Gore pleads for unity on climate, despite divide

By DINA CAPPIELLO and H. JOSEF HEBERT – 1 hour ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Vice President Al Gore, the leading American voice on climate change, urged lawmakers Friday to overcome partisan differences and take action to reduce greenhouse gases, but Democrats and Republicans sparred even more vigorously over the cost of dealing with global warming.

Gore, who won a Nobel prize for his work on climate change, told a congressional hearing that "the dire and growing threat" of a warmer earth requires the parties to unite to deal with the environmental threat. He endorsed a House Democratic bill that would limit carbon dioxide and other pollution linked to warming.

"It is a challenge that this Congress must rise to," Gore said. "I wish I could find the words to get past the partisan divide that both sides have contributed to. ... It shouldn't be partisan. It should be something we do together in our national interest."

But former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., argued that the Democratic proposal to reduce greenhouse gases would "punish the American people" by imposing higher energy costs and threatening jobs.

"This bill is an energy tax," Gingrich said. "An energy tax punishes senior citizens, it punishes rural Americans, if you use electricity it punishes you. This bill will increase your cost of living and may kill your job."

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee that is writing the bill, shot back that Gingrich was resorting to "the old scare tactics" designed to undermine any congressional effort to address the problem.

"When American people hear the statements you have made today, they get scared, which I think is exactly what is intended," a visibly angry Waxman told Gingrich, a potential presidential contender in 2012 and a leading voice of the GOP.

Gore defended the science that warns of a potential climate crisis later this century and insisted the blueprint outlined by House Democrats would address the problem without soaring prices for Americans.

"I think the cost of energy will come down when we make this transition to renewable energy," said Gore, who predicted economic costs would be much greater if global warming is not reined in by a shift from the use of fossil fuels. Democrats argued that the development of renewable and energy efficient technologies will produce jobs and mitigate cost increases.

The House bill calls for mandatory reductions in carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases by 20 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, and 83 percent by mid-century. It also would require utilities to produce a quarter of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025 and impose new efficiency requirements.

The measure would cap greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels. Under a compromise being discussed, a large portion of these emission permits would be given away, while others would be auctioned with much of the revenue to be redistributed to ease the impact of higher energy costs.

Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the committee's top Republican, argued that the proposed "cap-and-trade" system would cost tens of billions of dollars a year. "How in the world can we have a (pollution) trade system that doesn't cost jobs and doesn't cost the economy?" he said.

House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio denounced the draft bill as a "massive national energy tax on every American .... who drives a car, buys a product manufactured in the United States, or has the audacity to flip on a light switch."

Barton said Republicans are putting together their own climate proposal that would scrap the "cap-and-trade" system. He said the GOP proposal, yet to be unveiled, will call for expanding nuclear energy and pumping more money into ways to capture carbon from coal-burning power plants.

While Republicans were critical, some Democrats expressed concern as well.

"How do we protect our people?" asked Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., whose state is reeling from the economic recession and is home to many energy-intensive industries, including the ailing auto industry. Dingell said he's not convinced the bill will protect U.S. jobs, especially if China isn't forced to take similar actions.

"If the United States leads, China will follow," Gore argued.

Friday's session concluded days of hearings on the climate bill, which Waxman says he hopes his committee will approve by the end of May. The Obama administration broadly endorsed the legislation, although some issues — such as allocating the pollution permits — have yet to be worked out.

Democratic sponsors of the bill hoped Friday's testimony of former Sen. John Warner, R-Va., might sway some GOP lawmakers.

Warner said dealing with the climate issue is essential for national security and the sake of future generations — even if there are economic consequences.

"Is this the time to challenge an issue of this magnitude which has ramifications of cost to everyone here in this country and is going to require sacrifices. I say to you, yes, it is the time," Warner said.

Literally, the fate of life as we know it hangs balance on the United States excepting responsibility for and reducing CO2 emissions. And for the record, the Republicans and their Big OIL/Coal buddies suck the weenie.    

Without a WORLD Govt this will never happen, anywhere. Sad but true.

AL GORE........before global warming he was Americas number one crusader to ban HEAVY METAL music...because,quote"its satanic"....ass hole

But then again he could be telling the truth!

global warming is a normal thing, temp goes up, temp goes down, greenland have been green before, and will be green again

right lets not do anything about it, buy bigger cars and pollute the waters even more. Lets make every factory put out how much ash and stuff in the air as possible. Over fish the waters and please kill all the animals they just make a mess. Lets all eat hamburgers made from chemicals and name all our children after the great Muhammad so we not offend anybody. The earth was nothing before let it be nothing once more.

I am all FOR reducing co2 gasses and cut down on emissions, but...

VERY recently they have discovered that:

The icecap on the South pole has grown significantly, in fact, it has grown more than the loss of ice at the North Pole...

IF all the ice on the northpole would melt, sea levels would FALL instead of rise... How?

There is more ice underwater than there is above water. Frozen water takes up more space than liquid water. So if all the frozen water UNDER sea-level melts, it would take up less space. And if the ice above water melts too, all together it would still take up less space than it does now underwater.. The result of this is that sea-levels go down instead of rise....

This combined with the increase of ice on the south pole puts a whole new light on the "rising of the sea" problems...

It doesn't counteract the global warming, but I am starting to believe that this might be a natural phenomenon...

The earth rotates on its own axis once every 24 hours... and once on it's other axis about once every 365.25 days... this creates day and night, and the 4 seasons... BUT it also VERY VERY slowly rotates on its 3rd axis... Meaning it is no longer on the same angle towards the sun (around 26 degree angle), so the northpole is more directly exposed to the sun, and all other countries are also exposed to the sun on a differnt angle... This explains why some countries get hotter every year, but also why some countries get colder (you don't hear them about those!) and it also explains why there seems to be a small shift in seasons... They seem to start a bit earlier gradually....

Any thoughts?

So Holland won't drown?

;-)

birdtongchai. I've no idea where you got the idea that the antarctic ice is increasing. Doesn't fit with the this recent story about one of the largest ice shelves breaking up in the middle of winter.

http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMG58VG3HF_index_1.html

And while the arctic sea ice melting will only be inconvenient if you're a polar bear, the real problem is the greenland ice cap and the siberian permafrost melting which will cause considerable sea level rise.

The key thing about taking action now is that it's insurance. Climate is chaotic, the science is difficult and there will always be events that buck the trend. However, the consequences of the majority of the world's climate scientists being correct, are so severe that we cannot afford to take the risk. And as insurance premiums go, the cost is pretty cheap. Sure it sounds a lot if you talk about hundreds of millions of dollars, but compare it to the cost of bailing out AIG or RBS and it doesn't sound so bad.

Anyone who takes comfort in the hand picked articles that claim that global warming isn't happening needs to listen to *the vast majority of climate scientists* who all agree that global warming is happening and say that it's 90% likely that we are the cause.

Of course if you think you know better than most of the world's experts on the subject then feel free to spout more rubbish about 1000 year cycles and "it's all happened before".

If you don't know better than all the worlds experts... quit the spouting "it's a hoax" bullshit and wake up before it's too late.

enough nonsense lets make some money !! woohooooo !!

Gingrich: the Democrat proposals would "punish the American people". Haven't they just finished an 8-year sentence at the hands of SOP (Satan's Own Party)? and its demonic dictator Herr Fuehrer Dubya?