Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Do you think hes interested? Of course not.
According to Timothy LaSalle, who Gore consulted for solutions to Global Warming, we could solve the "problem" of CO2 emissions by clever use of agriculture and technology. the response of Gore's team was to try and change his science.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/220552/output/print
[i]The potential for soils to absorb more of the CO2 that our utilities, factories, and vehicles spew poses a dilemma for Gore, one of two where his scientific and political instincts collide. With better management, soils could sequester much more carbon than they do now. The question is how much more. Soils scientist Rattan Lal of Ohio State University was surprised to get a call last summer ("Vice President Gore would like to talk to you") that began, "I have 15 or 20 questions about soils and climate for you." Lal calculates that if more farmers adopted mulching, no-till farming, and the use of cover crops and manure, 3,700 million acres worldwide could sequester 1 gigaton per year of CO2, roughly 12 percent of annual global emissions. Other experts are even more sanguine. "If we feed the biology and manage grasslands appropriately, we could sequester as much carbon as we emit," says Timothy LaSalle, CEO of the Rodale Institute, who presented at two summits. The political clash is this: if you tell people soils can be managed to suck up lots of our carbon emissions, it sounds like a get-out-of-jail-free card, and could decrease what little enthusiasm there is for reducing those emissions
According to Timothy LaSalle, who Gore consulted for solutions to Global Warming, we could solve the "problem" of CO2 emissions by clever use of agriculture and technology. the response of Gore's team was to try and change his science.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/220552/output/print
[i]The potential for soils to absorb more of the CO2 that our utilities, factories, and vehicles spew poses a dilemma for Gore, one of two where his scientific and political instincts collide. With better management, soils could sequester much more carbon than they do now. The question is how much more. Soils scientist Rattan Lal of Ohio State University was surprised to get a call last summer ("Vice President Gore would like to talk to you") that began, "I have 15 or 20 questions about soils and climate for you." Lal calculates that if more farmers adopted mulching, no-till farming, and the use of cover crops and manure, 3,700 million acres worldwide could sequester 1 gigaton per year of CO2, roughly 12 percent of annual global emissions. Other experts are even more sanguine. "If we feed the biology and manage grasslands appropriately, we could sequester as much carbon as we emit," says Timothy LaSalle, CEO of the Rodale Institute, who presented at two summits. The political clash is this: if you tell people soils can be managed to suck up lots of our carbon emissions, it sounds like a get-out-of-jail-free card, and could decrease what little enthusiasm there is for reducing those emissions
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 33
|
By:
How does he make these billions a year?
|
|
By:
well he part owns or has shares in most of the companies your going to be forced to buy your carbon credits from.
|
|
By:
Which ones? I'm going to have to buy carbon credits?
|
|
By:
Does he really? Al Gore is probably the only major politician who truly understands climate change science. His detractors claim he is a bandwoggoner, but nothing could be further from the truth.
As a freshman, Gore planned to be an English major and was working on a novel.[21] In 1967 Gore took a course on climate science from Roger Revelle which made a strong impression on him, influencing him in the direction of environmental concerns.[22] He was not tremendously engaged in his studies until the upheavals of 1968 and the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. Gore took a political science course, developed an interest in politics, and changed his major to government.[18] |
|
By:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html?_r=2
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6496196/Al-Gore-profiting-from-climate-change-agenda.html |
|
By:
I thought he was white.
|
|
By:
Dylan?
|
|
By:
"He added that he had put
|
|
By:
Al Gore deserves is (NAP)
|
|
By:
it
|
|
By:
Oh well.
|
|
By:
just because hes been interested in the subject for a long time doesn't make him right. Don't you find it interesting that the "solutions" to climate change that are being pushed are all going to make Gore very rich while decimating what industry is left and taxing people into poverty.
There does seem to be consensus that clever use of agriculture and technology could help neutralize a high percentage of CO2 emmissions (the amount you could neutralize is debated but there seems to be consensus that it would have a substantial effect) so going on the assumption that man made co2 is the reason the climate is changing why aren't solutions like this being supported more? Maybe because they won't make a select group of people very, very rich in the process. |
|
By:
Still wanting a source for these billions a year.
|
|
By:
A concensus you say? Evidence for this?
|
|
By:
spark those links tell you some of the businesses hes invested in which will profit from the cap and trade plan. I think his main one is called Blood and Gore (yes)
|
|
By:
climate change ,bigger con than alphonse capone was.
|
|
By:
they may do dylan, but why would I read them when you can't even give me a source for your claim that he'll be making billions a year? It's been a while I've been asking now.
|
|
By:
spark why do you always do this, focus on one line in a debate which isn't really the main point. Do you accept that Al Gore is going to get very very rich off the back of the cap and trade scheme hes proposing? i don't know exactly how much per year he'll make from it, ok maybe it will be hundreds and millions a year maybe it will be more, but that wasn't the point i was making (and you know that)
the fact is Al Gore is going to benefit financially from cap and trade thats been widely reported now and when its been put to Gore himself he doesn't deny it, it seems that when alternative solutions are offered that won't make him even richer than he is they aren't considered. |
|
By:
I focussed on it because it seemed to me so unlikely that I suspected you of lying.
I 'always' do this because so often my suspicion proves correct and the person concerned cannot support their claim, however many times I ask for it. Which is nice. |
|
By:
All a load of balls. In 500 years, we'll be pumping more co2 in to the atmosphere to prevent a mini ice age. Just let nature be FFS.
|
|
By:
does it really matter if its hundreds of millions or billions per year? There have been numerous articles this week estimating that the whole cap and trade scheme will make Gore the first carbon billionaire, i linked two of those articles.
The point is Gore stands to make a lot of money from these cap and trade schemes, the schemes that he (surprise, surpirse) is pushing for. If his major concern is saving the planet wouldn't you think that this type of vested interest might play a role in which types of "solutions" he supports and which he doesn't. |
|
By:
No, you linked articles reporting that others had made that claim. And if it doesn't matter, then why tell the lie?
|
|
By:
spark it isn't a lie because noone really knows how much these markets are going to make each year, who knows maybe billions per year will be an under estimation. But the fact is hes involved in several of the companies that will be the ones your forced to buy your carbon credits from under the cap and trade scheme hes supporting.
Gore himself doesn't deny this so why do you? |
|
By:
spark,
Goldman Sachs estimate that trading carbon credits will be their biggest earner in the future. There are massive vested interests in the Climate Change Con. |
|
By:
Goldman Sachs marketed $12 million worth of carbon offsets to CE2 Carbon Capital in what Goldman Sachs is calling the largest publicly announced U.S. offset deal so far, reports Reuters.
CE2 Carbon Capital is a U.S. investor and owner of carbon-based assets and commodities. Goldman Sachs sold the offsets on behalf of Blue Source, a company that generated the offsets from projects aimed at preventing forests from being cut down, as well as carbon capture projects at landfills and coal mines. Goldman Sachs is a minority partner in Blue Source. The forestry offsets came from tree stands that were protected by convincing farmers in North Carolina not to cut down the trees. http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/10/12/goldman-sachs-sells-12m-in-carbon-offsets-in-largest-such-u-s-deal-so-far/ |
|
By:
http://www.b12partners.net/wp/2009/07/19/carbon-credit-market-and-goldman/
Raed that link if you doubt any motives. And bear in mind that Goldman is 'very close' to a lot of movers and shakers in the US, especially politicians (their ex-employees all run the Fed, for example) |
|
By:
From that link above:
[i] The feature of this plan that has special appeal to speculators is that the |
|
By:
Gores " An inconvenient Truth" is the biggest load of utter ** ever fobbed off on the mug public. Anyone who buys that must have the intellect of an insect.
|
|
By:
How inconvenient that the polar caps are visibly melting.
Otherwise the Global Warming debunkers might not be obviously daft. |
|
By:
Stopping the hot air from Gores mouth would help shirley.
|
|
By:
This is the same Al Gore who during his presidential campaign claimed to have invented the Internet.
|
|
By:
at least he gave us Windows8
|
|
By:
wur 05 Nov 21:05
Does he really? Al Gore is probably the only major politician who truly understands climate change science. His detractors claim he is a bandwoggoner, but nothing could be further from the truth. Is "bandwoggoner" a racist term? |