Climate Conversation: Mark Carney

[@MM22272]

I sincerely appreciate Cleo's prefaces to her questions as a basis for putting Mark's responses in perspective which is really beneficial for rendering a more meaningful understanding. I likewise value Mark's clear articulation of how he came to shift his career towards a leading role to address climate change relative to his role as the Governor of the BOE and the insurance companies. I had previously mused about this. Cleo, you may wish to note the slight volume disparity at 4:52 in which you finish speaking and then transition to asking Mark the next question. Perhaps in the future you can review and edit the volumes to make the volumes more equal between segments. Anyways, it's not a big deal, only some fine tuning to optimise production. Maybe it wasn't the volume but the placement of the microphones that resulted in the variance. It's also nice that you're coming to know the monumental and pivotal work that your father is doing to redirect the world towards a balanced environmental sustainability and economic vibrancy. It seems that many children don't take such initiatives or don't have the opportunity to do so. Bravo! Family relationships are vital. It just occurred to me that both Cleo's thoughtful questions and Mark's encompassing yet very intelligible responses were at such an understandable level that this kind of presentation could well benefit the common man which improves the potential for supporting broader support for improving the global and economic situation of the world. In other words, this type of video has great potential, but may well need some strategic media marketing in order to maximise its reach, especially among young people. Great oaks always begin as small acorns. I only came across your video, because every few months I search for what Mark is saying. He's always been a positive inspiration amid a difficult world and always balanced. Incidentally, KZbin "shorts" (short videos) seem to be one emerging way to increase viewership; but be careful of unscrupulous trollers. Sometimes one needs a thick skin and the wisdom not to swing at bad pitches. As a personal sidebar, having said that and despite my agreement to be pragmatically progressive, I still drive an ICE car. EV's are still too costly for low-income people as well as personally fiscal conservatives (yes, even with the federal government's $5K credit). Many are simply not disposed to debt-finance such costs in order to stay afloat financially. I replaced some of my house windows with triple pane argon gas ones, but that's also costly to cashflow. As well, solar panels are also beyond my present reach. So, my key point is that there can be a protracted gap between what world leaders are doing and what ordinary people can manage financially even if they do care about the climate in principle. That's where humility and realism arise, the perpetual convergence between the ideal and the real. Every generation makes improvements and Mark is certainly a wise and competent leader for our generation. As regards diet, especially dairy, that's tough to address, because Western civilisation has been so habituated to it. I can go without milk, but I do regularly consume it as well as beef. Relative to organic food, for low-income people, they are more concerned with affording food, especially given the steep inflation and the economic effects of the carbon tax. Let me leave you and your father with a three other considerations concerning the environment that I haven't heard addressed (though it's certainly possible it's already been done), yet likely impact it as well as replacing fossil fuels with green technology and diet. First, pharmaceuticals: I am no expert, however from what little I know, there are copious amounts of pharmaceuticals being flushed into our water systems and that can't be too beneficial for the environment. Perhaps Mark could recommend an industry expert for Cleo to interview. Of course, given the high value of health care and desire to help people with pharmaceuticals, it may be challenging how to minimise their impact on the environment. Secondly, I never hear about how the cosmetic industry impacts the environment and surely all of the cosmetics that are washed down the drains and the packaging that goes with it impacts the environment. Of course, producers want to protect their source of income. I'm sure Mark could find reliable numbers on this. Would consumers of cosmetics be willing to stop buying them? Third, family living: Western society is so radically individualistic that, instead of having one or more generations living together under one roof, people live individually. The impact on the material demands of our society are staggering. Instead of one extended family living under one roof, there can be, let's say 10 individuals, living in 10 houses with 10 more vehicles, 10 more of everything in a house, etc. Having been raised as a Westerner, I'm used to individualistic living, but historically it wasn't always the case and perhaps part of the environmental solution would entail a return to multi-generation living which would actually benefit low-income people and even housing those in abject poverty while at once helping the attendant undesirable effects such as bad mental and corporal health, crime, family instability, divorce, etc. which then place greater strain on government social costs which means less for other worthwhile programs. Well, little did I anticipate seeing a great video like this and hardly did I expect to respond at such length. Many thanks. May Saints Rose and Francis put in a good word for you and your family. PS: Perhaps manufacturer's ISO audits could include environmental impacts. I haven't known of this where I work.