I Speak for the Freeze
Gore calls for carbon freeze in major speech on climate solutions

By Amanda Griscom Little
19 Sep 2006

It is "time for a national oil change," said Al Gore with a sly wink in his
voice. "That is apparent to anyone who has looked at our national dipstick."

This was one of the few moments of comedy in what was billed as a "major
policy address" yesterday by the former veep. In an uncharacteristically
formal speech to students, faculty, and a throng of top reporters gathered
in a New York University auditorium, Gore -- after a year spent chronicling
the climate crisis in lectures, film, and print -- turned to the subject of
solutions. He outlined a host of policy proposals both familiar and
strikingly new, rarely interjecting quips of the sort that have
consistently endeared him to audiences in recent months.

"My purpose is not to present a comprehensive and detailed blueprint [of
future climate policy], for that is a task for democracy as a whole,"
intoned Gore, "but rather to try to shine some light on a pathway through
this terra incognita that lies between where we are and where we need to go."

The pathway Gore described began with "immediately freezing [carbon
dioxide] emissions and then beginning sharp reductions." Reminiscent of the
nuclear freeze of the '70s, Gore's proposed carbon freeze "has the virtue
of being clear, simple, and easy to understand," he argued. "It can attract
support across partisan lines as a logical starting point for the more
difficult work that lies ahead."

Standing against a stately backdrop of American flags -- gone were the
flashy visuals that usually accompany his climate speeches -- Gore
projected a decidedly more somber and serious persona than the exuberant,
almost giddy character we've seen pumping his fists and cracking jokes as
he roared around the world on his climate lecture circuit. It was a persona
that, if you squinted just right, seemed almost ...

Yes, presidential. Indeed, Gore's protestations that he has no intention of
becoming a 2008 presidential contender have been getting weaker. Add to
that the recent news that Gore will be publishing a book next May entitled
The Assault on Reason -- a meditation on the ineptitude of political
leaders paralyzed by their "unwillingness to let facts drive decisions" --
and it's enough to drive the media to distraction.

Little wonder, then, that rumors have begun to circulate that the White
House may announce a major new climate policy in order to steal Gore's
gathering thunder. (If Karl Rove can convince Bush to turn on his buddy
Michael Crichton, you know the Republican Party senses shifting winds.)

Despite its formality, Gore's speech focused on uplift: "Many Americans are
now seeing a bright light shining from the far side of this no-man's land
that illuminates not sacrifice and danger," he said, "but instead a vision
of a bright future that is better for our country in every way -- a future
with better jobs, a cleaner environment, a more secure nation, and a safer
world."

Such effulgent optimism is new. 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 Gore's 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."

Some unexpected, outside-the-box proposals popped up as well. One he has
been advocating "for the last 14 years," he said (to the surprise of many
who remember no such proposal in, say, the 2000 campaign), would eliminate
all federal payroll taxes -- Social Security and unemployment compensation
included -- and replace the revenue with a pollution tax on CO2. "The
overall level of taxation would remain exactly the same," explained Gore.
"It would be, in other words, a revenue-neutral tax swap. But instead of
discouraging businesses from hiring more employees, it would discourage
businesses from producing more pollution."

Spend Your $.02
Discuss this story in our blog, Gristmill.
He also proposed a new Carbon Neutral Mortgage Association -- a wonky idea
redeemed by a cute nickname, "Connie Mae" -- to help finance more efficient
buildings and eventually zero-energy, zero-emission architecture. Builders
often bypass efficient features like thicker insulation and better windows,
Gore noted, because these investments elevate construction costs on the
front end, even though they pay for themselves within a few years. "It
should be possible to remove the purchase-price barrier for such
improvements through the use of innovative mortgage finance instruments,"
he said.

Throughout the address, Gore's calls to action were couched in a thick
layer of patriotism: "In order for the world to respond urgently to the
climate crisis, the United States must lead the way. No other nation can
... Our natural role is to be the pace car in the race to stop global warming."

Could the U.S. shift from obstructionist to leader on global warming? It
sounds far-fetched, perhaps, but no more so than the notion that climate
change -- once the exclusive obsession of environmentalists and
climatologists -- could catapult a man once written off as a historical
footnote back into the presidency.