Gore sets bold goals but campaign avoids specificity
Yesterday Al Gore made a bold speech that set an ambitous goal for the reduction of greenhouse gases: that all electricity produced in the United States would come from renewable sources within the next 10 years. Finally, it’s time that a leader pushes us to make the dramatic changes that are required to make a significant reduction in our greenhouse gas emission. As I wrote previously, climate change is not just an environmental issue, it’s also a national security issue. So, I applaud Al Gore for setting an ambitious goal. It seems so commonplace these days to set goals that are 20 or 30 years off in the future, particularly when it comes to energy or the environment. It’s easy for politicians to promote such goals since they will certainly be out of office long before we ever reach the deadline they set. Such distant goals serve to delay immediate action. As Gore emphasized, 10 years is about the longest attention span America has for a sustained effort on such an issue. And, as the frequently referenced example of the moon landing shows, we can achieve great things within that time frame if we set our minds to it.
Although Gore’s speech set a bold goal for the future, I felt that the speech, and the campaign he promotes, is missing key components. As I’ve frequently commented on this blog, it’s time that our politicians acknowledge that real financial sacrifices, at least in the short term, are required. It’s up to our leaders to be honest with us. Otherwise, when the sacrifices become evident, there will be an even greater public backlash. Gore spoke very little of the sacrifice that would be required. The main interventions he calls for are for greater support of new technologies.
I do give credit to Gore for raising the issue of a carbon tax offset by a reduction in payroll taxes. This is something that I’ve frequently suggested, albeit, targeteted at gasoline taxes. We must be honest, however, that even with a payroll tax offset, there are going to be a significant number of losers.
Making a transition away from carbon generated electricity and to renewable sources will, in the short run, cost more for many people, even if in the long run it will cost less. Gore correctly identified our tax system as the most effective way to change our behavior. I was disappointed, however, that the “We Campaign” website made no reference to this intervention. Here’s what the website suggested for the specific ways to move to renewables:
To ensure greater adoption of renewable energy, each of us needs to urge our friends, utility companies, and government officials to more aggressively promote and integrate renewable power into all sectors of the economy. Together, we can stop the building of new dirty power plants and instead ensure that future energy projects take advantage of the clean renewable resources available.
Well, the best form of encouragement is making fossil fuels more expensive than renewables. Unfortunately, these tough policy choices were glossed over on the campaign website. The interventions suggested seemed to focus on simply urging our leaders and companies to turn to renewables. The fact of the matter is that all consumers want cheap energy and the energy companies are simple responding to our desires. We can “encourage” all we want, but until the financial incentives are set up to reward renewables, not much is going to change. Gore was right in his speech. Too bad that the the campaign seems too timid to set out specific changes that need to be made.
Finally, I was disappointed that Gore seemed to make the common mistake of linking the proposal of 100% renewable electricity generation to our dependence on foreign oil. The fact of the matter is that even if we were to generate 100% of our electricity tomorrow on renewable sources, it would do virtually nothing to reduce our dependence on oil or reduce the cost of gasoline. Almost none of our electricity is generated through oil, so although Gore’s interventions would significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that this is a solution to the oil problem. Gore made reference to encouraging the development of electric vehicles. I totally agree. However, the real way to do this is to make gasoline more expensive – even more expensive than it already is. In this political climate that has voters frustrated by high fuel prices, unfortunately, few politicians are willing to make that call.
Gore’s speech was a bold step in the right direction, but I was disappointed that the campaign he promotes lack specificity in terms of the policy changes and the tradeoffs that our elected leaders must address.
Related posts: