Can there be more important work than saving the Earth as a fit place for human habitation?  Is this not the huge challenge that is posed to humanity in these early years of Century XXI?

These are precisely the things Al Gore, R.K. Pachauri and 3000 scientists appear to be doing.  

As things are going now, we can expect that 1)skyrocketing absolute global human population numbers, 2) endless expansion of production capabilities of large-scale business enterprises and 3) unbridled human overconsumption of limited resources, when taken together, could literally overwhelm the frangible ecosystem services provided by the relatively small, finite, noticeably frangible planet we inhabit. The gigantic scale and anticipated growth rate of these distinctly human activities, that are now overspreading our planetary home, could be approaching a point in human history when global production, consumption and propagation activities of the human species become patently unsustainable on this tiny planet.

For humanity to reasonably and sensibly address the global warming challenge seems like a good way to begin to save the world as we know it for our children and coming generations.  After all, the best available, good scientific evidence indicates with remarkable clarity that human beings are a primary driver of processes that are giving rise to the global warming phenomenon.  Inasmuch as global warming is derived, at least in large part, from human over-growth activities, it is becoming clear that the human community community will have to make changes in behavior and other adaptations necessary to ameliorate the pernicious effects of climate change.

Thanks again, Carl,  for all the great work you and the Sierra Club are doing to acknowledge, address and ovecome the threat of global warming; to preserve biodiversity from massive extinction and the Earth's resources from reckless dissipation; and to protect the environment from irreversible degradation and the human species from potential danger.

Yes, Carl, I second what StevenEarlSalmony has written, by way of applauding the work of the Sierra Club.

And your explanation of why Al Gore deserves the peace prize is very clear.  It could be added that not only are increasing aridification and competition for fresh water resources likely to cause major movements of populations and competition between nations, but so are rising sea levels.

(And by the way, the Soviet Union no longer exists, save in the memories of many of us.)

Obviously, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has seen things in this way too.  It would have been more helpful, I suspect, had "An Inconvenient Truth" included more, and more vivid, illustrations of signs of climate change from many parts of the world, rather than depend so heavily on US examples.  Still, AIT has done well enough, and the Norwegians were not put off.

It should also not surprise us if people outside the US associate Al Gore with the kind of American presence in the world, a "good" presence, that has gone missing during the current administration: one of moral leadership, characterized by robust internationalism, the commitment to upholding certain supremely important values even when doing so does not suit our short-term policies (e.g. yesterday's House resolution on the Armenian genocide), and the strong and sincere desire to consult the interests of all people everywhere.

Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.