Is former vice president Al Gore too controversial to carry the
torch for the clean-energy movement?
Let’s be right up front about this. While Gore is a hero to many
environmentalists, he is a toxic figure to many people of the
conservative persuasion.
Last week, Gore received a lot of attention when he proposed a
crash program to shift from carbon-based fuels to renewable
supplies, such as solar and wind. (See
Associated Press story by Dina Cappiello.) I was surprised that
Gore said nothing about what has gone on before with the help of
U.S. Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Bainbridge Island, and his New
Apollo Energy Project and others involved in the Apollo Alliance.
Yes, Gore has managed to raise the profile on this issue like
nobody before him. But as Michael Gerson says in an opinion column
in
Sunday’s Kitsap Sun:
Some Republicans and conservatives are prone to an ideologically
motivated skepticism. On AM talk radio, where scientific standards
are not particularly high, the attitude seems to be: “If Al Gore is
upset about carbon, we must need more of it.” Gore’s partisan,
conspiratorial anger is annoying, yet not particularly relevant to
the science of this issue.
This points, however, to a broader problem. Any legislation
ambitious enough to cut carbon emissions significantly and
encourage new energy technologies will require a broad political
and social consensus. Nothing this complex and expensive gets done
on a party-line vote.
Yet many environmental leaders seem unpracticed at coalition
building. They tend to be conventionally, if not radically,
liberal. They sometimes express a deep distrust for capitalism and
hostility to the extractive industries. Their political strategy
consists mainly of the election of Democrats. Most Republican
environmental efforts are quickly pronounced “too little, too
late.”
Gore is well known for his concerns about climate change, which
he revealed in his book and later the movie, “An Inconvenient
Truth.” Now, he has hitched his ambitions to a crash program of
energy conversion, something that Inslee has written about in his
own book, “Apollo’s Fire.”
In interviews I’ve seen and heard, Gore gives barely a nod to
legislation that others have been pushing. He exhibits more than
his usual arrogance in acting like this was his idea alone.
Now, T. Boone Pickens, the multi-billionaire oil man, is
muscling in with his own clean-energy initiative, including
a potential $53 million ad campaign to promote wind energy and
break America from its oil addiction.
Maybe all sides of the energy issue should come together and
decide what can be reasonably accomplished with a bipartisan
effort. While Al Gore could bring something to the table, I’m not
sure whether everyone would welcome him there. And the notion that
he should become some kind of “energy czar” for the country might
just turn the table upside down.
Hear Gore in his own words on Sunday’s
“Meet the Press.”
Share on Facebook
