Political Change on Climate Change

  • Al Gore's Vice-Presidential portrait from 1994. (Photo courtesy of the United States Government)

The man who won a Nobel Peace Prize for
his work on climate change is optimistic
about the politics around the issue. Lester
Graham reports Al Gore says he thinks the
political landscape is changing in favor of
a world-wide climate change treaty:

Transcript

The man who won a Nobel Peace Prize for
his work on climate change is optimistic
about the politics around the issue. Lester
Graham reports Al Gore says he thinks the
political landscape is changing in favor of
a world-wide climate change treaty:

The former U.S. Vice-President says he thinks world leaders will sign a meaningful climate change treaty in Copenhagen in December.

Al Gore says politicians and governments around the world seem just about ready to do something significant about climate change.

“The potential for much larger change has been building up and I think that Copenhagen is the moment when it may cross that political tipping point. Now, let me take the other side of it just for a brief moment. The consequences of a failure in Copenhagen would, in my opinion, be catastrophic.”

Gore says waiting any longer to reduce the greenhouse gases that cause global warming could take the world past a point of no return.

That’s because tundra in the frozen north thaw and release the potent greenhouse gas, methane, creating a feedback loop that cannot be stopped.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

GOP Cap & Trade Numbers Wrong

  • Republicans in Congress incorrectly cited an MIT report on cap-and-trade, claiming it would raise consumer energy prices by $3,400. The report actually said $340. (Photo courtesy of GOP.gov)

House Republicans used an M.I.T. report to come up with cost estimates for the carbon cap-and-trade program. Lester Graham reports the author of that report has informed the Republicans their conclusions are almost ten times higher than the report indicated:

Transcript

House Republicans used an M.I.T. report to come up with cost estimates for the carbon cap-and-trade program. Lester Graham reports the author of that report has informed the Republicans their conclusions are almost ten times higher than the report indicated:

The House Republicans recently issued a press release that claimed the carbon cap-and-trade program would cost every American houseold more than $3,100 a year. They based it on that report. Problem is, the author of the report –an economist– says that’s just wrong. John Reilly says when a House Republican staffer called Reilly the economist made it clear the Republicans’ number was wrong by a factor of ten.

“To the extent they knowingly took wrong numbers, they’re really kind of just misinforming the debate and trying to scare people with numbers that really aren’t accurate. If they’re just confused, I’ve sent a letter now. In principle they could put out a press release that said that they had made an error and the right number is actually 340 not 3,100 or something.”

The discrepency was first noted by PolitiFact, a truth squad project at the St. Petersburg Times.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Eco-Films Debut on Festival Circuit

  • Environmentally-themed movies are hitting the festival circuit hard (Source: Sailko at Wikimedia Commons)

If you think Al Gore’s movie, ‘An
Inconvenient Truth,’ is one of the only
environmental films out there, think again.
There are so many movies about the environment
that entire festivals have been created to
showcase them. Jennifer Guerra has more:

Transcript

If you think Al Gore’s movie, ‘An
Inconvenient Truth,’ is one of the only
environmental films out there, think again.
There are so many movies about the environment
that entire festivals have been created to
showcase them. Jennifer Guerra
has more:

Science films have come a long way from this.

(sound of old science film)

Now, they’ve got flashy trailers, famous narrators and edgy music. There are hundreds of
these environmentally-themed movies and they’re hitting the festival circuit hard. Korea,
Italy, Israel, DC, Colorado, Michigan.

Susan Woods got to choose which movies to include in Michigan’s first ever Green on
the Big Screen film festival.

“It was quite daunting in the beginning, to tell you the truth, when I started looking
up all these films. I thought oh my goodness, how can I select them. There’s too
many to select.”

She eventually settled on about 30 films, including King Corn. Curt Ellis produced the
documentary, which is all about – yup, you guess it – corn and our dependence on it for
almost everything we eat.

(sound from movie)

“When you’re telling a story about the natural world, you really have to be able to
transport people to the place you’re talking about.”

And Ellis thinks the best way to do that – short of lecturing people in a cornfield in the
middle of Iowa – is to show them a film.

“The reason we make documentaries – Lord knows it’s not for the profit – the
reason we make film is because we believe film can make a difference.”

“My opinion of media effects in terms of film actually producing social action is
pretty limited.”

That’s Daniel Herbert. He teaches film at the University of Michigan. You could say he’s
got a healthy amount of skepticism when it comes to films’ impact on environmental
change.

“Unless you have policies in your city government without recycling, what does it
matter if you’ve watched An Inconvenient Truth? If Al Gore’s telling you to buy
$30 light bulbs and you make 9 bucks at Starbucks, what’s it matter?”

Plus he says you run the risk of having audiences think that just because they watched the
film they’ve somehow participated in solving the problem.

That said, if he had to choose between showing an environmental film at a festival, a
commercial movie theater or on TV? Herbert says he’d pick the festival. Sure, there’s
probably a greater audience to be had with television, and it’s a little more convenient to
just Netflix the film and watch it from home, but you lose something that way.

Susan Woods – she’s from the Michigan film festival – she says a festival can provide a
whole different experience.

“The difference is that these people are sitting home in a dark room as opposed to
being with a group of people who have the same mind set. And I think that’s the big
difference.”

And, she says, at a festival, if you feel inspired by one of the films, you can go up to a
director afterward and ask questions, or talk with a climate change expert about solutions
or sign up with a local environmental group.

Something you definitely wouldn’t be able to do sitting at home alone in the dark with
your TV.

For The Environment Report, I’m Jennifer Guerra.

Related Links