How America can leave fossil fuels behind, in one chart | 2020 Election

[@Vox]

This was the first episode of our series on the 2020 election. Over 15,000 of you told us which issues mattered the most to you, and we made 9 episodes explaining what the election meant for those issues: 1) Climate change: kzbin.info/www/bejne/h5ekiZV9ftOqpNE 2) Voting rights: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l52Wooxuj7J7e8U 3) Reproductive health: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eKvYnGRpe9mrndE 4) Public schools: kzbin.info/www/bejne/onetZGqonpKGl9k 5) Police reform: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iXnIgZqihZdrea8 6) America’s role in the world: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iWavo4SsaZ5pf9k 7) Transportation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4uni6d4h7msm6s 8) LGBTQ rights: kzbin.info/www/bejne/roPRoYimqctqe5I 9) The eviction crisis: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fGGaqod_Za9mh80 Thanks to everyone who responded to the callout and took the time to help make our reporting and our videos stronger.

[@fidelpichardo4483]

Police accountability

[@yourlocalramen1660]

Should you have to turn your cameras on in Zoom.

[@MR0JUDGE0]

Look at carbon sequestration, rewilding and stage 0 river restoration

[@glinda9243]

I think the candle should be discussing Decriminalization of cannabis for both recreational and medicinal uses.

[@MobiusFour-Four]

Hey Vox, if possible could you share the link of the sankey diagram?

[@mob_abominator1868]

“A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they shall never sit.” - Greek Proverb.

[@evilspatula6450]

i disagree due to history. augustus saw the empire he created and his achievements. albert einstein saw his success, albeit later in life.

[@cenobitecyborgkratch9669]

My dad has planted a mini woods on his property. He's still planting and enjoying the extra shade from the ones he has always planted. He has 7 acres

[@HaroldTheWizardCat]

Evil Spatula I think you missed the point

[@Bakumatsu1]

@@evilspatula6450 lol whooosh

[@tamar597]

This is beautiful

[@angamnyiam8150]

"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything" - Albert Einstein

[@hanochkurian5933]

Dann Nyiam 💯

[@jasoncola6071]

So what are you going to do?

[@derk.ex.machina]

Nah. The number of people responsible for the energy decisions that cause most of the world's warming can be counted on-hand.

[@jasoncola6071]

@@derk.ex.machina that's not the point. The point is your (well not you personally) biggest contribution against climate change was leaving an inspirational/woke quote on a video. And considering the quote's message, it's pretty hypocritical do literally be the person you are talking about. Yes billionaire stipulated the use of fossil fuel, but was it you that decided "you know, I'm actually going to make an impact." Yes billionaire in the end produce more carbon dioxide that most of us, and yes they own companies that do so, but it's us that sit silently as they do it. Yes the system is rigid against us, but what stops you from organizing an actual protest, or start lobbying, and instead you chose to do nothing, like a comment making fun of people you despise, without realizing that you also fall into that category. I know I am doing almost the same thing, and you can never change anyone's opinion, especially on the internet, but I have a good excuse. I can't vote. Period. I have school work I need to do, which at this point is a bigger priority for me and the world, as it will hopefully make me a net positive later. Sorta rant over.

[@derk.ex.machina]

@@jasoncola6071you don't know what I do in my free time The point I wanted to make is that corporations have succeeded in shifting responsibility onto YOU, and you're just as complacent in it as I am, whether or not you or I protest and are proactive, since again, we aren't the ones at greater fault here

[@lukeh9300]

This reminds me of when in like grade three the teacher would say if everyone does silent reading without talking for 10 minutes, everyone gets to go outside. Everyone wanted to go outside, everyone knew the best option was to just be quite for ten minutes, but we couldn't do it. there would always be someone who tried to be funny and get attention at the expense of everyone else's fun.

[@xano2921]

Ouch, this is so real a perfect metaphor

[@lazicepie7800]

F

[@JSOTOcod]

What an amazing metaphor

[@kjl3080]

Prisioners dilemma

[@fos1451]

@@kjl3080 this have nothing to do with prisoner dillema

[@dino4812]

It sounds like everybody cares but nobody makes the move.

[@THEMAIN198]

This comment aged well

[@Hejoam]

I like dat bobux pfp

[@La-Illaha-Illa-Allah]

You have Elon and Tesla but they can't do it alone

[@dino4812]

@@La-Illaha-Illa-Allah true

[@TherconJair]

Think about the economy! /s Also, one thing that is not in this carbon footprint: a lot of energy intensive products are made offshore in where labour is cheap and laws lax. They are made for us, bought by us, used by us, but all the CO2 is produced elsewhere. It's easily about the same size as the in-country emissions. And what most people don't want to hear - methane is also a greenhouse gas. Gas drilling, pipelines all leak methane, and not even in small quantities. And then there's the part noone wants to hear: industrial meat production, with beef being the biggest contributor.

[@american-professor]

Not gonna lie, this makes me nervous like nothing else

[@Mia-zx7nn]

same

[@mentorrrr]

Same

[@bobohunter1776]

@@Cytoplasm4508 Exactly. Liberals are nothing by terrorists that use psychological warfare. A fairly large chunk of kids have nightmares about climate change. I personally have nightmares about my guns being took away but I know how that would end.

[@lazym91]

@@Cytoplasm4508 you trumpanzees are really ignorant 😒 you always wanna politicize everything & blame it on "liberals & the left"

[@Wingo537]

You and me both

[@XtarShoter]

"We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light." -Plato

[@ivantan42]

XtarShoter true but sad

[@jamesmurphy2828]

Plato is the best

[@nateab1994]

Then you all better become Christ followers. He is the light. Not bogus science

[@lareinali8182]

Countries be like WE NEED TO STOP GLOBAL WARMING!!!!! Also countries: After you

[@archingelus]

Coronavirus: hold my beer bro!

[@hanochkurian5933]

💯

[@victorhinojos3050]

Tragedy of the commons at the world level. Each individual country benefits by using as much fossil fuels to prop itself up since they are cheap and available but when everybody uses them the entire world will suffer, some more than others but there is only one earth.

[@ellikasan]

*a country does it* The USA: "But they're smaller than us!!!!" *another country* The USA: "BUT WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE!!!" *another one* The USA: "BUT-" you get the idea

[@thekhans2823]

@ oddysey , yes

[@ganarygirl4557]

Humans: don’t react to climate change on time Climate change: approaches Humans: oh no itwould be to difficult and radical to react now, lets not do it

[@manatteegiggles7743]

Then life just continues and future generations don’t even think about it because they realize how obviously ridiculous that notion is.

[@1158supersiri]

that's a lie media keeps pushing to people

[@La-Illaha-Illa-Allah]

Kinda like Covid, if you got what i mean! if you didn't, we were warned that such thing could happen but neglected that see bill gates on TED 7 years ago and bunch of other sources.

[@rhynulhye4104]

We are now taking actions on problems . I donot mean we are only great . Animal and Plants are also great . Why not I say Earth is great

[@HeelerHouse]

@@1158supersiri 😂 which is why glaciers are melting faster, and storms have gotten worse? Explain that.

[@Powaup]

Sounds like this all could create lots of jobs. Why don’t politicians take that angle?

[@mikeaskme3530]

@Powaup, Money!!!!!!!!

[@georgetaylor100]

Biden is pushing this argument yes

[@octaviusv]

It costs a helluva lot to do, and it would also cost a lot of jobs and end a lot of businesses. FDR's mobilization for war was not without controversy - some companies actually sued over being repurposed this way - and you'd see an even greater pushback today. FDR presided over a communitarian decade and had an extremely friendly Congress as well as the very real, literal enemies of the Axis powers. We have none of these factors at work. Mobilizing a federal effort that will fundamentally change the fabric of American life without those factors will be next to impossible.

[@thegermanhero204]

I think people will be unemployed, because they don't have the knowledge to work in this Sector, so this is a problem, which have to get away from the way of clean future. And yes this isn't severe like the climate change, but Politians focuse more on short term problems, then long term problems, because they want to get more power through voters and they don't get the Idea, that if they solve a long term problem they get more reputation.

[@eveastardust3747]

Alexandria ocasio-cortez and the green New deal which Biden will not adopt in his platform

[@MoonatikYT]

The best time to have done something about fossil fuels was 30 years ago, the 2nd best time is now.

[@NicholasLittlejohn]

🌲

[@_ikako_]

And there will be no 3rd best time.

[@Dulcimer.MP3]

@vinks You could be technical and say that every year since 30 years ago was the second best time, and then third best time, and then fourth, etc. But the idea is to motivate people to make a change right now. We should have taken action before today, that would have been best, but the best option remaining so move right tf now

[@liammargetts]

No, the best time to do it is the present. Yeah overall the best time was to actually start doing it 50 years ago, but now is the best time. When I say now I mean the relative present, so in 5 years the best time would be in 5 years time. My point is there is no moment in the future where we can just quit, there's always a chance to fix things.

[@kamon242]

global warming and co2 raised the first suspicions between 1850 and 1950, in 1970 it was already a thing. The '30 years ago' mark just serves to show up how little do we really care

[@safe-keeper1042]

Chernobyl was a tragedy not only because of the event itself, but also about how much damage it's done to peoples' perception of nuclear power :( .

[@garygruvman8111]

And three mile island, and Fukushima. Nuclear power is the best power source we currently have for the demand we need. But people think it's nothing but a radioactive disaster.

[@IndigoIndustrial]

Gary Gruvman Need to reduce demand. Do we want the companies lobbying governments to keep their carbon intensive industries intact and profitable in charge of nuclear energy? No.

[@markthomasson5077]

In hindsight, look at the figures, all these nuclear disasters prove how safe it is

[@brandonevans4868]

It's a good job that Bill Gates decided to do some R&D to make nuclear power safer. I'm sure in good time the world will come to accept nuclear power as the new equilibrium energy source.

[@garygruvman8111]

@@IndigoIndustrial demand will never decrease. With more and more people coming into the world and wanting comforts that's a fools dream. We haven't even seen the real big hits yet. That's why China and India are ramping up power with more coal plants because people are demanding more. While they have a lack of infrastructure it would be perfect to utilize newer "cleaner" energy sources but they have found that it would cost them far too much which is why they are going with coal.

[@EugeneBuvard]

Those diagrams are so beautiful, the reality they depict so scary.

[@ScopeofScience]

We're currently on track for 4.3C

[@tigerkill420]

Nice I don't like snow anyways.

[@RNAxRibose]

Not considering positive feedback loops or increased emissions by eg perma frost.

[@jeebus9118]

tigerkill420 I guess you don’t like living either

[@alexcontreras6103]

sounds nice

[@luismabou]

$400 trillion dollar in damages if we get to that treshold.

[@FinancialShinanigan]

This is what happens when you elect politicians who don't believe in science

[@hanochkurian5933]

Financial Shinanigan 💯

[@MyBiggerProblems]

Why hasn’t Joe done anything yet? He’s been in politics a long time.

[@localboi2330]

Renewable energy is not reliable, and expensive, so I am suggesting nuclear energy

[@SomeOne-1.1]

Samuel T Oh the whataboutism really shows now huh, joe this democrat that what has the GOP done about it, oh idk continually bashed science, defund education, and actively kept the government from working.

[@andrewbrooks5479]

My senator brought in a snowball to disprove climate change

[@lalakuma9]

Back in 2000, my parents laughed at me for being concerned about the climate. SMH.

[@capitaldude7119]

What is the point if you are not alive right?!

[@Alexander_Kale]

Considering how none of the catastrophes that were prophesized since then have even remotely manifested, I't say they were right to do so...

[@papaspooks8531]

@@Alexander_Kale the west coast is literally on fire

[@Alexander_Kale]

@@papaspooks8531 Whenever someone says "These are the worst fires since Y years", what that actually means is there have been worse fires Y+1 years ago. Meaning such fires are possible without man's interference in the climate. Meaning you cannot attribute these fires to man either, without some serious evidence, and that evidence does not exist. There is no global trend in droughts currently. There is no global trend in extreme weather events either. The west coast is on fire rght now. It has been on fire in the past. Even if we stop all CO2 emissions tomorrow, it will be on fire again some time in the future. Forest fires happen.

[@OutSideTheBoxFormat]

@@papaspooks8531 Isn't climate change global? If so why aren't there fires all over the place?

[@hughquigley5337]

Its so depressing that there are a bunch of people in the USA that either don't care about this or have been tricked into believing that it isn't real. :(

[@alexrivera4598]

Or what if you were tricked into believing it’s real? Hmmm

[@somebodyig624]

@@alexrivera4598 global warming is real theres all the evidence in the world.

[@paulstandaert5709]

Let's suppose it is real. What are we going to do about it? The USA is only 15% of worldwide CO2 emissions. I recommend bringing the climate protest to China, India, and Russia. We may as well throw Mexico and Venezuela in there as well.

[@anthonycardenas1297]

Well the 60 years of telling up we are going in 20 years gets old

[@fighter0056]

Wow People really don’t get that it’s real Everyone does their own work The USA has a responsibility to decrease Emissions And they can put pressure on the EU and China and India

[@yuioyup]

I hope that getting everyone to agree with this is not like trying to get everyone to wear masks

[@lucaswaitman4549]

Way harder since oil and other natural gas companies have way too much power in the government.

[@twilightgeneral777]

It will be infinitely harder.

[@1997jankuschef]

It HAS been harder

[@whatisoatmeal9174]

Except this time the problem isn’t the people, it’s the companies.

[@Spirit_Circle]

@@MathGPT we at least should try

[@ratmouse556]

America just needs to install the green energy DLC

[@JoshDoesTravel]

If only things were that simple

[@bobohunter1776]

If only that wouldn't cause everything to light on fire like California.

[@joshlanders]

What's AOC? A pre-release trial? But seriously. The issue is congress. Vote, ain't nobody gonna convince a 50 year old stubborn right-wing boomer, we have to vote them out and vote in intelligent leadership.

[@ratmouse556]

@@joshlanders I'm not from America but yeah please vote.

[@johanmunkholm9302]

@@joshlanders yes but Republicans mostly see Democrats as enemies and not colleagues so they just use the filibuster and stop everything in it's tracks

[@keithmanfredi]

You can't expect everyone to care about 'saving the world' or the environment. With some people I think you'll get further by pitching the other benefits of this technology like - portability, efficiency, economy, safety, quieter, less stinky, etc.

[@yellowspike3344]

People won't care until we see consequences. By then hopefully we moved out of earth lol.

[@richardlinares6314]

Yeah, I wonder what the cost is of all the health issues caused by burning fuels.

[@thienle3597]

Do you mean like the fluorescent light bulb compared to incandescent? Remember what that transition was like? People were hoarding the old light bulbs because they couldn't take the change.

[@xpo1220]

Another big one is your electric/utility bill will be cheaper.

[@phyllo8958]

Which is why carbon taxes and subsidies work: the government just makes clean technology cheaper, and the free market does the work.

[@early7strikeland996]

Politicians: We need to take care of our Environment for the good future of mankind Also Politicians: Ha Ha, Missile Go Boom!

[@early7strikeland996]

Also Politicians Again: Ha ha, A10 go brrrrtttttt

[@joermnyc]

Also politicians: and since this will help the future, make the future pay for it..

[@tripanzo]

𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗲 𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺

[@therealgadielsepulveda]

@@tripanzo Each one is better than the previous!

[@tripanzo]

@@therealgadielsepulveda yes trump was so great!

[@jaime9927]

"How is the US supposed to do that?" It'd help if we stopped reopening coal mines

[@victorhinojos3050]

But the jobs and their way of living! They been doing coal mining for generations! They even have black lungs to show for it...

[@Master-kh6ww]

Victor Hinojos well it’s time to stop things change

[@themidnightracer9937]

@@Master-kh6ww Time for things to change, alright explain how are you going shift hundered's of thousands of coal miners, to go from coal mines, to other lines of work, especially with little funding, take example West Virginia, has very little money to help those coal miners, get into other jobs, and West Virginia, does not seem to be the best place for White Collar jobs. Now there is blue collar job's, but that would also take quite a chunk of money to retrain them to those job's. However yes I do agree with, a change needs to happen.

[@eljorgetmf]

@@themidnightracer9937 there are just about 50k coal miners in the entire country. They earn, on average, $60k/year. Are you saying our 21 trillion dollar economy can't solve a $3bn problem? California wildfires in 2018 cost $400bn. Both presidential candidates, combined, may approach $2bn spent on campaign related expenses. I don't think the coal miners' salaries are the problem...

[@themidnightracer9937]

@@eljorgetmf I'm not talking salaries, I'm talking retraining coal miners, into different lines of work, which can up add quite the bill, especially in poor states. Now if there was federal funding, then yes it can be done. Since if you shut down all coal mines, people are going into debt, loose houses, and go homeless which will not be good.

[@elconejitopandrosito4971]

Everyone: stop using fossil fuel! Usa: No that’s socialism!

[@rainmirron]

Well, they aren't wrong. It will take us collectively pooling our resources to do a massive energy change. The problem is we shouldn't be stigmatizing Socialism & realize the evils of Capitalism are the very reasons we're in this situation in the first place.

[@bobohunter1776]

When you give the government power to decide what energy we're using and what cars we drive that's a big step towards socialism.

[@g.a.b.e7085]

@@bobohunter1776 I would argue there's not too much wrong of that. Unless they abuse such power towards it's people. Our constitution says the government can make laws in order to protect the country from real threats. If there needs to be a change, laws must be drafted.

[@CPubi]

G.A.B.E 708 that’s a pretty ignorant viewpoint considering the history of socialism and its inherent economic flaws

[@serl3zykn1ght71]

@@CPubi And it's pretty ignorant to ignore what capitalism has caused as well. You can't argue against one side without mentioning the other.

[@Lucas_Rinaldi]

I'm out here on team nuclear. Ironically the safest energy source

[@tomac8551]

By far the best safety record of any form of energy production. Nuclear would be the logical choice given the supposed problem, yet it has been shunned and litterally regulated to death. It seems the climate changers arent very concerned about less C02 emissions.

[@Sacto1654]

And we have the technology to build ultra-safe Generation IV nuclear power plants fueled by commonly-available thorium-232.

[@sethfish8889]

its sad that people view it as dangerous. Think about how much more efficient and safe nuclear reactors have become.

[@mattbrody3565]

Have you heard the good news about NuScale? They're part of the Gen 4 nuclear program, and they just got authorized to enter production this year. They'll have a reactor power station running in Ohio by '23. Terrapower's not far behind, and they're using a molten salt heat reservoir attached to their reactor as a grid battery, they can boost their 300 MW reactor to 500 peak for demand spikes. Once they blaze the path, MSRs should start moving along fast. We're on the edge of glory, folks!

[@alphonsobutlakiv789]

Nucular is a fossel fule

[@modolief]

1:44 "You have to start now." Yeah, now is too late, really. Old Chinese proverb: "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now."

[@Evili555]

This is why the Chinese are beating us

[@nolkerss]

@@Evili555 in what? Starting up coal power plants?

[@Evili555]

@@nolkerss making money which includes coal power plants

[@chingis1154]

Well, we have a best time for now, we can't go back to 2000 because it just doesn't exist for now, and situation will get worse if we don't act now, so relatively to the future, now is the best time for action

[@Evili555]

@@chingis1154 no it’s not, the us treasury is poor

[@FunDerick]

We have the tech and the resources, just not the common sense.

[@ajinkyatarodekar9099]

And also rich people concerned only with money and oil.

[@whatisoatmeal9174]

@Derick Fang, humans will be the ultimate downfall of human kind.

[@the_rubbish_bin]

Greed is a big barrier too

[@emperorsblade2786]

Well can we make the creation of renewable energy producers less expensive and more efficient??

[@brian2440]

This is literally the most complex and largest scale problem ever encountered in human history, so “common sense” - eh not exactly....

[@teamakesgames]

It makes me sad how many people are careless about climate change

[@Sacrer]

Not everyone lives a good life to think about this.

[@happypt2929]

they just don't think its a problem, the Sahara desert was green 10k years ago so why is climate change all of the sudden caused by humans, that's the ideology.

[@Bettie_Rage]

Have you finished your beef burger yet? :-)

[@tomac8551]

Seeing how many people believe this nonsene is what makes me sad.

[@tomac8551]

@@happypt2929 The positives of fossil fuel use far outweight the negatives.The consequences of the projections on temperature and sea level rise are being highly exaggerated by the media and politicians, anyone willing to read the actual IPCC reports can see their current projections. These changes will be slow and we will adapt. Thats a much more prudent solution then completely transforming civilization. There is also the fact that people have never lived longer, safer and more prosperous lives. Average life expectancy is rising and so is average income per capita. All of this is a result of reliable energy sources most of which are fossil fuels.

[@OldChannel999-9]

“The best time to plant a tree was 10 years ago, the second best time is now” -Kurzgesagt

[@georgesamuelson4003]

What about 9 years ago? Also that's not originally from Kurzgesagt anyway

[@GeneralKenobi69420]

I'm pretty sure that's a proverb.

[@Kazavop]

Mr beast: *advertises website that will plant 20 Million trees*

[@andresiniesta9955]

@@georgesamuelson4003 It's credited to an old Chinese proverb.

[@sudazima]

planting trees doesnt work though, doubling all trees on earth will net you a mere 10 years of emissions and your never allowed to cut them down again. theres not enough space on the planet for this. only nuclear power works but people just dont care enough about the environment quite yet to implement working solutions..

[@watsonwrote]

So it's 100% not going to happen As much as I wish it were, America is hopeless

[@sanjikaneki6226]

well atm china and india are the main polluters and that is not going to stop , even if the us is 0 emissions tomorrow those 2 will simply pollute enough to the point it does not really matter that much

[@Xpistos510]

Not with the Republican Party holding power.

[@dynamicworlds1]

@@sanjikaneki6226 China is leading development of green technology and planting huge forests to help. Meanwhile, a huge portion of their CO2 production is to produce cheap, disposable consumer goods for the US. I think China is awful. I want to be better than China, but we're not, so we need to spend less time finger pointing and more time getting our own house in order.

[@chrischong6613]

@@sanjikaneki6226 The US and other Western countries offset their own carbon footprint by making their products in China and India.

[@watsonwrote]

@NoWeaponFormedAgainstMeShallProsper I am leaving next year to teach English. Speaking of, "your" = a possessive before a noun, "you're" = you are

[@nakibsayyed4999]

The world needs change in a positive direction and RIGHT NOW.

[@NicholasLittlejohn]

Let's be the change we seek

[@aturchomicz821]

2 Trillion $ Climate plan go brrrr

[@aturchomicz821]

@Tessellation yup

[@rizaleliasmosquera5114]

@white That is true in an economic system that does not consider the planet we live in and the future generations that would suffer and curse their ancestors for doing nothing.

[@aturchomicz821]

@white you are by defenition evil....

[@WhiteDireWolf_217]

As a European, the idea that my future and the future of the humanity on Earth is in the hands of the Americans and Trump.. this is rather saddening :(

[@hugodeandres1497]

Keith Walker We are are also a huge factor. Don’t look away and blame others when we are nearly just as responsible

[@iwiffitthitotonacc4673]

EU has been spitroasted between China and the U.S. for years. If we stopped bickering among each other and started working together, we could actually do something about this.

[@JoHn-gi1lb]

America emitted most in total. But right now it's China that's emitting the most per year.

[@JTS-Games]

We can ALL do something, every, single, person.

[@thijsammeraal7252]

@@hugodeandres1497 c02 emissions in europe per person are less than half of that of the US and we invest way more to further lower it

[@Ideallane]

How about don’t spend 600 billion on the military but rather on renewable energy sources. Also give a bit more to space exploration.

[@Ideallane]

Aienbalos Aienbalos spend 100-200 billion less. That’s still an enormous amount compared to a country like Russia. Their military spending is about 70 billion.

[@jashonwestbrook3362]

We should spend more on nuclear

[@SanjitT]

The US Spends that money to make sure the world is safer. If Russia or China controlled what we control, the world would be WAY worse. Ever think why Covid 19 come from China? Bcuz they have no safety standards.

[@altrag]

They could start with simply not spending $20bn to subsidize fossil fuel companies. Imagine where we'd be if that amount of subsidy had gone to green energy instead over the past 10 years.

[@LiveType]

Heh, you're delusional if you think the US would spend less money on the military. The US's military is way more globally important than you likely realize. It's not as simple as just slashing spending by 30-50%.

[@ThomasTubeHD]

Politicians after finally listening to the people: so when would we start decarbonising? Literally every Climate change activist:NOW,NOW,NOW,NOW,NOW

[@anhbui-bc4ew]

@@nathanielholmes79 Trump: no, a century.

[@aksigsidkguru1097]

"Maybe once i'm out of the house, better yet, when i'm dead."

[@Agent77X]

Not going to happen in our lifetime! Maybe, 300 years from now when fusion reactors are mainstream!

[@marionicka9053]

So you are against fossil fuels?

[@pascalsmit8739]

Maybe instead of just replacing the source, people could also start needing less energy. The US could invest in a proper public transit system for example. You need fewer planes if you can hop on a decently priced high-speed train to at least every major city in the US. For example, in the Netherlands, the entire railway system is powered by wind energy and has been for years. A decent railway network could also reduce the reliance on trucks. Next to that, just think of the amount of emissions and toxic chemicals required to make the batteries.

[@pepps779]

It has been priced out previously and deemed impractically expensive due to a number of factors like scale, geography, legal barriers, etc. Quite simply, it could be done, but the savings, at least in regards to the carbon emissions, would likely be better achieved through another project.

[@pascalsmit8739]

@@pepps779 I wonder who priced it out? Since you provide no evidence I can only guess as to the interests involved...

[@Alexander_Kale]

The one reason why we are no longer living in caves is because we can harvest and utilize larger amounts of energy than our ancestors. There is a very small amount of energy you can save by optimizing the system, but making sure the door of your fridge is always closed will not even remotely impact the incredible amount of power needed to produce steel or ceramics, to create ammonia or pharmaceutics or to pasteurize a gazillion liters of milk every day. Those are expenditures that will always be there, and need to be there to uphold civilization. You do not save the world by consuming less energy. You save it by finding a way to produce more. Nuclear might be that way. Solar and wind are almost certainly not.

[@pepps779]

@@pascalsmit8739 I recall it being the department of transportation, and that they requested such analysis twice during different decades. Feel free to disregard me if you wish, as I was only attempting to be of assistance with some relevant information.

[@Fenrir7]

@@Alexander_Kale I completely agree with you that lowering our energy usage is the wrong approach. If anything, we will want to continue to increase our energy usage as we advance technologically, and that is a good thing. As technology advances, we discover more options of dealing with the problems of today. The only part I disagree with you on is that solar isn't the way to produce more energy (I do agree with you about wind energy. It's too volatile and doesn't scale well). I think there is a lot of room for growth for solar power, including efficiency, scale, and location.

[@david_junior]

Everyone: Physicist's kid: AaAaAhhh (while dad's saving the world)

[@myraann2003]

Guillermo Hernandez why are you yelling?

[@julietasilva5135]

i was looking for this comment lol

[@david_junior]

@@guillermohernandez4000 This comment had nothing to do with politics. That was just a funny moment. I'm not even american

[@JasonXYT]

@@guillermohernandez4000 so we should vote for Republicans and make climate change worse?

[@david_junior]

@JoJo Reference He's certainly not trying to destroy it

[@gabrielnegron5846]

Now for a minute imagine being part of the rest of the world. Being from Costa Rica or Iceland where electricity comes 100% from renewable sources, or any other country. For us, it doesn’t matter how much our countries do to combat climate change, as long as the US continues their own path, we are all doomed. Just thinking about it makes me so angry and so impotent. So, from someone who cannot vote in the US, please don’t let Trump be president for four more years!

[@beefstew3927]

Haha Louis Dejoy go brrrrr

[@flutee6162]

And make sure Biden does his worth

[@AndreVictorGoncalves]

You basically wrote what any Vegan feels like.

[@gabrielnegron5846]

flutee 616 this is as much as important. Definitely Biden is not the ideal candidate, not for a pretty long shot. However, the rest of the world can’t under any circumstances stand four more years of Trump, and getting him out its the first step.

[@douglasdale8592]

What about China?

[@tripanzo]

This shouldn't be political. This is about the whole human race. We need to vote for Biden whether you Republican or Democrat. Or else we don't have a future. I am mostly conservative. But we need to change before it's too late!

[@PrayashLand]

Thank you for your vote 💕

[@THEMAIN198]

Don't forget to continue voting for politicians who support climate change even after Biden!

[@singletrack_king7700]

Nope

[@PasscodeAdvance]

We need people in India who care about enviroment as our politics. Ebikes galore

[@williamhuang8309]

democracy is SO outdated it needs a refresh.

[@mten37128]

Constantly left out of the conversation: public transit. Electric cars will help, but they're not the answer. Less cars, less resources. Which has to work in tandem with tweaking our cities to be livable for people instead of cars.

[@LMB222]

Public transit is a list cause for much of the US. You can't easily repair the errors of 1950's urbanists.

[@awaterplease7885]

Completely agree. The KZbin channel "not just bikes" has a lot of interesting videos on this topic. He explains how the infrastructure in Dutch cities is redesigned to make public transit just as fast and comfortable as taking a car.

[@RipCityBassWorks]

This 100%. We badly need to start transition our cities to be more public transportation oriented.

[@christodang]

It's another aspect but one far more removed in North America since the entire continent was developed around the car. It's doable, but renewable and more efficient energy sources are likely more easy to achieve (less red tape to work around, less inter-government bodies needed to collaborate etc.). Outside the major cities, North America lacks the density needed to make anything beyond inner city public transit a viable option and most of those cities have options. They could be better mind you, but they're there. Inter-city travel is another ballgame altogether. The United States alone has almost twice the landmass of the entire European Union, but "only" 330M people inside it (compared to 500M+ in EU). How do you convince everyone that there is a viable high speed train solution that can connect so few people (relatively speaking) across such large distances?

[@awaterplease7885]

@@christodang I completely understand why you think this, but just watch one video on the 'not just bikes' yt channel and you might change your mind a little. He's an American that also lived in Canada and some other countries before he moved to The Netherlands and he is a great observer on this topic.

[@PianoBoyLiam]

“Temperatures have risen 1 Degree Celsius since pre-industrial times” Americans: Is that good?

[@warweasel2832]

"What's that in freedoms per bullet?"

[@chrono-glitchwaterlily8776]

Have I seen you somewhere before? Haha I feel like I have

[@PianoBoyLiam]

thatguy 00 there isn’t a spit valve on an alto saxophone my guy

[@PianoBoyLiam]

thatguy 00 that was a horrible joke..

[@thechameleon2636]

@@warweasel2832 Great, just great. I’m probably gonna use that

[@tym3444]

New generation nuclear really has the most promise even over solar/wind

[@donnyyario1726]

This is big facts

[@MrPhungster]

IMO I highly doubt we can jump onto renewables quick enough. We should transition to nuclear to buy ourselves at least millennium and in the meantime transition to renewables.

[@ziaulislam87]

without nuclear decarbinzation is impossible period, unless ofocurse a new revolutionary battery technology which is several fold better is discovered

[@ikani1]

It's not a zero sum game. We don't have to choose between nuclear and solar/wind. We can do both. We should do both.

[@jsrodman]

1 - To meet our energy needs without carbon sources, we will need solar, wind, hydro, biomass AND nuclear. There's no reason to view it as a fight between these. 2 - Nuclear power is also a fossil fuel. If you transition a majority of electricity production to nuclear power, you will hit peak extraction of uranium in about 15-20 years. It's important now, but long term it will need to be replaced.

[@macaron3141592653]

Sooner or later we're gonna have to fall back on nuclear, this dude admitted it.

[@tylerswint2695]

No, with the invention of Nuclear *FUSION* (not fission which is what we currently use), scientists and earth as a whole is practically going to have unlimited energy that is 100% clean and cheap, the only problem is scientists don't know how to make it _yet_

[@joermnyc]

@@tylerswint2695 The ITER is still about 5 years from switching on, and there’s no guarantee it will produce more power than it uses to keep the plasma from fizzling. Plus it’s costing billions of Euros, so it not only has to work right, but be scalable to the point that it’s cheaper to build.

[@Whiskey11Gaming]

@@tylerswint2695 ahh yes, the myth of fusion not producing waste... what happens to the radioactive heavier than helium isotopes which are a neutron you intended for your lithium blanket to produce more tritium? Ohh hey, yeah, tritium is the thing anti nukes complain the most about current plants "leaking" into water sources, and you want a reactor which intentionally produces it? What about the metals which absorb neurons during operation which become radioactive? There is plenty of waste in fusion that will need storage, just like fission. Given fusion's perpetual "a decade away", fission represents an easy way to decarbonize the grid and fast. France did it in about 15 years by using a standardized plant design. The US could probably do it quicker given our construction prowess.

[@squifftopher]

@@tylerswint2695 We don't know if it'll work, but they are starting construction!

[@mrseyo6572]

What gonna happen to all the nuclear waste? it will not magically vanish

[@emndz9995]

I live in Costa Rica here we’ve almost accomplished leaving fossil fuels behind, the only problem are cars, normal ones are way easier to get than electric cars, the u.s does have tons of electric cars and if they focus on de carbonizing they could do a great job

[@axetroll]

Research about how much energy you use to build green generators then you'll understand why fossil is still used

[@emndz9995]

Andrew Biller nope in 2016 we used 100% renewable electricity, but we only used 40 % of renewable energy this was because of cars, cars are literally the only thing stooping us from being carbon neutral. Plus theres no oil here

[@axetroll]

@@emndz9995 You didn't understand: to create a wind generator it will use more energy than it will ever deliver by using it. Multiply this to change to alternate energies, then it's clear that you're not solving any problem, but increasing it. That aplies to others renewable sources of energy.

[@Jabjabs]

@@axetroll Not entirely true but not entirely wrong. Wind turbines do recover their energy fairly well, they just have massive intermittency problems. Solar can as well provided the last the desire life time and you do BOT attach batteries. The big problem is there are not enough rare earth materials to build them out to the scale desired.

[@rockfan2406]

@@axetroll that's because supply chains still rely on fossil fuels. Once more renewable sources become active and industrial supply chains shift to mainly renewables, the manufacturing of renewable sources themselves will vanish in carbon footprint

[@willm6846]

Just commenting to help the algorithm share this to more.

[@DustinLineweber]

I'll chip in!

[@wade2112]

You guys should watch Michael Moore's documentary. The process of making wind turbines and solar panels generates close to the same amount of emissions that they will save by collecting clean energy (digging for solar panel metals, transporting/constructing wind turbines). The only real green energy is actually nuclear power

[@Chelm9]

I disagree with your comment because conflict also boosts exposure.

[@willm6846]

@@Chelm9 I beg to differ

[@g.l.8319]

No

[@laurabilling3561]

I think that one of the smartest things I ever read regarding "going green" (credit to Reddit) was "we don't need a few people doing it perfectly, we need everyone doing it imperfectly' they were talking in particular about going plastic free, but I think it's a smart philosophy for anything along this line. Imagine if all countries focused to have 100% green electricity and heating. Airplanes, a few cars etc could be future goals. Break it into realistic, achievable parts and do those achievable parts asap instead of delaying and focusing on the parts we can't yet achieve.

[@willlehrfeld457]

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

[@drdewott9154]

YES! That is what we in Scandinavia have been doing for decades, slowly transitioning to green energy, from energy production, to environmental protection, to policies regarding electric vehicles, to green home heating and cooling and now the electrification of the railways! Everything broken up into smaller bits, into different departments, all working towards a common goal.

[@alyx6427]

TL;DR: america could save the planet but they don’t want to because a group of old guys don’t like it

[@Luke-nn4pm]

TLDR America wants to fight climate change but a corrupt election system led to someone who lose the vote becoming president and denying science

[@mateuszdziewierz2938]

I’m 11 but I still want more fossil fuel

[@manatteegiggles7743]

Good one Kayla 😁

[@joselira9342]

@@mateuszdziewierz2938 it’s probably because your parents want it

[@michaelsoland3293]

@@joselira9342 It's probably his family's way of life, as they work in the industry, so it is only natural. The big question is what are we going to do with the people who need those jobs?

[@saralkumarshrestha]

So sorry for our children. We have to secure their future.

[@jeffreysmith4196]

It's called school choice but democrats love keeping the poor kids poor wake up.

[@1moneyking]

@@jeffreysmith4196 no

[@jultdi5273]

@@jeffreysmith4196 no

[@zach6867]

Jeffrey Smith why are you talking about schools? there wont be a school to choose if theyre underwater or in an equatorial zone. This is obviously a bigger issue

[@tiezukae]

@@jeffreysmith4196 Explain?

[@anandgautamm]

Another important issue is the amount of people who still deny this issue

[@kyleayres5397]

We dont deny the issue. We deny your ability to fix it. You people live in fairy tail land.

[@silverhusky7993]

@@kyleayres5397 if a doctor didn't have the facilities to save your life, would you invest in it or would you shut them down as a lost cause?

[@theoenomelphilosopher8687]

Basically every trump supporter ever

[@Oscar_Armstrong]

@@kyleayres5397 "You people live in fairy tail land" - said every anti-progress, pessimistic cynic ever.

[@tomac8551]

A more important issue is that around 3 billion people have limited or no access to energy. The world bank and other entities are denying loans for coal and gas fired power plants to third world countries because of this climate hysteria being propagated by priviliged first worlders like you.

[@leviticuscornwall8375]

Trump has to protect his billionaire buddies in the Oil Industry lol

[@tenpenny2919]

@Some Person Hahahha. Gooood one

[@MAchannel2024]

just like Reagan before him. All republicans are about Money.

[@nogg735]

Also the us citizens who work in the oil industry no one talk about that

[@Joe-ij6of]

@@nogg735 No one talked about us citizens that worked in the typewriter industry, and yet here we are

[@nogg735]

Joe people worked on type writing just changed over that’s definitely 2 totally different things type writing industry improved the oil,coal,gasoline car industry won’t improve it will vanish

[@christina28272]

this man singlehandedly did more work than the EPA 😭😭

[@sie4431]

"The US is no longer the biggest co2 emitter" is a strange way of saying they're the second biggest in the world. If they didn't make all their stuff in China they'd still be number one and China has for times the population aqq

[@JohnSmith-ou5un]

Also “over time it is the biggest polluter” even though if you don’t separate the EU from the rest of Europe it’s clearly been a bigger polluter

[@paytick9034]

Pointing fingers isn’t going to do anything, we either all nail this or we don’t. So please don’t act like 8 year olds on a playground.

[@shido8597]

@@paytick9034 your people are the one pointing fingers thats why nothings going to happen

[@yoshi9358]

@@JohnSmith-ou5un The EU doesn't have as much direct control over individual European nations as the American federal government has over individual states. If the US hasn't been able to make laws to decarbonize what makes you think the EU can ?

[@sie4431]

​@@JohnSmith-ou5un They don't give the data to make that conclusion. If, for some reason, you combined the EU and the rest of Europe it'd only be slightly higher than the US despite having a population of around 869M vs only 362M in the US

[@danyramos8139]

Honestly, Arizona has so much sun throughout the year that a good enough solar plant there could make a lot of electricity.

[@yoshi9358]

And eventually give people free constant energy!! Which will make some particular billionaires lose a few millions so they aren't letting it happen

[@geddonarma566]

This scares me:(

[@GabrielAlves-mu4mf]

Same bro, same.

[@Daniel-yk9dm]

It’s meant to do that. It’s the depressing truth and we have to accept it

[@Dommy521]

it should, you have to do your part in helping the fight against climate change

[@geddonarma566]

@@Dommy521 i know, i try my best, but still, im just a teen, and its dipressing:(

[@reviewguy12]

"It's really about how fast you build machines" Tesla has entered the chat.

[@de_stroyed]

Sounds like we need to call up Mr. Beast and have him plant more trees.

[@Fujin69]

unfortunately, planting trees isn't enough anymore...

[@flowdog6585]

hehehehehehe

[@N0N0111]

Guess what they use for biomass.

[@imperial2252]

get mrbeast to fix all world problems with a fundraiser

[@Jsooeyr1512]

Around 40 million trees is cut down DAILY, him planting 20 million makes up for 12h...

[@flashstar1234]

US government: Nah

[@Master-kh6ww]

You mean trump

[@braincell4536]

@@Master-kh6ww oil companies: nah

[@ILoveYani]

China :nah

[@nogg735]

There people who have jobs in these industries no one talks about that

[@Master-kh6ww]

SACC you know Biden doesn’t support oil companies

[@GabrielAlves-mu4mf]

“We’re in the endgame now.”

[@qu765]

and were gonna lose

[@nicokelly6453]

I do think the "electric cars replacing gas-powered cars" parts were shortsighted. We can't just switch them out. We need to reduce car-use in general, both for climate reasons and for other forms of health, safety, etc. Cars take up a lot of space and money and infrastructure, and they don't carry enough people all at once. They're also very dangerous to pedestrians. Any switching to electric cars MUST be as a compliment to better walkability, bikeability, and public transit. Which means we also need to work on zoning, street, and urban planning to make our country friendly to a wider variation of transportation modes.

[@brunhildevalkyrie]

yes

[@--julian_]

The worst part is that this affect the whole world. And we all depend on a couple people in some swing states to make the right choice

[@TheRockerX]

@Nick Arjomand While it still has a long way to go, China is doing a lot more than the US to curb it's carbon emissions

[@brian2440]

Nick Arjomand You seem to be ignorant of the fact that China has an energy policy to decarbonize by 2050 included in their major party plan called One Belt One Road

[@brian2440]

Nick Arjomand Well if you ever bothered to actually read the plan it is extremely clear why this is the case and what their plan is moving forward. Now there is legitimate discussion on whether or not this is an effective strategy but you clearly have never even heard of their plan....

[@TheNtg3399]

@Nick Arjomand exactly. if America did all of this, it wouldnt even matter until the biggest threats stop their carbon emissions too

[@--julian_]

@@TheNtg3399 per capita the US is the worst. All countries need to take action and assume responsibility!! The air does not stay at a fixed point above ground.

[@taintedtaylor2586]

One the best ways to decrease the use of oil in transportation is promoting Public Transport, as this would be completely regulated by the government and would pave the way for electric use Public Transport or even better, city planning to encourage short distance transportation and thusly promote walking and the use of bicycles. City planning and social programs are really one of the biggest ways to reduce it, we didn’t choose to use fossils fuels and oil, the market did, but now we have a government and the technology to stop this.

[@ZephLodwick]

The problem with American cites (and one of the reasons US is such a big carbon emitter) is that all of the cites are new and were thus built for cars, as opposed to the old world where the cites were meant to be walked on.

[@bublitrubli]

You will lose of America at "this would be completely regulated by the government"

[@taintedtaylor2586]

bublitrubli Yeah, cause leaving it to the market has worked so well.

[@taintedtaylor2586]

bublitrubli I won’t lose all of America, but I’ll lose most of the people who don’t even care compromising the environment for profit.

[@elowatchesvideos]

It bothers me so much all the technology already exists...we just have to act.

[@needn5796]

A lot of the technology doesn't exist yet, is not affordable enough yet or is less clean then people think. Still more could be done, but i'd recommend looking at where you buy your stuff rather than the politicans you vote bcs it's no doubt both are heavily influenced by sponsors and influential people behind the screens.

[@ElliotWeishaar]

I'm definitely onboard that we need to switch to 100% renewable, but to say we have ALL the technology is not 100% accurate. We do not have the technology to properly store power in batteries or some other form when generating it. The crux of the energy industry is that you MUST use electricity when it's generated. You cannot generate electricity at a cheaper time (say the middle of the night in the US), then use it later when everyone needs it. We are working on making this possible, but we are not even close to having a grid level solution to this problem yet. California is a great example. California switched to a lot of renewable energy (solar and wind). When the wind isn't blowing on extremely hot days, and at night, California resorts to buying power from states that use fossil fuels, due to renewable energy not being consistent in generation. We need to get there, but we don't have the technology to support it yet. Source: Working in SCADA/EMS industry and am a NERC/CIP auditor

[@elowatchesvideos]

@@ElliotWeishaar Wow thank you for your very informative reply. Could you explain more how we cannot store generated electricity in batteries? Also aren't there other alternatives for when renewables aren't consistent yet such as nuclear or natural gas extracted from landfills?

[@ElliotWeishaar]

@@elowatchesvideos Nuclear is a good example of a renewable energy source that has consistent output. Nuclear plants and coal/gas plants operate the exact same way. How the heat is produced is the only difference. It's not that we can't store power in batteries, it's that we don't have the technology yet. Tesla is investing tons of money into this area currently, and we're making good headway, but we just aren't there yet. Just the scale of electricity that you would need to store, and then release on demand, on a grid sized level is massive. Having a battery that won't wear out under these conditions is going to require a lot of clever engineering and some new technologies or applications of materials that haven't been discovered yet. Take your cell phone for example. How long does your cell phone battery last you before it quits holding a charge? It wears out due to constant charging/discharging of the battery (as well as other factors like temperature, etc.). That battery holds such a miniscule amount of energy compared to what we would need for the power grid, but no matter the battery size, all batteries have this problem currently. I am hopeful that battery / electrical storage technology makes some big improvements in the near future. If we can solve this problem, I guarantee you every company in the world will be jumping ship to renewable energy

[@jakepeters5225]

@@ElliotWeishaar And once the chemicals in that battery wear out it cannot be efficiently recycled and will end up in a landfill.

[@lapiswolf2780]

Added to my subscription list. You guys really go into detail about this kind of stuff and actually make me want to stick around to see the end of the video. There are few other channels that keep me engaged with would would normally be boring topics if taught in school or in any other scenerio. Keep up the good work,Vox!👍

[@albertocrescini2076]

You voted for a clown? Expect a circus.

[@avivg.4971]

well said

[@nogg735]

Global warming isn’t the USA fault it’s the worlds fault

[@demanthnaidude415]

@@nogg735 ?

[@reb9977]

@@nogg735 its china's faut.

[@caroselloshow5615]

No GG and the usa its in it.... and considering that your country is even actively denying climate change makes your position even worst

[@missammonoid]

every day is like staring into the black void. we rlly are just never going to do this.

[@teamakesgames]

I feel this.. It's hard to stay optimistic but try to :) Or try finding a healthy way to cope with it

[@YayForUnicornMeat]

Hi! I really sympathize with you. It can be hard to stay optimistic when dealing with something this massive. But I want you to know we can do this. This history isn't written yet and lots is possible. Most climate activists really believe we can do this, it'll just take everyone's talents and hard work. If this is something giving you bad anxiety I heartily suggest getting into activism. It can give you some control and you're actually being part of the solution. It sounds hard but it's a lot simpler than it sounds and there's definitely something in it you'll enjoy. I hope this helped you!

[@ritesh146]

When you realize this election is literally about to make or break our Future.

[@LordMisterOfficial]

Not really

[@Polymath2B]

1:18 on the graph, we only make up roughly 1/6th of carbon emissions. This is a global effort, this isn’t just an American problem. Besides, I doubt either president will get much done about this. Biden’s plan is more of a wishlist.

[@asdfghjkl133]

Elisha Sanchez 1/6 is a lot for a country that makes up less than 1/6 of the human population..

[@asdfghjkl133]

Elisha Sanchez Trump doesn’t even recognize climate change

[@Polymath2B]

@@asdfghjkl133 The US has the 3rd highest population and it's essential to have a car in america. I never said Trump was going to be a better candidate for our environment. All I'm saying is that this election won't change much for the environment. Neither candidate is capable of changing the situation.

[@marcofkosi]

If Al Gore won in 2000 we wouldn’t be talking about this now

[@rjnicdao1414]

The Earth is getting hotter and hotter and I'm hating it! do something papas!

[@mfaizsyahmi]

The ice we skate is getting pretty thin The world's getting warm so we might as well swim

[@thecrippledpancake9455]

mfaizsyahmi. Could we not just take off all our clothes like Nelly told us?

[@mahmirr]

Move to Nunavut, buy all the land there, and wait 30 years. Then you will become a billionaire.

[@gener2473]

Do something! Plant trees in your backyard were you can plant trees. Don't loitering everywhere. The first step we can stop climate change is ourselves.

[@Walevolence]

In before Trump fans state that it's a hoax.

[@thyme2pley100]

It isn't a hoax. It is a natural cycle of the earth that we may have accelerated, but we cannot stop. According to geologists and paleontologists, climate change has been happening cyclically ad infinitum since the dawn of creation. The Earth has gone through multiple cycles of warming and cooling over the past millennia and will continue to do so until the sun burns out. The current climate change rhetoric being pushed by politicians is mostly alarmist hype about something that was going to happen with or without humans. Human use of fossil fuels is a contributing factor but it is not the cause.

[@nganstoppable]

"Again last night I had that strange dream Where everything was exactly how it seemed No concerns about the world getting warmer People thought that they were just being rewarded For treating others as they'd like to be treated For obeying stop signs and curing diseases For mailing letters with the address of the sender. Now we can swim any day in November. Don't wake me I plan on sleeping (now we can swim any day in November) Don't wake me I plan on sleeping in" -Excerpt from 'Sleeping In' by Postal Service

[@mothbyte98]

I love this.

[@Xpistos510]

Our inaction really is criminal negligence.

[@Biophile23]

Such clarity. I hope we make the changes in time.

[@alericjohansen6775]

To be honest, I doubt we can. We have to drag the uneducated masses (conservatives) through this, and they refuse to be educated on the matter.

[@speedybill47]

@@alericjohansen6775 The other issue is that his 2050 plan relies on the hope that everyone after Biden is Left of him till 2050, and that someone to the right of him doesn't derail the process entirely and it MIGHT surivive

[@Biophile23]

@@alericjohansen6775 thing is it will create a ridiculous number of jobs. If it can get going and conservatives start getting those jobs I think the opposition will wither pretty quickly.

[@alericjohansen6775]

@@Biophile23 I wish I could have your enthusiasm, but conservatives are so lost that they still think Trump is doing a good job with the virus, when he CLEARLY did the absolute minimum and even damaged, and continues to damage, the US response to it. Not to mention all the other policies that he has enacted which harm people.

[@yanirohana]

10:03 I like how someone there made a sign against nuclear energy when its considered one of the most efficient and cleanest energy sources that we have today

[@jwstolk]

How can it be the most efficient when it is the most expensive? And that is with just the first 10 to 100 years of nuclear waste handling included in the price. Include millions of years of waste handling and even electricity from human powered treadmills would be cheaper. It is also not sustainable since we have already run out of high-concentration Uranium sources.

[@rodrigopaim82]

@Nathanael Marco Hartanto It is not that simple. Solar and wind efficiency is directly affected by where you are, and their energy output varies a lot during the day (day/night cycle) and the year (seasons). You cant run a grid only on them. Hydro and geothermal you need to specific conditions to be met, and specially hydro is not nearly as safe as you think. It is also not so clean (here in Brazil we use it a lot, but comes at a price of huge forested areas getting flooded to make the resevoir. It also damages the fauna) The new generation nuclear reactors are indeed the safest, most reliable and stable power source that there is. And you can build those almost anywhere you like

[@ejro3063]

rodrigopaim82 finally a person with a brain

[@Hubcool367]

@@rodrigopaim82 do you have some sources? I would love to believe that nuclear is the ultimate solution, and of course, the *risk* of nuclear meltdown is still better than the *certainty* of climate change. But let's just start with the "safest" part, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima are very real things, how can we be sure that they would not happen again (or worse), also considering that they were "not supposed to" happen in the first place? You also didn't answer the concern about nuclear waste. And *even then*, how would it be *safer* than, let's say, solar?

[@philipphildt1328]

„how come you dont want to have any children“

[@tamar597]

True

[@juliem2021]

after 4 years as an environmental science undergrad, now a couple months into my masters, nothing is more depressing than climate change professors who had kids in ~2010-2015 thinking things would get better by now. I'm glad that my growing up happened to align well with this moment. I have the luxury of being able to wait until the late 2020s-early 2030s until I really have to decide on that one, and by then we'll know if there's any point. It's heartbreaking to watch old-guard climate scientists talk about their children. They almost never do. They rarely seem joyful about their kids, and what joy they have is tinged with a deep-seated angst about the future. If things are still bad by the 30s I'm planning to adopt from somewhere of high-impact like the US Gulf Coast or SE Asia, where at least I can tell my kid "You and I might not have chosen to alive at this moment in history, but we're both on this world together, and I'm working on it, and I'm going to give you the best life you can have." Then you avoid the baggage of having caused someone to exist at this time, while still sharing the world with a young person and passing on your love and knowledge. In the same way that you and I might lose our desire to have biological children because of the real dangers of climate change, there are children who are going to be displaced or whose parents won't be able to care for them because of it. There needs to be someone raising the next generation of environmentalists. Young people like us and our descendants will be working on this for the lifetime of carbon emissions: ten thousand years.

[@yourlocalramen1660]

Al Gore was an environmentalist. Literally 500 votes in Florida separated us from a Clean Energy World and an Industrialized Coal/Gas Powered World.

[@maksc3781]

The earth has an infection and is trying to remove it with a fever.

[@Apjooz]

KZbin commenter has a brain infection and speaks in riddles.

[@Guy_W_Majimapfp]

This joke is top tier

[@jasonhebedead1710]

@@Apjooz Let me make the meaning clearer for you infection "us" infection removing fever "climate change" got it?

[@tomac8551]

@@jasonhebedead1710 The self hate is more then obvious, i dont get why people with such a negative view of humanity dont just do the planet a favour and off themselves.

[@Dontwannabeafangirl]

@@tomac8551 it's more effective if the ones whom off themselves are the ones perpetuating the problem and blocking progress.

[@AbbyCd]

Pretty sure "biomass" means burning wood and a lot of it . . .they need to be more honest.

[@RazeHaze10]

Burning existing plant matter and human waste is a lot less ecologically damaging than burning fossil fuels. The carbon from those are much more "loose", let's say. It's already in the carbon cycle and has been actively circulating, unlike fossil fuels, which have long been isolated underground. Burning wood is not entirely green (especially not very old, very large trees; those are a great repository of atmospheric carbon), but its a lot better than fossil fuels.

[@roaringdragon2628]

@@RazeHaze10 It doesn't matter what happened in the past, only what will happen. If you release the same amount of carbon one way or the other, it doesn't matter where that carbon came from.

[@RazeHaze10]

@@roaringdragon2628 That's not the point; carbon stuck underground has been out of the carbon cycle for literal millennia - carbon in the form of plants was atmospheric carbon that is reintroduced by burning it, which will eventually become plants again. Burning fossil fuels introduces excess carbon to our current system, thus increasing the temperature.

[@RazeHaze10]

@skullrade5 Excess to the current system, not the whole.

[@arthurbdt2329]

Only viable option to produce electricity when there is no wind or sun if you don't have some awful nuclear energy

[@OurEden]

The net zero target for carbon emissions are key, many European countries have set targets for 2050 or even as early as 2030. The US, with currently one of the most carbon emissions per capita and highest cumulative historical emissions, is a key country for driving the resolution of carbon emissions. The 2020 elections are going to be absolutely vital in the fight against climate change.

[@Gwaxy]

Europe is so much better at doing what’s best for its people lol, may as well just move there

[@axetroll]

Co2 is not the problem. Water steam holds a lot more energy in the air

[@czajkowski2352]

@@axetroll This is a false, ignorant statement. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Try to wrap your head around the basics before you open your mouth.

[@Croz89]

Eh, a goal is just that, a goal. Here in Europe there's plenty of pledges to move to net zero (which will require a lot of sequestration as it's near impossible for us to emit no CO2 at all) but plans are often a bit shaky at best, every so often someone comes up with one and it gets picked apart until someone else comes up with another. Technology is changing rapidly in this area due to many billions in R&D investment. As such it's hard to forecast an optimal path to net zero, or what hard choices would have to be made to lifestyles and standards of living.

[@alexcontreras6103]

The only way to move to Net Zero is Nuclear but everybody seems to be banning it. Take the example of Germany spending billions on renewable emissions skyrocketed and utility cost went up. Plus solar requires 16x more material 450x more land than Nuclear also it's produces about 300x more waste something known as e-waste in the process highly toxic stuff, produces more emissions creating them than nuclear and even deaths. Not to mention the rare minerals that require to be used to build it that still needs facking and mining to extract them. Wind kills 1.2 million insects per year in germany not to mention birds, bats many that are highly endangered or close to extinction at least here in California. O forgot to mention both of those 100% need fossil fuel to back them up

[@jancenimperial6786]

Please do a video about the clothing industry and what are the current available resources that we can use to lessen plastic use in the clothing industry.

[@Porelorexeus]

Has any country ever changed every sources so dramatically to 0 carbon? France under the Messmer plan started in the 70s finished in the 80s. They did it with nuclear a tech that had been ready for decades as other tech is barely ready now.

[@ystudbeast3]

Germany might be the closest for a large economy at like 40%.

[@Reptiguy100]

Say it with me: NUCLEAR

[@LasVegar]

Nuclear yeahhhhhh

[@archingelus]

GO NUKE GO NUKE GO NUKE

[@CatholicWeeb]

NUCLEAR ENERGY FOREVER!!!

[@alexcontreras6103]

It's the only way but try convincing an ignorant bunch of environmentalist

[@archingelus]

@@alexcontreras6103 if you want to satisfy them you need to somehow invent how to convert qi and chakra into electricity tap into that mystical zero emission energy of magic :)

[@gdkloxius]

Lol The Government Just talk about climate change and do nothing about it, I'm losing Hope to Humans

[@discounicorn31]

This is why I want Biden to win

[@circleinfo]

Does the president even talk about climate change?

[@tripnils7535]

And governement will continue to do nothing except maybe incentives. That's why private or publicly traded companies are booming in this sector.

[@rainmirron]

@@discounicorn31 Biden doesn't want to ban fracking. He's not serious about climate change.

[@paintyourtoe2377]

"Losing hope for humans" are you something else XDXD

[@Ace-Maverick]

This is one of the best videos I've ever seen. Thank you.

[@repairdrive]

I'm totally down with going full electric.

[@enviromental2565]

If your home electric needs replacing, try an all electric heat pump. If you need a new car, try either a hybrid or electric vehicle. I you live in a sunny area, look into solar panels. We can do this!

[@johnkennethhaarr]

“ The time for seeking global solutions is running out. *We can find suitable solutions only if we act together and in agreement.* " Pope Francis, 266th Catholic Pope

[@happypt2929]

yeah that's why trump left the Paris agreement because all they did was complain about the USA and turned a blind eye on China and other countries , there is no problem in leaving fossil fuels to bewind the problem comes when you will still have to compete against others that didn't leave them behind

[@waron4fun597]

When for some reason people decided to make being in Congress and Senate a career and not a temporary duty, then those same people decide it is their job to pay attention to short-term problems with just as short-term solutions... and that is when they are in the mood to do something. No matter what political party you are, we can basically all agree that some kind of term limit system on all government positions of power like congress and senate would fix a lot of problems with our current government.

[@michaelsoland3293]

Also an important thing to consider, doing this would isolate a lot of countries that get their money from gas/natural oil so we'll need to reshape our foreign policy a lot as well.

[@niameyers6686]

We'd also have to come up with a incentive for the average person to buy brand new electric car

[@TheJerbol]

They already exist, they're called subsidies and they're why a lot of people can get an electric car for a reasonable price. This would be even more dramatic were we to remove the subsidies on oil, however this would be catastrophic if we didn't make it easy to transition to electric for the average customer.

[@Tuubesoxx]

@@TheJerbol that get part of the way there. I can't afford an electric car rn, but my mom is looking for a new car, but doesn't make enough money to really benefit from he tax breaks. I like teslas direction of shooting to make EVs more affordable, more car companies need to get on that, instead of the luxury market like bmw/rivian

[@mrseyo6572]

buying electric cars wont fix climate change, electric cars also polute to produce, charge up from energy grid and that energy comes from coal or gas

[@jordanscoville5033]

Or we could just provide better public transit for cities- change the system so that urban planning is less geared towards cars

[@SV-kr9fu]

I wonder, what raw materials go into making an electric car? And what is the process of making an electric car? Have you ever looked into those things?

[@KianOntong13]

Good timing with the Red Skies in Oregon

[@bearandowl8510]

And the red sun, too.

[@bearandowl8510]

What's annoying is that the news only talks about the forest fires in California when there's multiple forest fires happening in Oregon right now.

[@ahigithchowdhary9873]

The saddest part is good economics and ecology is bad politics

[@TheJerbol]

I don't think that's the case. I think the issue is more that most societies have groups of vehemently self-interested people.

[@ahigithchowdhary9873]

@@TheJerbol True, but that's what capitalism is all about. People in power have to attempt to change that attitude but what they focus on changing is their Votebank count

[@blammers]

"Is it even possible?" No. The United States is a fundamentally broken state, and is ungovernable. This kind of change in our energy generation is not possible without government action, and our government is incapable of acting with a populous so divided.

[@lr8868]

You are probably right, but if the Paris deal was the best we could do, then we deserve what we get. The video stated that we are not the largest culprit here, China and India are worse and they were given a pass...if this is to work then we all need to have equal skin in the game. The USA should not be punished unfairly. However, the bottom line is this, if you think this would be too difficult to get a consensus in this country, just imagine the difficulty getting the WORLD to agree........... On anything

[@origionalwinja]

nothing you said was intelligent or accurate. you should be embarrassed

[@Michal235]

At 1990 EU had basically the same CO2 emissions as the USA and it's even decreased them through the last 30 years. And it keeps on decreasing them year by year. 28 countries of EU are far, far more diversed than the American states, we don't even have the common language as you do... And yet we're cooperating and achieving successes. It's not all that pretty and there's a lot of tensions and politics coming with it but what matters is the effect.

[@tadhgoneill6005]

I think the stigma around nuclear is what holds us back the most. Many of the other "green" energy sources aren't what they're cracked up to be. Biomass is often just wood taken from the decimation of forests or mulching animals. Solar requires quartz which needs coal to be smelted, defeating the purpose. (The panels often last less than 10 years anyway). Wind needs vast amounts of aluminium which produces 3 times more CO2 than Steel production does. Hydroelectric has it's own medley of ecological issues from draining natural rivers and lakes. All in all, I think Nuclear is the only thing that can be ramped up in the little time we have, with the least amount of carbon emissions. Yes, it's scary - nobody wants a potential Chernobyl incident on their doorstep, but that only happened as a result of flawed engineering, administrative negligence and a corrupt & highly insular state.

[@samuelforesta]

Thank you my dude. You are correct.

[@Travis0palzae]

You are correct that it takes some energy to make these machines, but they still produce more than they take. Also Wind uses tons of plastic, not aluminum (which is technically worse)

[@brian2440]

Biomass is not just wood

[@gabbar51ngh]

Solar and wind are far from clean source of energy. You are also forgetting the fact none of those renewables are even half as efficient as Nuclear or produce enough energy to replace fossil fuels. To be even more obvious the battery technology is quite behind too. Unless suddenly all those renewables become 5-10 times efficient we won't be seeing them combat fossil fuels

[@tadhgoneill6005]

@@brian2440 Wood is the biggest source of biomass. Others that I didn't mention include energy crops, domestic waste and human waste.

[@carlonasayao4884]

Summary: Don’t vote Trump

[@joesmith-dm9pg]

*biden* "let's reach net zero emmisions by 2050!" *me* "sounds good but how?" *biden has left the chat*

[@empirestate8791]

Fans instead of ACs, buses instead of cars, work remotely, consume less plastic, install solar panels!

[@IndigoIndustrial]

Recycle all those steel and aluminium cans into bikes for the new bike lanes.

[@vikkyvicks]

That graph was way more detailed than expected😂.

[@zachmeyn3460]

Stop focusing on solar panels and wind turbines and invest in proven energy like nuclear and hydroelectric

[@fivade6534]

Solar and wind are becoming increasingly cheaper and farms take 1-2 years to build, while nuclear takes 5-10 years for construction and the cost of demolition is currently a issue. To say there is a one model fits all is silly, we need all energy sources on the table.

[@Whiskey11Gaming]

@@fivade6534 nuclear decommissioning is only an issue because plants are shutting down prematurely, eco terrorists are blocking economic means of scraping and storing plants and pushing regulations which drive up cost for decommissioning beyond what is actuality necessary. It's the same in the building end of the equation. If you let plants live to the end of their projected life (80 years) and you value the energy they produce, they'll have fully funded decommissioning funds. To do that, you need to address natural gas pricing since the gas glut is what is driving nuclear plants offline. Not renewables.

[@squifftopher]

@@Whiskey11Gaming Oh hey it's you again. We're both wandering through the comments I see. You way overbloat eco-terrorism, the last eco-terrorist bombing I remember was back in the '90s bud. Although I'm not a terrorism expert, from what I can tell, they're kind of a dead breed.

[@overthinkinghooper0]

When my dad is whopping me with the belt: 3:22

[@rockamaroque8189]

"Less is more" has never been more of an imperative.

[@raceman9586]

I haven't seen anyone in the comments here say this, but something like moving to 100% electric cars, isn't exactly feasible. Not because of range or charging issues, but because we don't have enough lithium in the world to do it. We need a dramatic, revolutionary shift in battery technology OR we could simply try driving less. And driving less would have any other benefits for society, and would be cheaper for everyone. We should all walk, bike and take public transit more. Metros/subways can run on electricity, but they dont need a battery. Trolleybuses can run on electricity without a battery. Or we should try to replace as much driving "around town" with low speed electric vehicles (25mph street legal golf carts, basically). The batteries are much smaller, but the range is still enough to go do a day's errands.

[@warbler1984]

"It helps to know where our energy goes"...**SCREAMING** 3:22

[@gracep2910]

So, we replace everyone’s everything. All electric cars. What do we do with the millions of cars that run on gas? They’re not exactly biodegradable. Do they just sit in landfills? Honest question.

[@alehaim]

Recycling, cars have a lot of material that would be useful to take back into use

[@gracep2910]

@@alehaim Ah, yes. Enjoy MINUTES of entertainment for your children with defunct car radio knobs!

[@gracep2910]

@Nathanael Marco Hartanto I knew the plot of Wall-E would happen one day. :P

[@alehaim]

@@gracep2910 i meant stuff like the metals for example. Plastics are going to be way more difficult to recycle

[@davidg1564]

Nuclear power plants are actually safe, the past incidents have been cause by human error not because nuclear energy is unsafe