Solutions to An Inconvenient Truth?

Well, seems like those rumors floated this last weekend that the surprising BushCo U-turn on greenhouse emissions haven't come to fruition (see previous post), leaving Al Gore's big solution speech at NYU alone in the 24-hour news cycle. Here are some details from the NYTimes:

Mr. Gore said that rising temperatures posed an enormous threat and that only a movement akin to the nuclear freeze campaign for arms control a generation ago, which he said he opposed at the time, would push elected officials out of longstanding deadlock on the issue.

“Merely engaging in high-minded debates about theoretical future reductions while continuing to steadily increase emissions represents a self-delusional and reckless approach,” Mr. Gore said. “In some ways, that approach is worse than doing nothing at all, because it lulls the gullible into thinking that something is actually being done, when in fact it is not.”
[...]
(He) also renewed a longstanding proposal to replace all payroll taxes with taxes on pollution, including carbon dioxide. And he said the United States should rejoin the Kyoto Protocol, the climate treaty, rejected by President Bush that requires industrialized countries to cut emissions.

The WaPo also notes:

Gore proposed a Carbon Neutral Mortgage Association ("Connie Mae," to echo the familiar Fannie Mae) devoted to helping homeowners retrofit and build energy-efficient homes. He urged creation of an "electranet," which would let homeowners and business owners buy and sell surplus electricity.

The Age in Melbourne adds:

Mr Gore cautioned against looking for a "silver bullet" policy reform for global warming, a view that finds an echo with many scientists. "There are things that you can do today … and things you tend to in the long term," said Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist at the Goddard NASA Institute of Space Studies. "You have to think on all the scales at once, and even that will only help you avoid the worst scenarios."

Amanda Griscom Little over at Grist had a bit more substantive (and wonkish) look at the speech, and she also noted a shift in tone--more presidential (with a "stately backdrop of American flags") and more optimism:

The whole lecture, in fact, seemed a response to the most common criticism levied against Gore's climate presentations -- that they are too clouded with doom and gloom, failing to convey a hopeful, can-do message (despite his frequent observation that the climate crisis presents equal parts danger and opportunity).

With the exception of a mention at the outset of yet more evidence of rapidly melting polar ice caps, the speech focused entirely on solutions. In fact, it was an exhaustive laundry list of dozens of such solutions, with no shortage of wonky detail, and peppered with assurances to the tune of, "This is a major source of hope!"

Many we've heard before: so-called stabilization wedges, as outlined by Princeton professors Stephen Pacala and Rob Socolow, which would solve the climate crisis with an array of existing technologies; the "25 x '25" proposal from the agriculture community, which would dramatically expand the use of biofuels and renewable energy; increasingly affordable and effective solar panels, wind turbines, and green architecture; "flex-fuel, plug-in, hybrid vehicles" that can run on gasoline, biofuels, and electricity; and a decentralized electricity grid with smaller generators located closer to the points of use.

Also back, in vaguely retro fashion: Kyoto. Gore argued that the U.S. is obligated to play a lead role in developing a new global treaty on climate change. "Since the [Kyoto] treaty has been so demonized in America's internal debate, it is difficult to imagine the current Senate finding a way to ratify it," he said. "But the United States should immediately join the discussion that is now underway on the new, tougher treaty that will soon be completed. We should plan to accelerate its adoption and phase it in more quickly than is presently planned."

And David Roberts at Grist's blog, Gristmill, points out a bit of Seattle hometown pride from the speech:

Many individuals and businesses have decided to take an approach known as "Zero Carbon." They are reducing their CO2 as much as possible and then offsetting the rest with reductions elsewhere including by the planting of trees. At least one entire community -- Ballard, a city of 18,000 people in Washington State -- is embarking on a goal of making the entire community zero carbon.