Comments on: Gore Calls for 100% Green Power in 10 Years

By: General Wesley Clark: It’s About Energy Independence

General Wesley Clark: It’s About Energy Independence — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 06:09:16 +0000

[...] In Clark’s view, the path forward is a combination of policy and technology gains, and he said both a cap-and-trade system and a carbon tax were looking to be inevitable. Given that imposing taxes is not the most politically-friendly position, Clark was quick to say nobody thinks it will be a substantial tax. Al Gore, whom Clark attributed with making the U.S. realize the size of the energy problem, has also voiced support for a carbon tax. [...]

By: General Wesley Clark: It’s About Energy Independence « Earth2Tech

General Wesley Clark: It’s About Energy Independence « Earth2Tech — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:11:01 +0000

[...] The path forward is a combination of policy and technology gains, and Clark said both a cap and trade system and a carbon tax were looking to be inevitable. Given imposing taxes is not the most politically-friendly position, Clark was quick to say nobody thinks it will be a substantial tax. Al Gore, whom Wesley Clark attributed with making the U.S. realize the size of the energy problem, also has voiced support for a carbon tax. [...]

By: Google’s Eric Schmidt Details Energy Plan, Chides Lack of Leadership « Earth2Tech

Tue, 09 Sep 2008 16:06:30 +0000

[...] Intel Chairman Andy Grove. Gore has called for 100 percent of electricity to come from clean power, but in a decade — roughly half the timeline that Schmidt laid out. But Gore in that latest speech, [...]

By: Armando

Armando — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 06:48:59 +0000

Gore’s plan ambitious?! More like delusional! I want some of whatever he’s smoking!

Even if Obama wins and shoves Gore’s energy plan down our throats, there is no way that renewable energy can be scaled anywhere close without the use of nuclear energy. You should know this. Either way, Gore is demonstrating a shocking misunderstanding of the energy problems currently facing our nation. They key right now is to transition the transportation sector from oil to electricity. That it an issue of battery technology, not renewable energy.

By: Green Campaign Watch: McCain Blames Obama for Gas Prices and Checks Out Volt, Obama Must Fight Back on Energy « Earth2Tech

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 23:01:49 +0000

[...] to panic, Jacquot warns, with gas and energy prices so high. Obama needs to give a speech akin to Gore’s, Jacquot writes: Explain the current situation, articulate why McCain’s proposals won’t [...]

By: Kevin Whitham

Kevin Whitham — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:57:29 +0000

Of course Gore has invested in clean-tech, he believes in the technology and its ability to replace carbon-based fuels. He has chosen to support the renewable energy industry with his rhetoric and his wallet. He is simply putting his money where his mouth is, which is something that most of can't say when it comes to the environment. If we can realize Gore's plan, everyone with access to the sun or the wind will benefit.

By: Greentech Media: Cleantech Investing » Blog Archive » We got BOTH kinds of cleantech here: Solar and PV

Fri, 18 Jul 2008 19:42:42 +0000

[...] quarter, so fewer, bigger, later funds is the clear trend… And speaking of Kleiner Perkins, Al Gore’s visionary goal for carbon-free power got a lot of attention this week — and note that he supports the tax shift we’ve [...]

By: J Willey

J Willey — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:10:02 +0000

Is there any doubt as to what Al Gore's driver for solar and wind technology to replace fossil fuels is? It surely is not, the environment. It is surely big money in his pocket!

By: kerry bradshaw

kerry bradshaw — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 23:58:20 +0000

It’s pretty obvious to those who understand energy needs and generation capacities, that decisions cannot be made in advance of the technologies. Wind power has been a collossal bust and for erasons that could easily have been seen beforehand – non-dispatchability, enormous tracts of real estate required for small amounts of unpredictable, unreliable energy that had to be duplicated by controllable (i.e. fossil) plan geenrators, doubling its true costs. We have wasted hundreds of millions of dollars msotly to quiet the loudest voices around – the radical environmentalists, you know, the ones who blocked nuclear power for 30 years in favor of thsoe coal plants that have caused global warming.
It’s clear to me that GPBRs are going to dominate the world, but if we’re not carefull and reject simplistic ideas coming from a pretty simplistic mind,
we may end up with a system that is simply not viable. We don’tneed gren and don’t need renewable, two useless terms. We need carbonless and crudeless. Coal and oil are actually renewable energy
sources, for those who actually understand what renewable means. Of course, then there’s zero emission, which has little to do with zero emissions ….

By: StuartB

StuartB — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 22:47:43 +0000

Does anybody really believe this fantasy? Let’s just keep deluding ourselves and see where we are in 10 years.

Fossil fuels are not going anywhere in 10 years. Give me a break, New Zealand as a model for solving the problems in the USA. Even if you believe the hype and the illusion about carbon netruality meaning anything you're comparing apples to kiwi's.

If it takes 10 years to drill a hole in a known reserve like ANWAR and bring oil to market using well known technology as some claim. Then how long do you think it’s going to take to replace fossil fuels with technologies that haven’t been invented yet? We're supposed to run this country like the little engine that could I suppose and ignore reality?

I’m also so tired of the man to the moon JFK analogy. The moon program was run at maximum risk to where even the slightest failure would cause a disaster. Is that how we want to plan our energy for the future?