Jeremysg was on the right track.

Natural disasters occur all around the world, to both poor and wealthy areas. The only difference that exists is their preparedness for such an event, both in looking to prevent damage and in their ability to deal with the damage that ensues.

As we all know, on 12 January 2010, a magnitude 7.0 earthquake hit the island nation of Haiti, killing approximately 230,000 people. That was a truly devastating event. However, since that event, five separate earthquakes have hit this planet that have had a higher magnitude. Those five, collectively, have resulted in 490 deaths. The earthquake that hit Chile on 27 February was of magnitude 8.8, making it approximately 500 times stronger than the 7.0 earthquake that hit Haiti, whereas only 486 individuals perished in the Chilean earthquake. That being said, potentially disastrous natural events happen worldwide, regardless of the regions well-being. The difference comes in their preparedness, and the poorer areas themselves, being unprepared to deal with such natural events, make the result disastrous.



Here are some statistics for you:
The United States is one of 195 countries in this world.
The United States occupies 1.9% of the surface area on this planet.
The United States occupies 6.6% of all the landmass on this planet.

So tell me why the United States should experience more than a drop in the bucket of the world's natural disasters.

His agenda is to sell the idea of climate change to the American public and to the American government. As a result of adopting climate change-inspired policy, businesses must become more green (reduce carbon emissions, etc). To do this, they enlist the help of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, of which Al Gore is a partner.

So he pushes climate change policy in the best interest of KPC&B, because it is in his best business interest. He doesn't push the subject as a member of the scientific community (in fact, most of his "scientific" evidence has since been highly refuted). Rather, he pushes the subject as a lobbyist, and in my mind he should be treated as such.