After viewing many of the streamed panel discussions at COP30--the 10-day UN climate conference in Belem, Brazil, that began November 10, 2025--I was struck by an overwhelming sense of Groundhog Day: the same cycle repeating year after year. Many journalists attending the conference reached the same conclusion. Once again, the panels called for setting agendas, more data, more programs, more commitments, and more funding for efforts that have consistently failed to halt climate change.
That repetition triggered a powerful dj vu moment. I was reminded of an article I wrote in 2008 addressed to Al Gore, whose groundbreaking 2006 film, An Inconvenient Truth, warned of the existential threat that climate change poses. In that article, I urged the creation of a Manhattan Project-style entity--independent of governments--to develop technologies capable of actually stopping climate change once scaled to full commercial deployment. At the time, I believed Al Gore was uniquely positioned, with the public trust and global stature, to catalyze such an initiative. Its the same proposal I advanced in my November 3, 2025 OpEdNews article and expanded YouTube version--and one still available to Al Gore and other visionary leaders.
I now regret not raising the idea directly to Al Gore during a conversation with him at a climate program on September 18, 2015, at Union Theological Seminary in New York.
Passion, advocacy, and inspiration without effective action ultimately lead to stagnation. And that is where we find ourselves today. The data is unambiguous: After decades of speeches, declarations, and ineffective programs, atmospheric CO2 is higher than ever, and rising global temperatures continue to unleash catastrophic events year after year.
Isn't it time to pivot to a new path, one that finally breaks the cycle of Groundhog Day and dj vu?
Here is my 2008 article, first published in United Press International's Religion and Spirituality section.
Al Gore: This Is Your Destiny!
The pace is quickening. The momentum is building. Full-page ads in the New York Times regularly propose bold initiatives for alternative fuel sources. The pain of outrageous oil prices is waking up the public to the urgent need for inexpensive alternative energy. Although there is less public interest in the environmental catastrophe we are facing from fossil fuel pollution, individuals and the business world are poised to embrace dramatic action to ease the crunching economic burden of rising fuel costs. So we have a rare opportunity to seize the moment to develop new technologies while saving the planet from possible destruction. We need an Energy Manhattan Project, and we need it now.
Al Gore's moving speech on July 17th in Constitution Hall in Washington, D.C, urging John McCain and Barack Obama to embrace a crash program to get 100% of our nation's electricity from renewable and clean energy sources within 10 years, has roused "Move On": The national political action group circulated a nationwide petition demanding that Congress act on Al Gore's proposal. As of this writing, Move On has accumulated over 150,000 signatures. Undoubtedly, they will ultimately gather millions of backers. Who wouldn't want a cheaper alternative fuel and conservation measures to lower the price at the pumps?
Will this strategy work and finally prod Congress to crank out a serious energy policy? Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi thinks so. She said that if sufficient numbers demand action, Congress will get behind the proposal. This sounds encouraging. But reading between the lines, Pelosi's statement is depressing and screams out: Keep the Energy Manhattan Project out of the hands of Congress.
On the heels of An Inconvenient Truth and the continuous flow of scientific data and warnings on the catastrophe we are facing, if members of Congress need an electrical cattle prod of signatures to wake them up from their slumber to take action on avoiding a planetary disaster, they are the wrong body to shepherd the Energy Manhattan Project. Their lethargy suggests that the project placed in their hands will fall victim to special interests, lobbying pressures, pork barrel concessions, and a never-ending list of hanky-panky maneuvers that will deflate the program and steer it off course. Most likely it would be limited to existing alternative technologies and would not explore out of the box thinking. It will not fulfill Al Gore's vision. As I stated in an earlier article, in the politicized and monetized legislative arena the Energy Manhattan Project would get mired down, watered down or hijacked, if not vaporized.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
Post Article Comment and Rate This Article
