A number of the 9 people whose photos they provide were nominated for their work on global warming, and they think Gore, if he receives the award, may share it with Canadian Inuit activist Sheila Watt-Cloutier. They say, "Watt-Cloutier is considered to be a strong candidate for her environmental efforts to stop the impact of global warming and the melting Arctic Circle." But bear in mind that there are 181 contenders! And while the nominators sometimes announce the names of those they are nominating, the bulk of the contenders are unknown. Also, the Peace Committee has a horror of getting involved in domestic politics, so the movement to draft Gore for president could well be the reason he doesn't get it (if that's what happens). ABC mentions this as a reason that the Committee may combine Gore and Watt-Cloutier as a joint awardee.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/International/popup?id=3717504 I still think for current relevance on the matter of peace, Cindy Sheehan would be the best winner. We are in the middle of a hot war, deliberately instigated by the Bush Junta and its 'Democratic' Party collaborators, for no just reason, and amidst massive lying, which has involved not only the slaughter of more than half a million innocent people, but the torture of thousands, and a humanitarian refugee crisis of immense proportions. How can any other issue be on the Nobel Peace Committee's mind? The U.S. has destroyed world peace, and is threatening WW III--all for oil, greed and domination. Can there be anything of more import and immediacy to the Noble Peace Committee than this? And who is the one person who best represents resistance to it--but Cindy Sheehan? There are others--like Lt. Erhen Watada, a U.S. soldier who refused to return to Iraq. But Sheehan is the best known, and the one who rallied the peace movement in its darkest days. It would be a real blow to Bushite warmongers for Sheehan--who dogged Bush's steps, demanding to know why her son had to die--for Sheehan to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The cause of peace--especially here in the U.S.--is at least as important as global warming, and is closely related to it. People are still dying--and being tortured--in this horrible, unnecessary war--and it has been the excuse for massive increases in armaments and weapons dealing (the issue that prompted the creation of the Nobel Peace Prize in the first place), as well as loss of constitutional democracy and human rights in the U.S.A.--an utter catastrophe, given U.S. military might. We need to restore democracy here, if a world war for resources is to be avoided.
All in all, the reasons for bolstering the U.S. peace movement are many, and compelling. While global warming is a companion issue, for sure, it already has many advocates around the world, within governments and outside of them; whereas America's huge peaceful majority (70%!) is in great distress, and has been quite deliberately disempowered, marginalized and ignored. I don't think it really matters to the global warming issue, that it receives the Peace Prize. But it could make a great deal of difference in the struggle to restore democracy and peaceful foreign policy in the U.S.