: And you brought the experts in, and did what?
AL GORE: I`ve had more than 30 of them in the last three years, with
the leading experts from around the world in each of these areas generously
and patiently explaining the new breakthroughs and the new possibilities in
language that I can understand and thus can use to communicate it to a
broad audience.
And then I circled back with those who had more to say and from whom I
wanted more in a very long list of interviews over the last three years.
The book is really based on the insights of these world experts on exactly
what the solutions are.
CHARLIE ROSE: Let`s talk about solutions then. Geothermal?
AL GORE: Yes. Geothermal is one of the sleepers in this debate. It
has been thought of in connection with the few areas around the world where
hot water bubbles up to the surface.
But now there is an possibility with new drilling technology to go
down to two kilometers or more to the hot rocks, whether there`s fluid
there or not, whether there is water there or not, and capture that
enormous amount of heat.
We`re said to have in the United States a 35,000 year supply of annual
electricity use in the geothermal resource alone. It`s called enhanced
geothermal.
There are six publicly traded companies doing this in Australia and
some other parts of the world. The basic technological breakthroughs came
here in the United States, and now after a hiatus, there is new interest in
developing this quickly.
And it`s so-called base lode power. It`s not dependent on when the
sun is shining and when the wind is blowing. Solar and wind are going to
play an enormous role, don`t get me wrong, but enhanced geothermal has a
continuous supply of enormous quantities of electricity, carbon free.
CHARLIE ROSE: Biomass?
AL GORE: Biomass is a complex story because our first effort with so-
called first generation ethanol based on corn did produce a distribution
infrastructure that`s extremely valuable. But the energy balance and the
dollar balance of making liquid fuels out of corn has been disappointing.
But the so-called second generation that relies on crops that are not
food crops that can be grown on land that doesn`t -- isn`t suitable for
food crops, can provide much larger yields. And some of the technologies
are coming along so rapidly, there`s tremendous optimism in this industry,
and many companies are racing out in front.
CHARLIE ROSE: Wind?
AL GORE: In each of the last two years wind power has been the
largest source of new electricity in the United States. And we`re not even
yet exploiting the areas that are most promising for wind because we don`t
have the transmission line going to the areas where the wind is blowing the
hardest.
CHARLIE ROSE: But you`ve got to get it from -- let`s say it`s Texas
right down the middle of America, from Canada all the way down, where the
wind might be best. You`ve got to get it to where the electrical plants
are.
AL GORE: That`s correct. And that`s one of the reasons why the
super-grid is so important. I have a whole chapter on the super-grid.
Our present network of transmission and distribution lines is
hopelessly outdated and obsolete. It costs us now more than $200 billion a
year in unplanned outages and cascading failures. So we need to replace it
anyway.
CHARLIE ROSE: What would it cost to do that?
AL GORE: Well, it would cost a good bit, but because of the savings
that come from replacing the current grid, it would pay for itself in only
ten years.
But we need it to bring wind from those areas and solar electricity
from the southwestern deserts where it`s easiest to generate electricity.
Other nations are planning this. There`s an ambitious plan in Europe
and North Africa to link the Sahara with Western Europe and the Middle East
to generate unlimited quantities of electricity there.
CHARLIE ROSE: When I talk to the Chinese, they do a whole range of
things, as you well know, in terms of solar and wind, but also in terms of
reforestation.
AL GORE: It`s unbelievable. Two and a half times the rest of the
world put together every single year. Every Chinese citizen between the
age of seven and 60 has to plant three trees every year. And the premier
and the president go out and participate in high-profile events every year.
They`ve been very successful at it.
CHARLIE ROSE: OK, they will lead the world in wind and solar, you
think?
AL GORE: Yell. They will surpass -- they will take over third place
this year, and next year or year after they will be in first place.
There was a story in the "Wall Street Journal" just two weeks ago
about a huge new wind farm in Texas with 100 percent of the windmills made
in China and most all of the financing from the Chinese government in
Texas. They see it as a source of jobs. They see it as the key industry
in the 21st century.
And again, with most of the technologies originating here, we should
be capturing that employment. We should be making those windmills. Only
one of the ten largest windmill manufacturers in the word is now American,
GE, only two of the largest solar manufacturers.
And I think President Obama is absolutely correct in repositioning our
country to retake the lead and to capture the millions of jobs...
CHARLIE ROSE: But how is he doing that, though? What`s the action
that is doing that?
AL GORE: Well, first of all the green stimulus provisions less than
one month after he took over. Secondly, notwithstanding...
CHARLIE ROSE: Spending how much out of the stimulus on that?
AL GORE: It was roughly 20 percent, which is a respectable amount.
Of course I`d like to see more, but it was a good effort.
His EPA has now put in place regulations that will require CO-2
reductions whether legislation is passed or not. Another set of
regulations will require the large emitters to publicly report their CO-2
emissions, and that leads to public pressure on them to reduce it.
CHARLIE ROSE: OK. You think that development of businesses,
entrepreneurial efforts, will be that will create alternative sources of
energy.
AL GORE: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because of technology, because of other scientific
changes, will be the biggest business in the world, in the world.
AL GORE: Absolutely. Certainly throughout the 21st century, and in
the first decades particularly. We are now seeing the largest business
revolution ever.
This is happening all over the world, Charlie. Not only in China, now
in India. Europe has raced out ahead. Japan has set even more aggressive
targets. This is a major global business revolution.
CHARLIE ROSE: And it`s taking place -- and where do we stand in terms
of seed money and in terms of supporting that and in terms of the
likelihood that the most -- largest amount of initiative will come from the
United States?
AL GORE: Right now, we`re woefully behind. Because we had an early
lead in these technologies, we still have an install base that`s quite
large compared to the rest of the world. But we are falling behind.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because they got busy or because...
AL GORE: Yes, and because they put policies in place that encourage
more rapid development.
And by contrast, our political system is still yielding to the
persuasions of the coal and oil companies and utilities that have so much
control in the Congress that they prevent progress from occurring very
rapidly. And that`s a real weakness now. Our political system has become
sclerotic.
CHARLIE ROSE: So how do you overcome that?
AL GORE: We have to become more active as citizens and encourage the
members of the House and Senate to do the right thing.
CHARLIE ROSE: Tell me about the kinds of things that are blue sky,
the kinds of things that you see because of who you are and what you do and
because you`re financially becoming some of them.
You see -- get a first look at a lot of the things that are on the
cutting edge of the future. What are they?
AL GORE: Well, they`re very impressive advances in photovoltaics.
CHARLIE ROSE: What`s this?
AL GORE: That`s the form of solar technology that doesn`t heat water
to make steam and turn turbines. That`s called concentrating solar
thermal, and that`s going to play a huge role as well.
But photovoltaics transform the sunlight directly into electricity.
There are new options, for example, in nano-technology to concentrate the
sun`s rays within the surface of the cell itself. There are new
chemistries for these cells that are cheaper to make and more efficient in
producing electricity.
There are new advanced batteries that are extremely important because
energy storage increases the usefulness of all renewable energy.
CHARLIE ROSE: And where are we in terms of dramatic developments in
battery capacity?
AL GORE: We are moving very quickly there. There are a lot of new
developments coming out of the universities and taken by entrepreneurs and
shaped in these companies.
CHARLIE ROSE: Most of them will have a lithium capacity or not, do
you think, because of the danger that`s come out of them?
AL GORE: Well, a lot of them will. Lithium ion is a chemistry of
choice partly because there is a global competition now to dominate the
coming electric car industry. Every nation is moving in that direction.
And lithium ion has been chosen by many of these electric car companies.
So a lot of these storage companies are now looking -- they`re
guessing that all of that R&D money from the auto industry is going to lead
to more rapid advances. But there are lots of other new chemistries for
batteries, and on the horizon, some potential breakthroughs that would
really be dramatic.
CHARLIE ROSE: Is it more likely to happen here or South Korea or
Japan or China or somewhere else?
AL GORE: It`s our choice. It depends on whether or not we put in
place the policies that encourage these entrepreneurs to believe that the
market is going to be here.
CHARLIE ROSE: Beyond what happens in the Congress in terms of the
legislation that`s there and -- do we have -- has the president articulated
a national energy policy?
AL GORE: Yes, he has. But in his communication with the Congress, he
has granted a lot of leeway to the committees of the House and Senate to
decide for themselves how they can get a majority vote. He did the same
thing on health care.
CHARLIE ROSE: Yes, but my point is larger than that. Do we have
beyond legislation, through the secretary of energy and others a huge -- I
mean, this was the criticism of the Bush administration, that they had no
energy policies.
AL GORE: Well, there`s been a sea change in that regard, and the
short answer is yes. President Obama and his administration have a very
impressive commitment to shifting toward renewable energy, and, also
extremely important, toward much higher levels of efficiency.
Efficiency doesn`t have a lot of sex appeal but it should. It is the
largest source of energy savings.
CHARLIE ROSE: Are efficiency and conservation the same thing?
AL GORE: Conservation is using less for the same purpose. Efficiency
is using better technologies to use less and get more out of it.
CHARLIE ROSE: I think I know to answer to this, but if you were
giving what`s famously now called a sort of last speech, what would you
want...
AL GORE: A last speech? I`m not ready for one yet.
(LAUGHTER)
CHARLIE ROSE: I know. But you had to sum up what it is that has made
this the most important cause of your lifetime.
AL GORE: Never before have we faced a challenge that brings the
potential for ending human civilization as we know it. And the timeframe
within which we have to act is shockingly short.
If we were to decide in the present generation to take all of the
sacrifices and labors of the generations before us and exploit them fully
for ourselves and give the back of our hand to the generations coming after
us, it would be the most immoral act committed by any generation of humans
in history.
It is a challenge to our moral imagination to recognize the magnitude
of this challenge and the urgency with which we have to act. It is not a
political issue, it`s a moral issue. It ought to cross party lines.
CHARLIE ROSE: And you have said -- and I`m now quoting you -- "We
will either look back and say how come we didn`t see what was happening to
us or, b, how did we find the moral courage to do the right thing?" That`s
the question that will be answered by history.
AL GORE: Yes. And we have everything we need to succeed, with the
possible exception of political will. Political will is a renewable
resource. The challenge is to renew it.
CHARLIE ROSE: OK. But I mean political will is created by
politicians in part. It`s grassroots, but there has to be -- I mean, what
happened -- there has to be some connect between an idea, not necessarily a
one political leader, between an idea who has the capacity -- and someone
who has the capacity to use that idea to inspire action.
AL GORE: Leadership is crucial. But the source of energy for this
transformation truly will come from the people. The civil rights movement
had inspiring leaders, but what changed America on civil rights was a
change of mind and heart on the part of millions of people at the
grassroots level.
This is now the largest, fastest-growing movement in history. But the
challenge is so great it needs to grow even faster.
I have an organization called the Alliance for Climate Protection.
There`s a web site, if I may mention it, RepowerAmerica.org, and lots and
lots of people are joining that organization. We work in collaboration
with other groups pushing toward the same objective and trying to get this
legislation and this treaty.
CHARLIE ROSE: Our mutual friend, I assume, E.O. Wilson...
AL GORE: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: ... has written a book in which he makes -- he`s trying
to find, you know -- he`s trying to find common cause with the religious
community.
AL GORE: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: ... and especially fundamental Christian community.
AL GORE: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: How is that going, and are you part of that?
AL GORE: Yes, yes, I am. And, by the way, the Christian Coalition
has just joined this movement because they believe, as the Bible teaches,
the earth is the lord`s and the fullness thereof. We have a duty of
stewardship over god`s creation.
Rich Cizik is among the many evangelical leaders speaking out boldly
and in a very passionate way on this. Every religious tradition in the
world has a growing movement to push in this direction, and we need them,
because in order to solve a crisis like this, we cannot simply rely on our
automatic responses.
We have to look deep inside for our deepest values, form goals on the
basis of those values, and then stick to those values and chart a course in
the right direction. When our religious traditions are at their best, they
help us in staying on course.
CHARLIE ROSE: Since 2004, what`s the most important thing you have
learned about the process of achieving the results that you want to see?
AL GORE: I keep learning the same lesson over and over again, to tell
you the truth, that this has to come from the people. Every time my -- I
get my hopes up that the political system is going to find some formulation
that solves this, I see the business, the carbon lobbies come in and stomp
it out.
They`re having more trouble doing that now. But the key reason why is
that there is a growing commitment at the grass-roots level. That`s really
the answer -- people, your viewers have to get involved personally and let
their elected officials know that this is important to them, it`s going to
affect their votes.
CHARLIE ROSE: You believe it has not only economic repercussions,
environmental repercussions, but national security repercussions?
AL GORE: Absolutely. Our dependence on foreign oil has been growing
steadily. The largest reserves are owned by sovereign states in the Middle
East, arguably the most unstable part of the world.
Multiple wars have taken place there for a variety of reasons, but one
of the reasons is our national security is connected to the continued flow
of those millions of barrels everyday from the Persian Gulf. We need to
cut that dependence.
You spoke earlier about how the price went way up then it came back
down. I have a whole chapter this in this book on where our energy comes
from and where it goes that charts the price of oil in relation to
political developments.
And every time we get close to forming enough will to come up with an
alternative, then the price comes back down. It`s a rollercoaster, but
because the new discoveries are declining and the demand in China, India,
and elsewhere is growing, this rollercoaster is headed for a crash, and
we`re in the front car.
CHARLIE ROSE: But energy companies will say there`s plenty of oil to
be found.
AL GORE: At what price? The new discoveries are declining.
CHARLIE ROSE: But technology`s going up with the capacity to find...
AL GORE: At a much, much higher cost.
And in the case of these resources in Canada called the tar sands,
with much more CO-2 for each gallon. I have a picture and a graphic in the
book showing that gasoline made from the tar sands of Canada will give a
Prius the carbon footprint of a Hummer.
So these new resources are not only expensive, but many of them are
very dangerous.
And why shouldn`t we begin to rely on domestic renewable resources?
Enough sunlight falls on the surface of the earth in one hour to equal the
entire world`s energy use for a full year. If we transmit that electricity
from the places it`s generated to where it`s used, we can shift away from
fossil fuels.
CHARLIE ROSE: This is November, 2009. How long would it take and
what policies would it take so that the United States has no dependence on
foreign oil?
AL GORE: It would take a long time to have zero purchases of foreign
oil, and I don`t think anybody is seeing that as a realistic possibility in
the near or midterm future.
But getting it down to a manageable level, where we`re in the driver`s
seat again instead of the front car of the rollercoaster...
CHARLIE ROSE: But define manageable, because people will argue that I
believe in Al Gore, I`m with him, but I disagree over -- I`m now finding
out whether there`s room for disagreement -- I disagree over how fast we
can be energy independent for our fossil fuels.
AL GORE: If we made up our minds to do it, we could do it within ten
years.
CHARLIE ROSE: In ten years?
AL GORE: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: And at what cost?
AL GORE: At a cost that would be far less than continuing our
dependence on these oil resources, which most experts agree are likely to
go way up as the demand throughout the world grows for oil and the reserves
are declining.
You know, the International Energy Agency has reported on the largest
oil fields. They have been declining at a rate three times faster than was
predicted just a few years ago.
Some of the sovereign nations owning these reserves have not been
transparent at all in giving the real figures about what`s happening to
these oil fields.
And it`s true -- there`s an argument between geologists and
economists, and the economists always say well, you just raise the price,
you`ll have an unlimited quantity.
But if the price of this that new oil, as I was saying earlier, is so
high that we become less competitive then that`s not good for us.
If we make up our minds to shift with electric cars running on
renewable electricity with the new generation of biofuels that don`t have
the harsh environmental impact, with a real commitment to energy
efficiency, with new agriculture, because we can sequester lot of carbon in
soils and make our farms much more productive, saving trees and stopping
the defragmentation that leads to almost a quarter of the global warming
pollution every single year, we can solve this crisis.
We can be much more energy independent, and we can create millions of
good new jobs that won`t be outsourced.
CHARLIE ROSE: Then why isn`t that argument so far persuasive?
AL GORE: Well, I think it has been gaining a lot of purchase. But
one of the reasons the process has been slow is the legacy industries that
are overly dependent on carbon-based fuels have exercised their muscle with
their PACs and their lobbyists and their campaign contributions in order to
slow the process.
In an era where politicians spend 80 percent -- in both parties -- 80
percent of their money on 30-second TV ads, they have to go back year and
year after year the same business lobbies for continued influx -- a
continued influx of enormous amounts of money, and that wears them down.
And they become vulnerable to wanting to make sure these lobbies are not
unhappy. And that has made our political system too unresponsive.
CHARLIE ROSE: If, in fact, this is so important, I mean, do we have
to have some serious consideration of the influence of money on politics?
AL GORE: Oh, absolutely. And of course campaign finance reform is
part of the problem.
CHARLIE ROSE: But it has not done it.
AL GORE: And by itself it will not do it, and the reason is the
dominance of television.
But the Internet culture has been rising very rapidly, opening up the
political system to individuals who can have an impact with their reason,
with their voice.
We saw in the election of Barack Obama one of the first examples of
this new Internet technology have a huge impact on presidential politics.
It did not fix congressional politics.
CHARLIE ROSE: Nor did it necessarily fix health care reform, and
those people did not get involved in health care reform and looks like did
not get involved in the elections that took place yesterday.
AL GORE: Correct. But the influence of these new entrants into
politics is growing.
More voters two years ago -- one year ago 30 and under voted than
those 65 and older. And among the 30 and under voters, it`s like 75 to 15
in favor of solving this crisis urgently.
And elected officials who want to stay there for a while are paying
more attention to what the future of politics in America is going to look
like as this generation comes to occupy the center of gravity.
CHARLIE ROSE: But how long will l that take, is another question.
AL GORE: Well, it`s growing every day. It`s not just a sudden
threshold. It`s growing every day.
CHARLIE ROSE: You seem to be saying, and I`m asking question, that
it`s not facts that will make the difference. You can repeat the facts
until cows go home.
AL GORE: Correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: But you have to have something else here in order to
close the deal.
AL GORE: That is correct.
Because the way we have developed, we are prone to short-term
thinking. Our ancestors survived certain threats. We viscerally respond
to those same threats.
But when we have to use our reasoning capacity to recognize and
respond to a much larger threat on a global scale, in this case, that
requires more reflection, more communication, and the formation of those
long-term goals based on values that I mentioned earlier, and a
determination to keep going along that course.
The great cathedrals of Europe, to pick one example, were built by
multiple generations over more than a hundred years in some cases. That
kind of commitment came out of values and long-term goals. In our
generation, we have to form a similar commitment. We have a choice. Our
choice is focused on that decision.
CHARLIE ROSE: And the opposition beyond commercial interests -- and
there are people who disagree with you and it`s not driven by commercial
interest.
AL GORE: I think that there are ideological opponents. I think
garden variety denial because it`s unpleasant to think about.
CHARLIE ROSE: But it`s not driven by looking at the same facts,
because whenever you have this conversation, I can tell you what the e-
mails will say tomorrow.
As you know, there will be a number of people, many of them will say
hooray for you and I can`t wait to get the book. Others will say these are
the numbers, he doesn`t get the numbers, the facts are this, they will
suggest that there`s seven different reasons for global warming which are
not damaging.
Where does that come from, a, and is there any serious disagreement
about the numbers?
AL GORE: There`s no serious disagreement on the basic science and the
range of reductions that are needed. The International Group of
Scientists, the IPCC in its last report said the evidence is, quote,
"unequivocal."
But we have a strange new reality in American politics with passionate
groups that are disputing well-established facts. I use one example in the
book. It`s an arcane example, but the birther movement.
Here you have a birth certificate examined and certified by the
governor of the state even though she`s of the other political party, two
contemporaneous newspaper announcements in different newspapers in Honolulu
the day of President Obama`s birth. Those are facts that are established.
In spite of that, there is this elaborate ongoing dispute, and,
shamefully, a few media outlets, perhaps because they`re confused about the
distinction between news and entertainment, continue to feed that
controversy.
I bring it up because it`s a perfect analogy to the established facts
about global warming. And even though it has gone through this exhaustive
20-year peer review process with the 3,000 best scientists in the world
unanimously endorsing it, every national academy of sciences in a developed
country on this planet endorsing it, still, based on some radio talk show
host or some odd orthogonal argument...
CHARLIE ROSE: Let me rephrase the question, then. Is there anybody
that you know who you respect who comes to a different conclusion than you
do?
AL GORE: Not on the basics of global warming science, no. "Science"
magazine did a review of every peer review article for the previous ten
years, a large sample of more than 10 percent. None of them disagreed with
this consensus.
Of course there is legitimate disagreement that I respect over some of
the details. There`s still disagreement over the details of exactly how
cigarette smoking causes lung cancer.
But you`re in a different category when you`re dealing -- for example,
there are 14 percent, 15 percent of the people who still believe the moon
landing was staged on a movie lot in Arizona. But media outlets don`t say
"Well, there is some dispute."
But if there are large commercial interests who would benefit from a
conclusion that it may have been staged on a movie lot in Arizona, then I
guarantee you there would be lobbyists, there would be propaganda, there
would be television ads, and a certain number of people would be fooled
into thinking "Well, may that is what happened."
CHARLIE ROSE: Is this your life`s work?
AL GORE: It seems to have become so. I never would have thought
that, but it feels like a mission.
It`s not about me and I`ve never been under the illusion that it is.
I thought when I first became interested in this 41 years ago, I thought 30
years ago when I began my advocacy in the Congress that it would have been
taken up and completely solved long since. I`ve been surprised that it has
taken so long.
Because the impacts are distributed globally, it masquerades as an
abstraction. Because the time lag between the causes and the effects
extend over a longer period than we are used to responding to automatically
and viscerally, it has been more difficult to arouse the appropriate sense
of urgency.
But it is coming.
And there have been other examples of how difficult goals have taken
time to mobile size support and reach them. I think we`re going to get
there. The question is whether we`ll get there in time.
And that`s why I seem passionate about it. I really wish that I could
communicate better. I wish that I could find better ways to transfer from
my heart to the hearts of others what these scientists have taught me and
what the facts are displaying vividly all over the world.
We`ve never faced anything like this. There is an awakening. There
is a growing awareness. But we`ve got to accelerate it. That`s why I
wrote "Our Choice."
CHARLIE ROSE: And as you well know, too, and this comes right to the
point you were just making, no one has suggested there was greed on your
part, but people do say here is a guy who did this remarkable thing and
received a Nobel Prize and on Oscar for "An Inconvenient Truth," and at the
same time he knows this world so well that he`s also at the forefront of
investing in it and that therefore some raise questions.
AL GORE: My business success has come in other areas. But yes I have
made some...
CHARLIE ROSE: You mean technology?
AL GORE: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: And communications?
AL GORE: I.T., media, et cetera. That`s really where my success has
been.
But in the last few years I have made some investments in this area
and proud to have done so. If I did not, the same critics would accuse me
of being a hypocrite. But I have also...
CHARLIE ROSE: He talks the talk but doesn`t walk the walk.
AL GORE: That`s right. And this is America. I want to stimulate
this in every way that I can. I want to put my money where my mouth is and
has been for 30 years, by the way, long before I got involved in the
business world.
I will say that that I have given to NGOs and principally the Alliance
for Climate Protection far more than I ever made on those kinds of
investments. And it`s not a factor in my motivation at all.
CHARLIE ROSE: In the end we will succeed because we have to?
AL GORE: Yes. Yes.
But, really, it does pose a question, Charlie, about what it means to
be a human being. Were we not to act in time, were we to create a future
in which the next generation would look back in anger and ask "Why didn`t
you act?" And if the answer was we were just distracted, or even worse, we
didn`t care, that would have...
CHARLIE ROSE: Or we were overcome by...
AL GORE: Lethargy.
CHARLIE ROSE: ... or other greedy forces or whatever.
AL GORE: Whatever we called it, the excuse would not be accepted, and
it would have profound implications for who we are.
I don`t believe that`s who we are. I don`t accept it for a moment.
But I feel a passionate commitment to play whatever part I can in awakening
the necessary sense of urgency to recognize this reality for what it is and
to respond appropriately.
CHARLIE ROSE: Thank you for coming.
My pleasure, thanks for having me.
CHARLIE ROSE: It`s great to have you here.
This book "Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis,"
"Newsweek," "The Thinking Man`s Thinking Man: Al Gore`s new plan for the
planet." Again, our thanks to the former vice president.
And thank you for watching. We`ll see you tomorrow night. Ken
Auletta a will be here talking about Google. See you then.
END
<Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2009 Charlie Rose Inc. ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2009 CQ Transcriptions, LLC , which
takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for
the user`s personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be
printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any
fashion that may infringe upon Charlie Rose and CQ Transcriptions, LLC,
copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This
is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.>
21
| Saved from | 28 Jun 2013 21:34:01 | ||
| All snapshots | from host www.charlierose.com | ||
| Linked from | en.wikiquote.org » Al Gore | ||
| TextImage | |||
| download .zipreport abusePIN THIS PAGE:other | |||