Scientists' Warning on Technology

Climate Emergency Forum discusses a paper titled "Scientists Warning on Technology" published in the Journal of Cleaner Production. The paper highlights the double-edged nature of technology.
This video was recorded on April 17th, 2024, and published on May 5th, 2024, and represents the opinions of the discussion participants.
While technology holds immense potential for addressing climate change through electrification, renewable energy, and AI-driven solutions, certain technologies can also cause harm to the climate and habitats. The authors warn that harmful technologies should be phased out, and future technologies must be approached with caution to mitigate unintended consequences.
The urgent need for a "Manhattan Project" level of effort to rapidly develop and deploy technologies that can cool the planet and remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is emphasized. Merely reducing emissions is insufficient, and a complete conversion to non-polluting economies is crucial. This would require mobilizing the best scientific minds and resources on an unprecedented scale.
The role of political and economic factors in hindering climate action is also addressed. The discussants criticize the influence of fossil fuel corporations on policymakers and the lack of independence between governments and corporations. They stress the importance of public awareness and individual efforts to drive change, as well as the need for a fundamental shift in societal thinking and intentions.
The paper's omission of climate interventions like carbon dioxide removal and solar radiation management is touched upon. While these technologies are gaining mainstream attention, the panel cautions against assuming they will provide a silver bullet solution, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive and cautious approach.
Links:
- Scientists’ Warning on Technology
www.sciencedirect.com/science...
- Unprecedented Crime
www.claritypress.com/product/...
- Manhattan Project
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhatt...
- Global Warming in the Pipeline and Earth's Energy Imbalance (CEF Video)
• Global Warming in the ...
- Planet Under Siege (CEF Video)
• Planet Under Siege
- Ecosystem Restoration Communities Update (CEF Video)
• Ecosystem Restoration ...
- Net Zero by 2050 - Analysis
www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-...
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...
- Eco Grief (CEF Video)
• Eco Grief
- I = PAT
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_%3D_PAT
- Global Tipping Points Report 2023
global-tipping-points.org/sum...
Regular Panelists:
Dr. Peter Carter - MD, Expert IPCC Reviewer and the director of the Climate Emergency Institute
Paul Beckwith - Climate Systems Scientist. Professor at the University of Ottawa's Paleoclimatology Laboratory as well as at Carleton University
Regina Valdez - Program Director, Climate Reality Project, NYC. GreenFaith Fellow and LEED Green Associate
Video Production and Panelists:
Charles Gregoire - Electrical Engineer, Webmaster and IT prime for FacingFuture.Earth & the Climate Emergency Forum; Climate Reality Leader
Heidi Brault - Video production and website assistant, Organizer and convener, Metadata technician, COP team lead for FacingFuture.Earth and the Climate Emergency Forum; BA (Psychology); Climate Reality Leader
Our Website:
climateemergencyforum.org/
Attributions:
Background Music:
- Title: Through the City II
- Author: Crowander
- Source: Free Music Archive
- License: CC BY-NC 4.0
Image and Video: climateemergencyforum.org/ass...

[@arturschmid4631]

Your Forum is great, but please stop telling that politicians finally must wake up. . . THE ARE AWAKE, but they are not on our side, they do whatever lobby wants them to do. Waiting for politicians is lost time.

[@Debbie-henri]

I tend to agree with you. The same thing is quietly going on in the UK, I'm sure of it. So, we can't wait for the politicians to act, they are thirsty for money and power only, feeding their egos and lifestyles. They don't even need to suffer as many ordinary people do. Their money takes them wherever they want, to enjoy all the most modern tech they want. We have to take that action ourselves. Wallowing in evo-grief is not the solution. It's just like 'Lying flat' in China. People doing nothing whilst still consuming precious resources. Yet most of us are actually capable of taking simple, worthy actions without even realising it. For instance - the 'No Mow May' campaign that was highlighted on some channels last year (and largely unknown to the rest of the general public so it would seem). Put your mower away for the entirety of May, let the bugs take advantage of wild flowers in your lawn, save yourself fuel costs, and spend your time doing something much more worthwhile than stupidly walking back and forth across a mostly useless green desert. At least one channel this year is going one step further, suggesting viewers put away that mower for the entire summer, adding new wildflowers to your lawn, and allowing invertebrates and even amphibians to live out their entire life cycles in uncut grass until Autumn/Fall. Only then cut the long grass back (probably with a strimmer first - which you can afford with all that fuel saved on mower fuel), then mow and leave for the winter. There are those of us, like myself, who have opted for the 'Never Mow Lawn.' This will be my 21st Summer of not mowing at any time of the year. I can't imagine how much time and effort I have saved by not indulging an activity, which on the face of it, keeps the masses with their heads down, behaving themselves, chained to the system for a day every week, sweating away to achieve the most boring feature in any garden. I look at a person mowing a lawn, and I see a slave to convention. It's pitiful. Instead, I put a whole day every week to better use - tree planting, planting berrying plants for birds, sowing and planting wild flowers, building little insect and animal shelters, making brash heaps for the combined benefit of creating habitat (nesting birds/insects/fungi) and soil building. Soil building is, in my opinion, one of the best ways of sequestering carbon from the atmosphere, but despite mentioning it under numerous videos, I have yet to see a channel presenter pick up on it and consider it for discussion. But I honestly don't see how we could go wrong with it. Soil is being lost all over the world. Floods, heavy rain washing away topsoils, landslips caused by excessive weathering patterns, conventional farm practices, and then fertile soil is being ruined by droughts, drying out, the life in the top layers being killed off. We need replacement soil. Soil could be created by making use of fast growth plants (normally shrubs/small trees) that grow thin, whippy growths and can be coppiced regularly (every year or 2-5 years), that tree/shrub being a species that can regenerate quickly and easily the following Spring. The growth can be stacked to one side of the land (I do this with a portion of annual growth harvested from my plants, the healthiest growth currently being used to propagate more plants). I know well that only 10% of of any growth cut from a woody plant becomes soil/carbon, while 90% returns to the atmosphere as gas. But that's not an immediate effect. It takes 'time' for that process to be fully complete. Thin, annual woody growth can take anything from 3 years to over a decade to completely break down, meaning that you could be taking several harvests of stems to stack before the first batch completely expires. An experimental 2 inch width Eucalyptus branch has finally begun to crumble 13-14 years after it was harvested. During that time, I was able to take more regrowths off the same tree before extreme winter temperatures killed that tree outright. So, Eucalyptus didn't work in my location, but could work in others. Other examples of fast growth plants include bamboo, willow, hazel, sycamore, buckthorn, buddleia, cornus, and birch. Indeed, I used this method of coppicing (and pollarding) with those on the list above, putting straight stems to temporary use as tree stakes around the garden (until they become brittle), the best stems for propagating purposes, and a significant amount to soil building. To build the soil, I just stack the stems up in brash heaps in a shady, damp corner, and Nature does the rest. I'm lucky in that I have a large garden, creating a 35ft long mound of brash at one end, a hedge-long brash heap (160ft?) all down one side of the garden, adding another 7 brash heaps at the 'wild' end of the garden (the last are in various stages of decay, one currently being used as a soil source during recent planting). The effect of continuous soil building practices in my garden has transformed my garden from a pale soil that was thin at best, bare rock over a third of it - to one that now has complete soil cover that is mid brown in colour. Trees and plants that once struggled to grow at all in the past have leapt into action. And all it takes is a few intensive days work per year, much less time than I would have spent mowing it instead. Plants are tailor made for carbon sequestering, and I wonder that we think about using technology at all, since carbon dioxide - though in much greater concentration than during the pre-industrial era, is still only present in air in small quantities. What is it now - 420ppm? Any man made device has to pump a lot of air through it to extract a significant amount of CO2, and that all takes a lot of energy, which comes from where?

[@christill]

Yep. This particular set of politicians will never do what we call for. It needs an entirely new system and way of thinking, which these people are incapable of seeing. They would rather end humanity than have a world with a collective mindset.

[@kirkha100]

Absolutely. Thank you.

[@Andreas-hh9yg]

At least in democracies the main problem is the electorate. Yes, politicians do what financially powerful lobbyists want them to do. But they also do what they think the majority of the voters want them to do. And the sad truth is that for the majority of voters all over the world global warming is not their major concern. In particular for this majority global warming is not their decisive issue in elections. So as long as this voters (for psychological reasons) deliberately ignoring the problem nothing will change.

[@solarwind907]

Wrong. Keep telling them early and often! Remind them that you vote every time, and you vote for the most environmentally aware and progressive candidate you can find. We need to get big money out of politics! Until that happens, nothing will change. I read that in James Hansen’s book “storms of our grand children“ and I believe it’s a very true statement!

[@Zankras]

Discussing electric vehicles as a viable alternative is crazy when we could have trains, buses, and bicycles instead. All cars are catastrophic for the environment and their use needs to be heavily regulated. They're just too inefficient at moving people for the state the climate is in.

[@dion8962]

What about construction?

[@richdiana3663]

We're deep into human overshoot. All is lost.

[@OurPredicament]

every technology, when scaled, causes more problems than it solves

[@MyKharli]

that applies to eating and having babies

[@neuralnetwork17]

@@MyKharli And drinking water or breathing oxygen. "The dose makes the poison" as they say.

[@maggieadams8600]

@@MyKharli No it doesn't! Eating doesn't cause more problems than it solves, anything but, and having babies is nature, and not intended to make life easier for parents, but.... "Science never solves a problem without creating ten more." George Bernard Shaw

[@davehendricks4824]

I say forget politician’s wearing t-shirts. Take the damn money OUT OF POLITICS. Period.

[@coweatsman]

I doubt the renewables are going to do it. We need to reduce energy use, energy from any source, clean, dirty, finite or renewable. Developing new tech will mean more energy being used. In the past we have solved every problem by throwing more energy at it. Today's problems come from using too much energy. We can have a green economy but not this one but a smaller economy and a no growth economy with a smaller population. Continuing BAU is NOT the biggest priority but the biggest problem. In fact we will have to abandon BAU. This is what technological bargaining, worshipping the magical technological fairy godmother is all about, continuing BAU, not stopping climate change.

[@garyjohnson1466]

The only way to make the necessary changes in time to avert chaos, due to looming climate environmental disaster, is to end capitalism or current capitalistic system, in my opinion…

[@nsbd90now]

Hello fellow realists 'n doomsters aware of what is coming our way... _faster than expected!_

[@MyKharli]

doomers are now mainstream , welcome the hyperdoomer . (the even if we pulled every stop possible , the balls been kicked to hard btigade )

[@Jim_Snowman]

150°F temps by 2030 is what's coming our way. It's too late to stop it...

[@Glenn_Ratcliffe]

Our Australian government talks of uninvented Co2 capture tech.... 🤮

[@nathanhallisey441]

The shit party and the shit lite party are captured by the fossil fuel lobby in Australia.

[@MyKharli]

juice media explains it well .

[@BekkaPoo]

I pray for the rewilding and degrowth of extractive economies so that we can do as much as possible to save what is left of this world.

[@kirkha100]

Agreed. Thanks!

[@keef.systems]

Three simple and cheap solutions are here: 1) go vegan 2) sand batteries for communities 3) hemp grown to capture CO2

[@Lyra0966]

Simon Michaux has demonstrated that the mining requirements for the on-going and future green industries is orders of magnitude greater than the current mining levels. Furthermore, there probably are not sufficient reserves of rare earth metals, copper and lithium, that can be mined at affordable prices (in terms of both energy and money) to create the renewable future we are told we need. However, this 'green revolution' will be pursued and, as Nate Hagens points out, we will turn much of the planet in to Mordor in our determination to maintain our profligate, high consumption and wasteful modern lifestyles.

[@kirkha100]

Great summation! Thank you.

[@solarwind907]

Did it ever occur to you that Simon might be paid by the oil companies to cast doubt on renewables? That is just such an awesome strategy for oil companies. Make us think no matter what we do there’s no hope. I’m calling BS on all that BS. Yeah, building anything requires metals and mining but it’s a lot better to build a wind farm offshore that produces gigawatt, then to mine minerals to build a fossil fuel powered power plant that needs you to feed it fossil fuels for the next 50 years. THINK about it!

[@rockadoodoo]

That’s what I want, Mordor but with even better iPhones and faster e-cars forever and ever. NOT!

[@TennesseeJed]

Mechanical carbon dioxide sequestration is not possible without using all or more energy than the hydrocarbons gave out initially. It is just the way thermodynamics is, and anyone telling you different is a huckster

[@Mike80528]

Just need to add: Based on physics and current technology. It seems unlikely, but not impossible, that some kind of catalyst could be discovered that makes the process energy efficient. That said, based on physics as we know it, any action we take only speeds our demise regardless of that action. We cannot afford to put ANY more energy into the system. We simply can choose the path of our destruction...

[@chelseashurmantine8153]

Faaacts. So ridiculous that politicians are investing so much money into it! What a waste in every single way.

[@roberth1970]

Clearly. But while I don't think carbon capture is a viable technology, the idea would be that non fossil fuel based power would be used for the process. I wouldn't be surprised if over 5x the energy was required when the carbon released by construction etc. is considered.

[@roberth1970]

I'd like to see ongoing research in this area, along with phased but aggressive carbon pricing, include long being able to "sell" sequestered carbon.

[@hayato4574]

This would only be the case if you break the chemical bond between the carbon and the oxygen. If you only collect the co2, you are not increasing any energy potential and there is no thermodynamic rule that makes the process of collecting the co2 more or equal energy demanding than the chemical energy which went free during the oxidation process of the carbon. Nevertheless you are absolutely right, the process of collecting and storing it takes a lot of energy. And the gigantic value of 40 billion tons per year is hardly managable

[@iczgighost]

Let's be totally honest. Our dependence on fossil fuels extends far beyond simply generating electricity. Modern civilization is fundamentally built upon materials like cement, steel, plastic, and fertilizer, all of which currently require fossil fuels for their production. We simply lack readily available alternatives for these essential components. See youtube videos by Art Berman like "Getting Honest About the Human Predicament" and many others. Art Berman is an earth scientist with over 40 years of experience in the energy sector who wants to move away from fossil fuels as much as anybody.

[@freeheeler09]

Berman is incorrect. The cost of continuing to burn fossil fuels will be 10,000 times the cost of switching to nuclear and wind, geothermal, etc. just for our household, the costs of our almost annual summer fires have included the cost of our electricity doubling, the cost of insurance quadrupling, tens of thousands to make our home and businesses fire resistant, loss of significant business during fire season, likely health effects from stress and smoke, etc. Those costs are a lot more per year than the cost of us switching to solar, batteries and EVs.

[@iczgighost]

​@@freeheeler09I don't disagree with your guess at the long-term cost of not going off fossil fuels fast. Berman would also likely agree with on this. I understand your desire to assume his analysis of our persistent real dependence on fossil fuels is incorrect. However, until you debunk his analysis objectively it's just more hopium. If we want to be part of an effective energy transition, we had better check our faulty assumptions about the hardest parts of the problems.

[@quintama1007]

As the technology advances and it becomes more efficient, the expenditure of energy increases therefore the destruction. It's called Jevons Paradox.

[@freeheeler09]

Good talk per usual. My one comment is that we still. Have to talk about human overpopulation. We won’t make even a small dent in the species extinction and habitat destruction rates, in water and food shortages and the resulting social instability and resource wars, In pollution, or poverty. And without implementation of family planning and the distribution of billions of condoms, we won’t slow the climate crisis.

[@Debbie-henri]

Overpopulation is a continuing issue - from the perspective of those of us who can recognise it as such. But it is not an issue from the standpoint of politicians, who can only focus on economic growth (which requires population growth to reach that goal) and the various religions that believe it pleases their particular god to see parents push out as many new worshippers as possible, particularly sons. Now, if Western countries adopted a child benefits scheme that only extended as far as 2 children per couple, a pension bonus for those couples with one child, and an extra care home payments bonus for those with none - then people would think twice about having that 3rd, 4th, sixth, tenth child. Seems to me that some women would be lost without a pushchair as a permanent fixture. I have to shake my head when I see a gaggle of kids around their parents these days, knowing that those children are going to have to struggle, possibly even fight for water and food in the not so distant future.

[@MyKharli]

yes but no one will have that imposed , look at the demonisation of China when they tried it , mind you it kinda worked a bit too . Low birth rates our hope or stop eating animals gives space for 10 times current population. There will , as happens to every species forever , be soon mass starvation to bring us in check .

[@reedforrest4732]

You wrote about these needs in 2018 which you are here discussing in 2024 saying it's a good thing we're having these discussions because we need to make these changes - but Sheesh does anything ever reach the drawing table. How many numerous jet flight conferences on preplanning yada yad yada...

[@SkepticalTeacher]

It's quite incredible the level of magical thinking on display from politicians.

[@treefrog3349]

I don't believe there is much genuine "thought" involved in their machinations.

[@edtremblay6694]

Thanks for all of your time and energy spent on all the awesome conversations about our climate catastrophe. Thanks for information.

[@heidibrault1313]

Thank you so much for your support!

[@brianwheeldon4643]

I agree with all you have said Regina, Peter and Paul. What about the corporatised-political fiancialised-economics of it all? That and that only is what is preventing us from taking the actions we know to be right. With that in mind and on a note of sanity, the one thing we all need to do and support right now is getting on board with taking action. Words are fine, but politicians and corporations only laugh and disregard as they've done for 30 years. What I want to say is that Återställ Våtmarker- the JustStopOil A22 group in Sweden 'Restore Wetlands, Sweden has declared victory on their dilemma demand'. After 2 relentless years on the road, in the media, in prison and out on the wetlands - they have publicly announced victory on Monday 22nd of April causing a further big splash in Swedish politics and society. This is what we need worldwide, or in enough global north countries to make a difference and to keep going as hard as we are each able to change the immoral-criminal political near homogeneous system we have had foisted on us. We thought we were voting for democracratically elected parliaments. But we never were! Keep on keeping on Climate Emergency Forum.

[@coweatsman]

Paul mentions "doomerism". I like what the late great Michael Dowd spoke of as "post doom, no gloom". Being afraid of what does not feel good can colour our judgement.

[@larry785]

We need to cut down on the energy required to heat & cool our homes.

[@singingway]

We need rapid large-scale projects to insulate all the 50s 60s and 70s housing plats.

[@DrJanpha]

It's true that applications of science have contributed significantly to global warming and climate change. Cars and rockets for example

[@christill]

4 or 5 years ago, I would have given the same spiel about Robotaxis and Full Self Driving. Now I would say just use buses and taxis with drivers. At least for quite a long time to come. With far less vehicles on the road, and high standards for professional drivers, I don’t think humans would be a problem. The main thing is just to get rid of private cars, except perhaps for people who live in the middle of nowhere.

[@QT5656]

Fighting disinformation online should still be a major priority. Get a social media account amplify the informed voices and discussions such as these.

[@HPDevlin]

It doesn't hell to be smart if we keep choosing dumb leaders.

[@danielfaben5838]

Peter, you qualify in your statement, as most commenters do, that fossil fuels should be eliminated "as soon as possible." When is it possible to give up the benefits that all, and I mean everyone, gets from the system that provides water at a turn of a faucet, electricity at the flick of a switch and travel from engaging a key in a vehicle? I say that "possible" is when the total system of delivery of the conveniences and enabling devices is no longer in demand. That would require both the breakdown of commerce powered by all kinds of tech, old and new, as well the literal death of vast swathes of the consuming public. If you have another means to accomplish the "as soon as possible" regimen, I would like to be apprised of the particulars.

[@Spice1_]

Great video thank you

[@heidibrault1313]

Thank you so much for your support.

[@stephaniepatel4132]

I like your channel. I like Peter's no-nonsense assessments and Paul's ability to articulate his views. However, that said, there's a HUGE piece missing in all of these assessments, and humanity at large will fail to grasp it because it has been verboten for so long. Some people, a few, understand this and they're not worried. This would imply, of course, that I understand it...little by little, sanity returns to a small group that say: "Well, things are a mess, aren't they, because so many don't really understand the nature of balance in the universe and that no one alive was spontaneously generated at birth. Therefore, because of their inability to face the thing they fear they most, they will destroy their beautiful world and their ability to live in it. Let me no longer be one of them." It's not the end of humanity, but it is the end of a whole lot of human bodies that squandered their opportunity to live in peace and harmony with each other and with their world. Their Armageddon has come and only a few will survive the coming ravages, as I presently understand it, but all will learn from it, although the lesson will be very very hard.

[@danielfaben5838]

Thank you for sharing your reasoned prognostication. It is forbidden indeed. Talking makes people feel better even though the fear remains.

[@nonearlylove]

'NOVA - Polar Extremes - Ice Worlds' is a great explanation of the Natural Carbon Cycle.. and How we have effected it..! And Not boring..!

[@caterthun4853]

But, Unfortunately. Many of our best scientists are working to improve the extraction of the difficult to get oil and gas. Including wind turbines to supply the electricity to rigs in the North sea , Scotland. Today roads in my area have delays as new domestic gas pipes are installed to new housing area. Houses with no solar . Madness

[@veteranscannabisadvocacygr5401]

✨🌎 Exceptional EarthWise Reporting 📡 #500👍

[@voltrevolt8731]

Great show, so many good points. The legalized bribery of the corporate/government complex that Paul speaks about is a huge hindrance to change. What are some alternate ways for people to push for climate action? How do we make the issue reach "critical mass"?

[@robertlussier2944]

AI is an energy gobbler. Oct.2023 Scientific American. Edit: "My sweet creamery butter" uh uhhh "it's not nice to fool Mother Nature" If you think it's butter, but it's not, it's Chiffon!

[@joannecarter8191]

Let's be smart...well I was in a taxi today and having a good conversation with the driver about Ukraine and the state of the world in needingvto desecrate conflicts. Then let's be dumb we started another topic on climate change whereby his opinion was hat humans were only a tiny part responsible. With a history of failing many times to convince a climate change sceptic in the past, I sat for a moment in silence...shall I opt for a quiet life and say nothing? ISuddenly I started sprouting out all sorts of facts based on videos watched ftom Peter Paul Regina etc. I just kept on relaying the science...quite forthrightly. I then got out of the taxi and wished the driver a good day. If that makes a 1% difference to his next passenger then it felt better than saying nothing. Thanks again for all the work you do to educate and inspire ❤

[@ClimateEmergencyForum]

Thank-you.

[@evadd2]

There is no technology that will compensate for the 50 years since the oil companies knew. Better to focus on transition and resilience.

[@davidtildesley3197]

How can someone who claims to be a scientist ignore the main context of the problem they are studying? By context I mean the social system of wage-labour & capital (markets, governments, nation-states, ruling class) that has a single immutable dynamic - the accumulation of capital. Come on! Dig deeper - you can do it.

[@blinkingmanchannel]

As I get farther into the existing literature around this topic, I see people worrying about how people are going to take the shock. I think that seems to be leading to ambiguous interpretations in the general population. I'm convinced, personally, that there's no time left for niceness and ambiguity. I agree with Manhattan Project. At 10:47 or so you get to the most important point of the entire problem. (IMO) I would add that the FUTURE impacts are the most relevant topics to discuss. The global south will be starving long before anyone in the developed world. Transportation and global trade are the biggest carbon sources, but fertilizers (food) are not far behind. THE PAST is irrelevant. Blaming people for the past, as you do at about 20:00 is utterly pointless, shrill, and distracting. That's going nowhere. Thalidomide was optional. Not an emergency. If you're going to urge panic and simultaneously caution, drug development is not a relevant comparison. Look instead to things like fire safety over the centuries. Some mistakes will kill you, but being indecisive in an avalanche is not gonna save your life. In short, emotion has nothing to do with an engineering problem. Instead, worry about how to buy out the oil companies, because you aren't going to get them to walk away from the money on their own. Think about getting away from the transatlantic slave trade. Oil and gas aren't victims. But people don't like it when you take what they perceive as their source of wealth. But keep going please! We need everyone we can get on this bandwagon.

[@nsbd90now]

Chris Hedges makes a point that "taking action" is important even if you know you aren't going to win. Important for existential issues-- to be an actual good and moral person of success in the end. "Let's be smart and not dumb!" Ohh... y'all are idealists, aren't you? lol!

[@Debbie-henri]

Yes, indulging in evo-grief is certainly not the answer. Indeed, it's quite as bad as being a climate change deniers - if all you do is whine and wallow in it, taking no action. I was fortunate in that my father had a short contract with the British Climate Research team back in the 1980's. His contract involved creating the data collection computer programs. When it came to testing these programs, the scientist supplied to his requirements provided him with data, and the observable predictions gave him cause for alarm. He asked the scientist whether these were actual figures, told yes, and also told of the expected consequences if humanity did not stop polluting at the rate it was doing so. I'm sorry to say that the predictions have been bang on the money, just as my father repeated them to me. Oh, and there's more to come... (Good sunglasses? I use engineering glasses on sunny days, they are 99.9% UV effective and have a British Kitemark to prove it. I don't trust designer sunglasses. They can be faked just that bit too easily). As a consequence of my father's dealings with actual climate research, I changed my mind about my career, and became a sort of semi-gardener/semi-conservationist instead. An unfortunate accident put me out of work, so I experimented with conservation on a very limited budget from home instead. I've been held back by the consequences of my injuries to some degree, but I do like to think that I have made a difference here in my little corner of the world at least.

[@danielfranklin2344]

Enjoy your show and obviously it's great that you present information on the greatest problem facing humanity and the world. I don't understand the analogy to the Manhatten Project. I don't think there is an easy answer to this. I think we understand the problem and the solutions we just need to do it, which takes mass mobilization and mass pressure to get it done. Starting with taxing the rich, slowing down co2 emissions, spending on efficiency, decreasing animal consumption, and solar radiation management.

[@singingway]

Re: IPAT. reduce affluence. Lower total energy use to 1930 s levels. Or 1880s levels perhaps. We should study how we CAN have a high level of civilization without all the fuels and waste and consumption we have now.

[@danielfaben5838]

Yours is a very important notion. The consumer driven society: homes, transport of huge masses of things, inexpensive travel (more mass transport), security for all the stuff (bigger homes with locks on the doors) and lots of money sloshing around to make us think we are wealthy (don't look at the debt of all governmental bodies representing us) are all needing to end (although it is too late for nearly all of us). I think smaller population and specifically greatly reduced city size is the starting place for your reduced affluence. Take away all the trucking and infrastructure support to maintain a city and it falls in on itself in short order. It costs more to hold it together than it does to initially build it. Maybe a city such as Detroit can start over to be something like the 1880's. It has to depopulate first and then figure how to water and feed itself.

[@johnthomasriley2741]

Outrageous possibilities are being claimed for AI. But they won’t say how. There are possibilities. If business took up the crisis wholeheartedly, action would take off. If AI championed a business solutions process, like OKR, to the level of universal acceptance problems would be solved not denied.

[@kirkha100]

2:42 A.I. will be used to generate profits in end stage, neo-liberal capitalism. After that it’s all about whether you prefer teriyaki flavored or ranch flavored Soylent green.

[@rbj5767]

My new hit song: It's The Corporate Dystopia‼️🌎💦🇺🇸💔💔💔💔💢😞🎵🎼🎵🤑💸💸💸💸💸✨️

[@Dragonrahl7]

Which world power is actually taking the necessary steps at this stage? Sadly none. I don't say this to be discouraging. I would like to encourage everyone to disconnect from the industries of these world powers and learn to live as humans once did, in harmony with nature. They cannot stop us from opting-out of the toxic paradigm of "advanced civilization". Look to the cultures of the world before they were colonized. Adopt their values and traditions. Thank them for showing us the way to live on this planet.

[@TTTzzzz]

I think that using 'the Manhattan Project' and the 'Apollo Moon Project' to illustrate what can be done in an emergency falls short. These were relatively small and specialized projects carried out by scientists. WW2 provides a better comparison During WW2 the US spent up to 40% of its GDP on the war effort. For example: In 1939, the total aircraft production for the US military was less than 3,000 planes. By the end of the war, America had produced 300,000 planes. Now, that's more like it.

[@bobincilgerran]

I think Artur is right. In a democracy the solutions need to come from the people. The politicians whatever, dont have examples of what we can and should be doing against what is coming. Weve been trying to pioneer demonstration of deadly obvious near city food growing with minimal fossil fuel use. Our problem on the ground in Wales is the local planning authorities are stuck in 1950 and ignore the Assembly who would like to see action and have made some positive legislation. The people in the planning department rationalise by saying they believe in climate change but not the interpretation, whatever that means. The planning in Swansea have been very busy with a high emissions development boom for the University. Its insane but they dont see it that way lol .

[@coweatsman]

I don't believe EVs can replace the entire ICE fleet and if it could it would only be good for 1 or 2 generations of EVs. You simply need the resources and energy to build it with fossil fuels. We can not and should not be looking at continuing BAU. Not all the world planked up with solar panels and winds trapped for wind power could give as dense a source of energy as cheaply as fossil fuel. Solar power and wind power are both subsided by dense fossil fuels with high EROEI. Once fossil fuels are no longer used few people will be able to afford green power or will use far less of it. The total amount, while in theory large, is on a very slight energy slope.

[@chelseashurmantine8153]

Stopping interventions is not the same geoengineering…. It’s not the same as intentionally “doing interventions” Fossil fuels and the innovation they invited in medicine, literacy, and transportation are awesome but they got us this far and we know enough to stop using them and use the alternatives we either used to use, or have found since.

[@drawyrral]

Dumb means one can't speak. Stupid means stupid.

[@maggieadams8600]

I think people should start walking again, it wouldn't just help the atmosphere, it would make people healthier, and we should concentrate on public transport, I'm sick of ugly cars.

[@prasitboonma7549]

Industrial revolution together with scientific development are both responsible for current disaster.

[@UCCLdIk6R5ECGtaGm7oqO-TQ]

Each a consequence of energy abundance.

[@DPerez-tz8sj]

You are looking good! Your presentation has a very clear enthusiasm & passion. Maybe put your camera up a bit higher. Peter needs to eat more. Getting too thin. 💟🥞

[@lowelllodesign]

Also the 'embodied energy' or 'embodied carbon' or more recent term of 'upfront carbon' of modern building materials and as well applicable to the energy/carbon it took for the making of the high-tech's!

[@HeloisaFischer]

Tshirts for politicians with their sponsors and $ - Wow, amazing ideia! If is was adopted worldwide we would finally begin to improve the climate situation.

[@shelleysolomon2228]

Amazing how none of the energy use equations incorporate use of resources

[@publicdomain1103]

ShakeUP XR

[@robertsummerfield3386]

Better stop with the wars and stop flying giant air tankers and spraying nanoparticles also, ya think?

[@jamesmurphy9426]

Interesting how do you create other technologies without fossil fuels Intelligent Dude

[@russtaylor2122]

Warfare increasing planet-wide... In the context of this discussion, this fact is totally opposite from what 'needs' to happen. Oh yes, the money... Less profit would be earned by de-growth. So that idea is binned...

[@toughenupfluffy7294]

Okay, scientists, how the f*&k are we going to solve this without technology? Any ideas? Maybe prayer? LOL. I think we all need to relax, take a deep breath, do some yoga, get flexible so we can bend all the way over and kiss our asses goodbye.

[@rudyhaugeneder4038]

Sigh. Human history is against us in terms of the future.

[@Wildernut]

Shared vehicles work during the week, but not for those who travel on the weekends or holidays. People are not going to want to become dependent on a company for all travel. Vehicles will also become a disease transmission vector.

[@dianewallace6064]

16:00 "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature" was the commercial. Making Mother Nature believe butter was Chiffon margarine. Commercials were like little stories back in the day instead of lots of flashy clips like now.

[@ClimateEmergencyForum]

Thanks for sharing!

[@anamariacarvalho6738]

I am envolved with computing. Numerical modelo, the CCM from United Nations. I vê usei in the past, snd norw a much smaller modelo flor parametrização the surfaces physical process

[@Edo9River]

The problem is your praising a role of government that ended with Ronald Regan in 1980s

[@dianewallace6064]

Yes, thank you for this content.

[@ClimateEmergencyForum]

You're welcome!

[@elusive323]

O - Day

[@Encephalitisify]

They don’t want you to use green energy because solar and wind is something a community or person can build and use individually. They want you to pay them a continuing fee.

[@dianewallace6064]

25:00 I love that politicians should wear T-shirts of who bought them.

[@user-vs8cb1ei1f]

I deem that the global warming is not a pure environmental issue,but is a political issue.the capitalism pursues to maximally earn the money,and so the interests and giants have vented greenhouse gases and other effluent despite it have damaged the ambience,which is a norm of the capitalism .hence,whether or not it is a capitalism,communism,etc,are not a ideal system to combat the problem.In the conclusion,we must construct new ideology,which is more equal,just,etc.

[@earthsystem]

Yes, I think it’s primarily a capitalist problem with corporate entities like Big Oil forcibly maintain their integrity

[@lucaciuandrei1347]

Resource Based Economy making money obsolete and declare all earth resources common heritage for all instead of just an elite owning the means of production?!?!

[@NashHinton]

👍

[@anamariacarvalho6738]

We have tô take CO2 from atmosphere and ocean. And compress it .....

[@thomaszack3573]

Let's be smart! ( not dumb :-(

[@anamariacarvalho6738]

If CO2 is compress. One csn take severas kinds of material. Much at onde it can fertiliza the soil. ....them one can tske. Graphit

[@waitawhileexplorer3904]

Less is better.

[@christill]

Good to see Paul now saying all the things I’ve been saying for years. I guess that’s what liberals do.

[@tombeck8740]

Technology is a blessing in disguise. As marichole, there are no miracles.

[@anamariacarvalho6738]

The at tjis small City. Leria there is possibilita tô by a small farm tô make some experiments with Mother Earth..

[@user-il4bm4gq8b]

AI can do great things like running trains and subways. Check out the train systems in China and Moscow. However AI uses tremendous amounts of energy which also includes crypto currency. Lots of stuff to sort out and think about!

[@michaelschiessl8357]

I remember that commercial Regina..Its not nice to fool with Mother Nature..it was a butter/ margarine commercial back in the day...Great video and content Regina,Paul,and Peter!! Many thanks..

[@johnkintree763]

This video presentation uses technology that did not exist fifty years ago.

[@MudWizard-]

Even if we dont stop some tipping points we may prevent further tipping points if we do take action. What makes me optimistic is that prices for solar panels, heat pumps and EVs are coming down and hopefully will come down in the future. The more the installment cost is going down the more people will install such system because its cheaper than the fossil fuels based approach. I am already saving money with solar and will enlarge my solar installation. I already save money not buying oil for my ev and eventually i will replace my gas furnace with a heat pump in the future. Wont make a dent alone but if millions of other people make these decisions that could.

[@tinoyb9294]

Too many humans. All else is noise.

[@freeheeler09]

Tin, exactly! Our current overshoot is so great that we would need two or more Earths to sustain our current resource use. Without having the courage and intellectual honesty to discuss overpopulation, everything else is a waste of time.

[@thomashoughton3722]

Regina is a consummate communicator.

[@kingkanute]

GO GO electric velomobile!

[@RajendraTayya-rh9mk]

We shouldn’t be portraying Mother Earth as prey as it is shown in the sculpture like green vegetation. This is the root cause of all the sexual perversity in humans leading to this existential crisis we are facing today.

[@crisismanagement]

"Technology!" "Democracy!" "Etc." "Then the mariners were afraid, and each cried out to his god (Jonah 1:5)."

[@DanielWatson-vv7cd]

We can benefit from a warmer planet. We just have to use technology to overcome rough weather.

[@john1boggity56]

Let's see - we'll know soon enough.

[@Patrick_Ross]

Mother Nature will just scoff and chortle at any attempts to tame severe weather.😂

[@freeheeler09]

Our ag and water systems won’t support our current 8 billion people at the 1.5 degrees of warming, much less the 2.5 degrees we are heading towards

[@gehwissen3975]

Your poor personell risk studies are worth nothing. You simplify the problem - that's not a solution.

[@gatpm]

It seems to me that each one of your videos lack the sole and most important aspect of the climate emergency's overcoming: the only way out is defeating capitalism. As long as capitalism keeps existing, our world is doomed, so are we. Why don't you guys ever talk about that?!?!? LOL

[@user-zh1th8sz2l]

Heck yeah... It's almost like a dirty word with some of these environmentalists for some reason. They're not really that into capitalism, but I'm sure they like their relatively cushy lifestyles shall we say, and somehow it's studiously avoided. And yet it's so true, it's everything. You don't even have to be all into socialism or nothing to intuitively understand that whatever the alternative might end up being, whether utopian or dystopian, free market capitalism, with fractional reserve banking, the institution of private property, and the rampant society that is thus fostered is patently and absurdly incompatible with an ecologically sustainable way of living. Full stop.