U.N. climate panel chief and Gore “good friends” after row

November 7, 2007

   Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N. climate panelThe Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo in December won’t be frosty despite a 2002 row between the U.N. Climate Panel  and former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, who are sharing the award for alerting the world to the risks of global warming.

Rajendra Pachauri, the Indian scientist who heads the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says he and Gore were already “very good friends” even before they publicly buried the hatchet and praised each other on learning last month that Gore and the IPCC had won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.Al Gore speaks by video to mayors in Seattle, Nov 1

A diplomatic source said Gore phoned Pachauri some weeks before the prize annoucement to apologise for denouncing him as the “let’s drag our feet” candidate to lead the IPCC in an article in the New York Times in 2002 when Pachauri was elected with the backing of U.S. President George W. Bush. Pachauri hit back a few days later in a letter accusing Gore of making “derogatory comments” and of unpredictably changing his mind.

So I asked Pachauri — in an e-mail he confirmed he and Gore spoke before the Prize announcement but says he does not want to go into details.

    Nobel prize medalHe added: “I had also seen Mr. Al Gore a couple of years ago during the Clinton Global Initiative, and we had a very cordial exchange…I have known Mr. Al Gore since the days he was a senator and we have been very good friends all along except for the brief misunderstanding that found expression in print in the New York Times in April 2002.”

In 2002, Pachauri won election by 72 votes to 49 against the then IPCC chair Robert Watson, a U.S. citizen who was outspoken in telling governments to do far more to combat warming.

    In fact, Pachauri has been outspoken too — diplomats say he has been far from the foot dragger portrayed by Gore. Rather than dwell on the uncertainties of climate science, the IPCC this year said it was at least 90 percent sure that human activities are the main cause of global warming in the past half-century.

One comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

I am writing to you on the subject of the Bali Conference on Climate Change. Few, if any, plans will come out of the Conference to cut CO2 levels drastically, but I have a plan that I would like to see adopted by all countries.

A Plan to Make All Countries Near-Zero Carbon Emitters Within Ten Years

I have been campaigning for a government driven campaign to make the UK a Near-Zero Carbon Country since shortly after I invented the Buxton Geothermal Turbine Generator in the 1980s. Twenty years down the line the UK has done nothing, and I get the run around from various government departments. I am sure that these same people will give me the run around for another ten years, when it will be too late to stop global warming.

It is difficult to get hold of all the figures necessary to show that countries can become near-zero carbon countries. However, there is a simple explanation that adequately reveals how this necessary target can be achieved. All our power requirements are for lighting, heating, transport, and energy for such things as industry on down to exercise machines. To make things simple we can assume that each category is 25% of total power. The lighting can be zero rated by building Buxton Geothermal Turbine Generators, the heating can be near-zero rated by installing Starlite coatings, that prevents heat escaping, on the walls and ceilings of all premises, and by having electrical heating from renewable sources we cut heating CO2 emissions to zero. Transport can be made near-zero in terms of carbon emissions by ensuring that all vehicles use carbon zero electricity, instead of petrol. This may seem to be an anathema to ‘‘petrol heads’’ but this displeasure can be simply overcome. At the moment when inventors come up with new technologies for electrical vehicles Oil Companies buy and destroy the patents and designs. These patents have a shelf life of ten years so we could soon put together a group of past inventors in this field to reproduce their work legally, as an intergovernmental team. We still have the problem of transport by aeroplane and ship having to use fossil fuels. However, their carbon footprints can be at least halved by having their fuels mixed with water using an ultrasonic dibber. Finally, the power needed for energy can be made entirely of carbon free electricity. New ways of making industry work using electricity instead of the gas that they are used to will be needed, but these are not insurmountable problems given that the Governments of the world have ten years to achieve the target.

All Government Departments must be part of the solution to the greatest threat to life on earth. They must work together, there is no point in hoping that the ‘invisible hand’ of the market has the ability to pay for such a massive clean up. In comparison, the threat of terrorism is a minor side show, and we would not leave the market to this task. The £60 billion being spent on replacing Trident submarines would have solved CO2 emission problems in the UK. This does not mean to say that this was our last chance, just a step in the wrong direction. Funding can be found from elsewhere.

‘The Ecologist’ magazine estimates the true cost of mental illness to the UK is £100 billion per year. When all patients suffering from mental illness are passed on to their trained local practice nurse for a thirty second cure using the Kadir-Buxton Method then we have immediate and massive savings.(The alternative of expensive drugs which, in trials, have less success than no treatment at all, should be made a thing of the past). The money saved by the UK would clean up CO2 emissions in the UK using the above plan. As it could in any country.

Please sign my petition to cut CO2 Emissions by 30% at: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/CO2Reduction/

Posted by Andy Kadir-Buxton | Report as abusive