Former Vice President Al Gore will speak on climate change and take questions from students at Stanford University next Tuesday, April 23.

Gore, 65, now chairman of the Climate Reality Project, is giving the first Stephen H. Schneider Memorial Lecture, in honor of the Stanford professor and world-renowned climate scientist who died in 2010. The program at Memorial Auditorium is open to the public and will start at 7 p.m., but I think all of the free tickets already have been snapped up. Stanford students and postdoctoral fellows need only their Stanford identification card to be admitted.

“Al Gore worked closely with Steve to sound the alarm about climate change, long before the average person understood there was a problem,” Terry Root, a senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, said in a news release.

The institute is sponsoring the event along with the Stanford Speakers Bureau and two student groups: Stanford in Government and Students for a Sustainable Stanford.

Gore’s address will be titled “Peril and Opportunity: Solving the Climate Crisis and Reinvigorating Democracy.”

Gore was a Tennessee congressman from 1976 through 1984, a U.S. Senator from 1985 to 1991 and vice president from 1993 to 2001. He now chairs the Climate Reality Project, a nonprofit devoted to solving the climate crisis, and is the author of “Earth in the Balance,” “An Inconvenient Truth,” “The Assault on Reason” and “Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis,” as well as a new book titled “The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change.” He is the co-recipient, with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for “informing the world of the dangers posed by climate change.”

And no, he never claimed he “invented the Internet.”

Schneider at the time of his death was the Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies and a senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute. His most recent work centered on communicating the possible risks, vulnerabilities and impacts of climate change to ensure that leaders were sufficiently informed to apply smart risk management strategies in climate-policy decision making. He founded the interdisciplinary journal “Climatic Change” and continued to serve as its editor-in-chief until his death. He consulted with federal agencies and/or White House staff in every U.S. presidential administration since the Nixon era, and was an author of the first four assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Awful as some of the climate-change predictions are, this one might hit a lot of Northern California residents where it hurts (assuming their homes aren’t gobbled up by the sea first): Global warming will dramatically impact many of the world’s most famous wine-producing regions, according to a new study.

The first-ever worldwide analysis of climate change’s impact on wine production and conservation, appearing today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggests wine production will shift to new areas as climate change makes the existing ones less hospitable.

Researchers found the area suitable for wine production will shrink by as much as 73 percent by 2050 in certain parts of the globe – about 70 percent in Californa – with high potential for stress on rivers and other freshwater ecosystems as vineyards use water to cool grapes or irrigate to compensate for rising temperatures and declining rainfall.

“Climate change is going to move potential wine-producing regions all over the map,” Lee Hannah, the study’s lead author and senior scientist for climate change biology at Conservation International’s new Betty and Gordon Moore Center for Ecosystem Science and Economics, said in a news release.

“These global changes put the squeeze on wildlife and nature’s capacity to sustain human life in some surprising places,” Hannah said. “Consumer awareness, industry and conservation actions are all needed to help keep high quality wine flowing without unintended consequences for nature and the flows of goods and services it provides people. This is just the tip of the iceberg – the same will be true for many other crops.”

The researchers looked at nine major wine producing areas: California, Western North America, Chile, Mediterranean Europe, Northern Europe, Cape Floristic region of South Africa, parts of Australia with Mediterranean climate, parts of Australia with non-Mediterranean climate and New Zealand.

“Chile and California are areas with traditions of irrigation and high Freshwater Impact Index values, indicating that their freshwater habitats may be most at risk as a result of climate change impacts on vineyard water use,” the study found. “Adaptation strategies involving viticulture, vinification, marketing, land use planning, and water management can all help avoid conflicts with conservation objectives in areas of declining as well as expanding suitability.”

Another key finding from the study is that new areas will become more productive, including parts of Western North America and Northern Europe. These places at higher latitudes and higher elevations will become increasingly suitable for wine making and sought after by vineyards as they search for the climatic conditions that are ideal for wine grape growing.

According to the study, the greatest area of increasing wine production suitability is in the Rocky Mountains near the Canadian-U.S. border, putting at risk species such as the grizzly bear, gray wolf and pronghorn.

“Climate change will set up competition for land between agricultural and wildlife – wine grapes are but one example,” said Rebecca Shaw, the study’s co-author and associate vice president for the Environmental Defense Fund’s Land, Water and Wildlife program. “This could have disastrous results for wildlife. Fortunately, there are pro-active solutions. We are creating incentive-based programs with private landowners to provide wildlife habitat as we expand our capacity to feed a growing planet in the future under a changing climate.”

Two years after leaving office, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s climate-change work continues – and continues collecting accolades.

Schwarzenegger will co-executive-produce a Showtime documentary series on the human impact of climate change. The “Years of Living Dangerously” series is a collaboration between Hollywood and journalists, delivering first-person accounts of those affected by, and seeking solutions to, global warming. Six to eight one-hour episodes will air in 2013.

Also, Schwarzenegger will be honored by the United Nations Correspondents Association as a 2012 Advocate of the Year for his work with R20, the non-profit he founded after leaving office to address climate change at the sub-national level. The award will be presented to him by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in New York on Wednesday, Dec. 19th.

Not too shabby for a guy who also found time to make a new action film, opening next month.

Besides Schwarzenegger, the Showtime project’s other executive producers are Oscar-winning director James Cameron; former United Artists chairman and CEO Jerry Weintraub; 60 Minutes producers Joel Bach and David Gelber; and climate expert Daniel Abbasi. Stars including actors Matt Damon, Don Cheadle and Alec Baldwin will take part as first-person narrators on the ground; Edward Norton and other names are expected to sign on soon.

Among those reporting from the field will be New York Times journalists including three-time Pulitzer Prize winner Thomas Friedman, two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Nicholas Kristof, and columnist Mark Bittman, plus MSNBC host and political commentator Chris Hayes, among others.

“The recent devastation on the East Coast is a tragic reminder of the direct link between our daily lives and climate change,” David Nevins, president of entertainment for Showtime Networks Inc., said in a news release today. “This series presents a unique opportunity to combine the large-scale filmmaking styles of James Cameron, Jerry Weintraub and Arnold Schwarzenegger — arguably some of Hollywood’s biggest movie makers — with the hard-hitting, intimate journalism of 60 Minutes veterans Joel Bach and David Gelber. I believe this combination will make for a thought-provoking television event.”

Democrats and their allies are stepping up their attacks on Rep. Dan Lungren, who they see as one of the most vulnerable Republican House incumbents ripe for a turnover.

Lungren, R-Gold River, is being challenged by Democrat Ami Bera, an Elk Grove physician. Lungren beat back a challenge from Bera in 2010, 50 percent to 43 percent, in what was then the 3rd Congressional District, where Republicans held a 3.5-percentage-point registration edge.

And Lungren finished on top in this June’s primary election with 52.7 percent of the vote to Bera’s 41 percent; independent candidate Curt Taras got 3.2 percent and Libertarian Douglas Tuma had 3.1 percent. But Democrats believe a much higher turnout in November, with a ticket led by President Obama, could buoy Bera to victory in the newly drawn 7th Congressional District, which is evenly split between Democrats and Republicans.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee launched a new online ad Monday targeting Lungren and three other Republican House incumbents (Jeff Denham, Mary Bono Mack and Brian Bilbray) for supporting GOP tax policies:

Today, the League of Conservation Voters named Lungren to its new “Flat Earth Five” program, which aims to defeat five climate change deniers in the House of Representatives this election cycle; the LCV will commit what it calls “significant resources” – at least $1.5 million for television ads, direct mail and phone banking – to these five districts.

At a town hall meeting in 2009, Lungren claimed “ideological bias” is driving efforts to combat climate change. “The science on climate change is as solid as any public policy question will ever get, but Rep. Lungren just won’t acknowledge the facts,” LCV president Gene Karpinski said in a news release.

Although he acknowledged it’s “prudent” to reduce carbon dioxide emissions “without waiting for proof or disproof of global warming,” he has opposed climate change legislation and later in 2009 called the Environmental Protection Agency’s move to regulate carbon a “vicious blow” to Americans’ freedom.

“At this point it’s clear that Lungren’s ideology is failing his constituents – he’s voted against incentives for conservation and renewable energy, and for big polluters and for more oil drilling,” California League of Conservation Voters CEO Sarah Rose said in the release. “Californians in this district deserve better. They deserve a leader that will put them first.”

Lungren joins Reps. Ann Marie Buerkle, R-N.Y., and Dan Benishek, R-Mich., in the “Flat Earth Five” program; two more names will be announced in the next two weeks.

Gov. Jerry Brown today announced he’ll get together with environmental, business and public health and safety leaders for “The Governor’s Conference on Extreme Climate Risks and California’s Future” on Dec. 15 in San Francisco.

Brown’s office said the conference will focus on the risks of unpredictable and extreme weather events caused by climate change and how our communities can prepare and adapt. It aims to build on the findings of a United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report – to be released later this month – outlining the link between global warming, extreme weather events and their economic impact.

Among those joining Brown at the conference, to be held at the California Academy of Sciences in Golden Gate Park, will be IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri.

The always communicative Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, is setting a new bar in news-release volume today, with five statements issued by midday.

In order, though not in their entirety:

Lee commemorates World Aids Day. “”In the spirit of World AIDS Day and this year’s theme of Universal Access and Human Rights, I call on my colleagues to take advantage of this moment and come together in a bipartisan manner with the administration to find the will and the funding necessary to stop this disease.”

Lee comments on the ongoing United Nations Climate Change Conference taking place in Cancun, Mexico. “I urge President Obama and our international counterparts to recommit to the international negotiation process and cooperative efforts to ensure science-based reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions are accomplished in an equitable and verifiable manner.”

Lee, on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus, speaks in support of The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act. “It is unfortunate that in order to pass The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act it comes at the expense of future Supplemental Assistance Nutrition Program funding. As more Americans slip into poverty and unemployment remains at painfully high levels, we should not have to choose between feeding poor children or their parents at a time that some in Congress argue for a $700 billion tax cut for the wealthiest Americans.”

Lee announces the launch of her newly redesigned website, featuring a homepage newsflash rotator, an interactive map of the 9th Congressional District and a more user-friendly design.. “I hope everyone will take a moment to explore my website to learn about my work on key issues and discover how to take advantage of the constituent services my office can provide.”

Lee calls for a change of course in Afghanistan, one year after President Obama announced his troop surge there. “There is no end in sight in to the war in Afghanistan and no military solution. The President’s recent decision to extend the timeframe for the transfer of security responsibility to Afghan forces to at least 2014 has put us on the path to another decade of costly and counterproductive military occupation in Afghanistan. Enough is enough. This war is not in the national interest of the United States, nor is it supported by the majority of the American people.”

Let’s all give a shout-out to Communications Director Nicole Williams and Deputy District Director Ricci Graham, perhaps the Bay Area’s hardest-working House communications team. A few more this afternoon, maybe?

Proposition 23, the ballot measure that would roll back California’s greenhouse gas emissions law, would kill jobs and prevent environmental improvements in communities of color, three noted human-rights activists said today.

“I am very disturbed by Prop. 23, it is a deceptive proposition,” Van Jones – the Oakland social- and environmental-justice activist and author who went to Washington last year as President Barack Obama’s “green jobs czar,” only to be let go in the face of conservative criticism – told reporters on a conference call. “Every time we go to the ballot in California, there is one ballot measure that is a deceptive, tricky ballot measure that does the opposite of what you think it’ll do on first reading. This is that ballot measure.”

California attracted one out of every four dollars invested worldwide in clean energy technology last year, said Jones, now a visiting professor at Princeton University. “That terrifies the oil guys in Texas because they know if that continues the next energy breakthroughs that will eat into their profit margins will be coming out of California.”

Texas oil companies have put up much of the money to support Prop. 23.

“The idea that Texas oil guys are this concerned about whether people in watts or Berkeley have jobs is, on its face, ludicrous,” Jones said. “The job killer is not the underlying legislation moving us toward a clean energy future … The job killer is Prop. 23 itself.”

Dolores Huerta, a cofounder of the United Farm Workers union and president of the Dolores Huerta Foundation for Community Organizing, said she sees the ballot measure as “devastating in our communities.” Air quality in the southern San Joaquin Valley is already awful, she said, and “we know that if this passes, it will only make things worse.”

“We don’t want to make a step backwards,” Huerta said, adding that her and other groups strive to see the measure defeated. “We are doing everything that we can, we are phone banking, we are going to be going door to door in the Latino communities.”

Pam Tau Lee, founder and board member of the San Francisco-based Chinese Progressive Association and a founder and former chair of the Oakland-based Asian Pacific Environmental Network, said Asian-American voters tend to see themselves as environmentalists and can be rallied against Prop. 23. “Every no vote on prop 23 shows that the voters care about the future and welfare of all Californians.”

But Anita Mangels, spokeswoman for the campaign supporting Prop. 23, countered later this morning that a recent preliminary study by state air quality authorities found implementing AB 32 to reduce carbon emissions wouldn’t have much effect upon other air pollutants threatening California’s communities. And, she said, the state has long said that carbon emissions alone don’t have a direct impact on public health.

Today’s teleconference was organized by Communities United Against the Dirty Energy Proposition, a coalition of about 130 community-based organizations and businesses rallying voters of color and low-income voters against the measure. Communities United is being coordinated through the Oakland-based Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, of which Jones is a co-founder, and the Berkeley-based Greenlining Institute.

An Oakland human rights nonprofit is coordinating a new coalition to work against Proposition 23, the measure on November’s ballot to roll back California’s landmark greenhouse gas emissions law.

Ian Kim from the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights will serve as campaign manager for Communities United Against the Dirty Energy Prop, composed of dozens of social justice and community advocacy groups across the state including the Greenlining Institute, the Equal Justice Society, the California Partnership and Youth ALIVE!

Communities United is operating separately but in coordination with No on 23: Californians to Stop the Dirty Energy Proposition.

The news release announcing the new coalition notes that a poll conducted this summer by the Public Policy Institute of California found most ethnic state residents more likely than whites to be concerned about climate change. Specifically, while about half of California adults and likely voters say the federal government is not doing enough to address global warming; Latinos (61 percent) are the most likely to hold this view, followed by Asians (51 percent), whites (48 percent), and blacks (47 percent).

“Proposition 23 will hurt low-income communities and people of color first and worst,” Kim said in the release. “This Dirty Energy Proposition will make air pollution worse and jobs more scarce, especially in communities already burdened by too much pollution and poverty.”

“Low-income communities are facing epidemics of asthma and lung disease due to air pollution, and Prop. 23 will keep it that way,” said Strela Cervas, co-coordinator of the California Environmental Justice Alliance. “Contrary to the lies being peddled by the oil companies, Prop. 23 would kill jobs, not save them.”

Communities United says it’ll mount “an aggressive, grassroots campaign statewide to educate voters of color about the Dirty Energy Prop,” with statewide days of action, the naming of the campaign’s co-chairs and The Clean Energy Tour, “a statewide music tour bringing together the arts, activism and education on college campuses to mobilize the youth vote.”

The Union of Concerned Scientists is organizing a series of house parties across the state at 7 p.m. next Thursday, Sept. 23, to rally opponents of Proposition 23, the measure on November’s ballot that would roll back California’s landmark greenhouse gas emissions law.

“The Valero and Tesoro oil companies of Texas and Koch Industries of Kansas want to stifle competition from clean energy industries and protect their profits by continuing to pollute our state with their dirty fossil fuel emissions,” the news release says. “A broad coalition is working to defeat the dirty energy proposition in order to protect California’s air quality and new jobs and companies in the burgeoning cleantech sector, and to promote energy security.”

Partygoers will watch the premiere of a mini-documentary about Prop. 23, “learn why defeating it is so important for California and the rest of the nation, and share tools for increasing voter turn-out to defeat the dirty energy proposition at the polls,” the release says.

Parties are planned all over the Bay Area, according to the UCS website; there’ll be a big one at the Chabot Space and Science Center, 10000 Skyline Blvd. in Oakland, which is free and includes refreshments but requires an RSVP.

I don’t see that the “Yes on 23” committee has any similar events scheduled. UCS is part of the coalition behind the main “No on 23” committee, but I hear there’s a new coalition about to take shape against the measure as well; watch for an announcement Monday.

The Californians to Stop the Dirty Energy Proposition committee that’s opposing Proposition 23, the measure on November’s ballot to roll back the state’s landmark greenhouse gas emissions law, today introduced a Bay Area hedge-fund mogul and philanthropist as its co-chairman.

Tom Steyer, 53, is the founder and managing partner of San Francisco-based Farallon Capital, a $20 billion hedge fund; he’s also a managing director and executive committee member at Hellman & Friedman, a San Francisco-based private equity investment firm.

Steyer and his wife, Kat Taylor, in 2009 gave $40 million to fund the Precourt Institute for Energy at Stanford University, where Steyer now serves on the governing board. The couple also founded OneCalifornia Bank, a sustainable community development bank, and the related OneCalifornia Foundation to support programs and grants to eliminate discrimination, encourage affordable housing, alleviate economic distress, stimulate community development and increase financial literacy. And the couple also helped found OneRoof, a social business designed to bring technology to rural India.

Steyer in 2008 ranked as No. 962 on Forbes’ list of the world’s billionaires with a net worth of about $1.2 billion, but dropped off the list in 2009 and 2010.

His inaugural act as the No on 23 campaign’s co-chair is to pony up $5 million for the cause – a massive sum for a committee that reported having $649,221.08 in the bank as of March 31 and has shown $1.45 million in big-ticket contributions since then.

“I’m very honored and happy to be co-chairing this with (former U.S. Secretary of State) George Shultz, who obviously has an incredible background in government and the private sector and academia,” Steyer told reporters on a conference call this morning. “He and I co-chairing this executive committee is a continuation of the bipartisan nature of this effort.”

“I personally come at this issue as a business person who cares about the economic future of California, who cares about the jobs in California as well as the environmental and security issues here,” he said.

Steyer said that as a professional investor for several decades, he knows investors don’t want rules changed in the middle of the game, but rather insist upon seeing a consistent commitment. The capital that has poured into California’s burgeoning green economy in recent years and is projected to increase enormously over the next decade will dry up in a heartbeat if voters roll back the existing law, he said.