0:00

TIAA is on a mission. Why?

0:03

Because 54% of Black

0:05

Americans don't have enough savings to retire.

0:08

So in collaboration with big-name

0:10

artists like Wyclef Jean, TIAA

0:13

released Paper Right, new

0:15

music inspiring a new financial future,

0:17

with 100% of streaming

0:19

sales going to a nonprofit that teaches

0:21

students how to invest. Stream

0:23

Paper Right now and help close the

0:26

gap. The

0:30

Great Pacific Garbage Patch is made up

0:32

of over a trillion pieces of plastic.

0:35

But two scientists recently stumbled on

0:37

something else. Something

0:39

that seemed impossible. Both

0:41

of us were just like, you

0:43

know, like, what? It was

0:46

an uh-oh moment. It blew our minds.

0:49

This week on Unexplainable, what do you do

0:51

when the garbage-threatening life in the ocean becomes

0:55

its own ecosystem? Listen

0:57

to Unexplainable, new episodes every Wednesday.

1:02

It's the weeds. I'm Jon Flynn Hill.

1:04

And I've been under a heated blanket

1:06

for days. It's cold. All

1:10

across the U.S. there's been snow and

1:12

ice and freezing temperatures. In

1:14

fact, last weekend, 80% of America's

1:16

population was under some sort of

1:19

winter weather advisory. It

1:21

may seem hard to believe when it's negative

1:23

degrees outside, but these cold

1:25

temperatures and shorter winters are very likely

1:28

the result of our warming planet. And

1:31

when you think about the impacts on glaciers and crops

1:33

and even what extreme weather can do to

1:35

the body, it's hard not

1:37

to panic. There's understandably a

1:39

lot of doom and gloom when it comes

1:41

to the state of our planet. There's

1:43

this sense of existential dread and the feeling

1:46

that we've gone too far, that there's no

1:48

stopping the inevitable demise of Earth and everything

1:50

that lives on it. It's

1:54

dark. But maybe it doesn't have

1:56

to be. I'm

1:58

Hannah Ritchie. I'm David I'm

2:01

a senior researcher

2:03

at the University of Oxford. Hannah

2:05

is also the author of a new book, aptly

2:07

named Not the End of the World, how

2:10

we can be the first generation to build

2:12

a sustainable planet. I

2:14

have to admit, the premise got me. I

2:16

wanted to hear a data-driven and optimistic

2:19

take on our climate future, so

2:21

I invited Hannah onto the show. Like

2:24

many of us, Hannah grew up aware and

2:26

even anxious about climate change, and

2:28

I spoke with her about it a couple weeks ago. I

2:32

think I'm kind of from a generation where it's

2:34

kind of always been with me. Even as a

2:36

kid, I think, I maybe wasn't aware of climate

2:38

change in any sense of where

2:40

I am today, but I think as a kid, I

2:43

was kind of aware of environmental problems.

2:45

I think climate change came on my

2:47

radar quite early. I was

2:50

definitely under the age of 10 when I kind

2:52

of heard about climate change. And I

2:54

remember really distinctly when I was like maybe 12

2:56

or 13, we had to

2:58

give an oral presentation to the class for

3:00

English. And you could pick any topic you

3:02

wanted, and most people were picking a hobby

3:04

or a favourite place, and I

3:06

stood up really seriously trying to educate these

3:08

12-year-olds on climate change. I remember standing with

3:10

a series of charts of the map of

3:13

the world showing this is what the world

3:15

looks like at 2 degrees and 3 degrees

3:17

and 4 degrees and 5 degrees. You

3:19

could just see the coastlines just getting swamped

3:22

and swamped and swamped and swamped. I remember

3:24

even pretty early on being quite anxious

3:26

and worried about climate change. What

3:29

drew you to data science

3:31

and environmental data science in

3:33

particular? I think that was much later

3:35

on. I did

3:37

environmental sciences at university, and

3:40

then I don't think I saw it through necessarily

3:42

through a data lens. I

3:45

think it was more towards when I was

3:47

in the PhD stage when I kind of

3:49

got interested in what big data could show

3:51

us about the world. And in particular, a

3:53

big inspiration for me was a guy called

3:55

Hans Roslin, and he would do

3:57

these amazing TED Talks where he'd show how the world

3:59

was changing. through data and that massively

4:01

shifted my perspective, but also got me

4:03

really interested in how you can use

4:05

data to understand the world. So,

4:08

the title of your book is Not the

4:10

End of the World, and you know, in

4:13

a little bit we'll get into why

4:15

we shouldn't be panicking. But first,

4:17

I want to lay out some of the

4:19

reasons that there are people freaking out right

4:21

now. So, 2023 was

4:24

the hottest year in recorded history. What

4:27

does the impact that that kind of warming

4:29

can have on the planet in the long

4:31

term? There are a range

4:33

of potential impacts we could see. You know, some

4:36

of the big ones are just direct heat stress.

4:38

The number and intensity of heat waves across

4:41

the world will just continue to increase as

4:43

the world is warming. I think a big

4:45

focus for me is the impact on food

4:47

production and agriculture, where if you have droughts

4:49

or you have floods, or even

4:51

crops can become really stressed by higher

4:54

temperatures so that you get a

4:56

defining yield. So, I think food security and instability

4:58

is a really big one. And

5:00

then a range of other impacts, whether it's

5:02

sea level rise, the intensity of storms, are

5:05

just listing really, really bad things that just

5:07

come hand in hand with a warming climate.

5:09

We know a lot about the doom

5:12

and gloom surrounding the way we talk

5:15

about the environment and just kind of the reality of the

5:17

world we're living in. But you

5:19

argue that the data tells us

5:21

an optimistic story. What

5:24

are the positive trends that you've documented?

5:26

I always caveat that as

5:29

being like a cautiously optimistic reality,

5:31

because in no way am I

5:33

necessarily really, really optimistic that things will

5:36

be fine because they won't be fine.

5:39

What I'm trying to push back on a bit is I

5:41

think with climate change and most environmental problems, we kind of

5:43

see it as an all or nothing. So there's

5:45

some that say it's not a problem at all or they try

5:47

to delay action. And then way on the

5:49

other end of the spectrum, there's the kind of human

5:51

extinction lens where there's just nothing we can do and

5:53

we're doomed. And I think there's a massive grey

5:56

area in the middle where impacts

5:58

can be really The large fit

6:00

to some extent we have control over

6:02

that like we're driving climate change in.

6:04

There is stuff we can do about

6:06

it. we just need to a salary

6:08

action. I want to get

6:11

into the specifics of things getting

6:13

better and the books you talk

6:15

about something called the Environmental Cues

6:17

Nets Curve can you explain what

6:19

that is and the role that

6:21

it place here? A really good

6:23

example there is air pollution as

6:25

Poll is a strongest environmental cousins

6:27

cause there was a cousin. Carver's

6:29

is like just the might an

6:31

upside down you. On

6:34

your ex access you have ripped from

6:36

to have tourette's and and on the

6:38

y axis of the hate as recently

6:40

the level of if listen know what

6:42

you tend to have as though when

6:44

you're poor that you're not born in

6:46

alone feel you don't really have and

6:48

disease or him for such are so

6:50

you air pollution is fairly low there

6:52

was a currency has returned such the

6:54

industrialized is up voted industry have manufacture

6:56

and you have call the have oil

6:58

air pollution tends to rise and then

7:00

it reach sees this kind of top

7:02

can have peak point. Where the

7:04

focus is not necessarily on the

7:06

enough energy anymore because often good

7:09

energy demand as. As. See gotten

7:11

into that? You need an end to pay us

7:13

to focus. To actually be just don't born

7:15

so to ear anymore. Like when you're on

7:17

that growth curve and your focus is on

7:20

getting people of anti poverty it like air

7:22

pollution as ten of of back issues spirits

7:24

a point where you just not happy. With

7:26

have implicit else are you put. Pressure on governments

7:29

to reduce that, You put pressure on

7:31

regulation to resist this and then you

7:33

start to see the air pollution falls

7:35

to the actually the most polluted tends

7:37

to be kind of middle income countries

7:39

and then and rich countries have actually

7:41

done a really. Good job and reducing

7:43

air pollution. You. Just as

7:46

really great example of using the

7:48

Chinese Olympics. could you sort of

7:50

illustrate that for us. We

7:52

think of the police and he often like

7:54

and collect Beijing for example and China which

7:57

has had really pluto. for long time

7:59

and thus com through industrialisation.

8:01

Now, there was the 2008 Olympics

8:04

in Beijing and obviously the world

8:06

was watching and everyone's athletes were

8:08

coming into Beijing for the Olympics.

8:11

So the Chinese government tried to do like

8:13

a very quick, we need to quickly clean

8:15

up there because we've got lots of visitors

8:17

and there's lots of eyes on us. And they

8:19

did that as a kind of temporary measure and

8:21

to some extent it was reasonably effective, like air

8:24

pollution did fall. So the problem

8:26

was that like once everyone went home, they just

8:29

took away the regulations and changes that reduced air

8:31

pollution. So air pollution went back up again. People

8:34

in China were kind of left with, why

8:36

were you willing to clean up there for people

8:39

coming to visit? But for regular citizens, we're

8:41

just happy that we have blootied air. And

8:43

that actually kick started basically the public in

8:45

Beijing saying, we just won't accept this anymore.

8:47

Like we want clean air. Like you've clearly

8:50

showed that it's possible to reduce air pollution.

8:52

So we're going to push for it now.

8:54

And actually, China has

8:56

been really successful over the last decade

8:58

or so and reducing its air pollution. And

9:00

this was really triggered by the public saying,

9:03

this is unacceptable. You need to fix this.

9:06

We talk a lot about sustainability. And

9:08

I think we often

9:11

think of sustainability as something

9:14

we have to make our way back

9:16

to like this golden era

9:18

where, you know, the borders

9:21

weren't rising. And you

9:23

argue in your book that

9:26

humanity has actually never been

9:28

sustainable. How do you define

9:30

sustainability? Yeah, I

9:32

think there's multiple definitions that people can

9:34

use. And I think as an environmentalist,

9:36

I would often go with a definition

9:39

of sustainability as just having a low

9:41

environmental impact. So we protect future generations

9:43

and other species on the planet. And

9:46

I think that's very valid. But I think there's another

9:48

half to this, which is that we also just want

9:50

to provide a really good standard of

9:52

living for people alive today who

9:54

want to reduce human suffering. And if

9:57

you look at for most of our

9:59

history, often can of living standards were

10:01

poor. So as an example, rates of child

10:03

mortality were very high. So for a long

10:05

time in history, the odds of surviving childhood

10:07

was like a point cost. So around half

10:10

of children died. Now, what's happened over the

10:12

last few centuries is that we've kind of

10:14

tipped the scales the other way. So our

10:17

ancestors might have had really low environmental

10:20

impacts, but often they had quite poor

10:22

health and living outcomes. Over the last

10:24

few centuries, we've seen amazing progress on

10:26

human dimensions. So poverty is extreme, poverty

10:29

is falling. So mortality is

10:31

falling, like expectancies increase, all of these

10:33

amazing signs of progress, but it came

10:35

at the cost of the environment, right?

10:37

We've burned fossil fuels, we have rising

10:40

temperatures and rising deforestation, a

10:42

whole host of really bad

10:44

environmental outcomes. So I think the

10:46

key, and what I frame it as, is like an

10:48

opportunity is I think we are at a stage

10:51

where we can achieve both of these things at

10:53

the same time. Like I think we can reduce

10:55

human suffering, we can continue human progress. I

10:57

don't think it has to come at the

11:00

cost of the environment anymore. I think we

11:02

have technologies, we have alternative ways of doing

11:04

things that we can reduce our environmental impacts

11:06

at the same time. What are some of

11:09

the barriers that we're seeing to this definition

11:11

of sustainability that you're talking about that we

11:13

have in this day and age? Like I

11:16

think, I mean, modern medicine has

11:18

done a lot for life

11:20

expectancy and you know, childhood

11:22

mortality and maternal mortality, but

11:24

what are the barriers we're

11:26

seeing to that other half

11:28

of sustainability, creating, you know,

11:30

this planet for future generations?

11:32

What are some of those?

11:35

I think in the past, a lot of

11:37

those barriers have been that we just didn't

11:39

have alternatives. So a big driver of this

11:41

progress has been energy, right? We

11:43

use energy for all this amazing stuff. And

11:45

alternatives in the past were like either wood,

11:47

so we're initially just using wood for fuel

11:50

and many people today still use wood because

11:52

they don't have alternatives. And then we moved

11:54

to fossil fuels. And actually, in

11:56

some sense, fossil fuels have driven a lot of

11:58

this development, but now they have, we know

12:01

that they have side effects. We have air pollution

12:03

and we have climate problems, so

12:05

we need to move away from fossil fuels.

12:07

The barrier in the past has been that we

12:10

didn't have alternatives to this. Having run now at

12:12

the stage where we do have alternatives, we have

12:14

solar, we have wind, we have nuclear, we've

12:17

got batteries, we've got electric vehicles.

12:20

Now, what's really important is that in

12:22

the past, the technology is really expensive,

12:24

right? And it was really, really hard

12:26

to convince anyone to give up fossil

12:29

fuels for this really, really expensive energy

12:31

source. And we've seen over the

12:33

last 10 years or so, we've seen the prices of

12:35

these technologies plummet. And now they're

12:37

often undercutting the price of fossil fuels.

12:39

So people wanting energy now can get

12:41

cheap energy without using fossil fuels. And

12:43

I think that's been a big barrier

12:45

that's been in the way that I

12:47

think we've taken away. Now,

12:50

there are still lots of hurdles. I'm not saying this

12:52

is going to be easy. We're going through, we have

12:54

to go through a massive transformation.

12:56

And that will require building

12:58

new grids. That will mean building

13:01

out energy infrastructure. That will mean

13:03

switching gas stations for electric cars,

13:05

charging stations, upgrading public transport. So

13:07

the changes are going to be

13:09

really big. I think there's often

13:12

a way of framing it. It's actually more of

13:14

an opportunity than it is a sacrifice. I mean,

13:16

we often frame environmentalism

13:19

as a sacrifice, like it's all about less,

13:21

less, less, less. But actually, there are ways

13:23

of doing things better that enhance our lives,

13:25

but also address these problems at the same

13:27

time. What do you think

13:29

it's going to take to sort of make

13:32

that shift? Because that feels like sometimes

13:35

it feels very simple, like,

13:37

okay, we have this technology at hand,

13:39

we just need to implement these changes.

13:41

But it feels like implementing

13:44

them, there's just such a high

13:46

barrier because it's going to

13:48

be changed. It's going to be upfront

13:50

costs. Like, what does it take to

13:52

sort of spur that action? So arguably

13:55

one of our biggest challenges, if not the

13:57

biggest challenge, we'll face essentially is the future.

14:00

is doing all of this stuff. I

14:02

think some of it will roll on its own. I

14:04

think some of the technologies are there where you just

14:06

cannot stop them now. I think solar energy, for example,

14:08

is just so cheap and so good that it will

14:11

just get built. I think

14:13

there some of the barriers are

14:15

often politically related, so getting planning

14:17

permission to actually build the wind

14:19

farm or to put the solar panels on. Or

14:22

we've even got an issue in most countries

14:25

across the world of just getting the stuff on

14:28

the grid and getting a grid connection, which seems

14:30

like a really core infrastructural problem and quite

14:32

a boring problem. But it's so essential. There's

14:35

often lots of renewables waiting to go on

14:37

the grid, but we actually just

14:39

need a grid connection. There

14:41

will be bigger challenges, especially

14:44

in lower income countries,

14:46

because of the upfront cost of this. So

14:49

often you'll say solar, wind, or cheaper

14:51

per unit of energy. And that's true.

14:53

The problem is that for solar and

14:55

wind, all of the cost comes up

14:57

front. It all comes at the start.

15:00

So you pay to build the

15:02

solar panel or the wind turbines.

15:05

But once you've built it, it's basically free. The

15:07

running costs of solar and wind are really

15:09

low because the sun's shining and the wind's blowing on

15:11

its own. Now for fossil fuels,

15:13

it's basically the opposite, where you have

15:15

some upfront cost, but most of the

15:17

cost comes spread across a much longer

15:20

period of time because it's buying the coal or

15:22

buying the gas. So big

15:24

hurdle will just be the upfront

15:26

cost of these technologies, which

15:28

is why we need much more finance.

15:30

I think that's really key, especially for

15:32

richer countries to support poorer countries, because

15:34

we just need a much bigger drive

15:36

and investment. Okay,

15:40

we're going to take a quick break

15:42

and subtext the relationship between

15:44

science and pollution. Fishing

16:01

attempts, harassment, and even unwanted spam calls

16:03

are all things we're at risk of

16:05

when our personal information looks online. But

16:07

you can protect your privacy with DeleteMe. You

16:10

can tell DeleteMe exactly what information you don't want

16:12

online, and they'll do their best to make sure

16:14

it stays offline. Sarah Frank, who

16:16

works with us here at Vox on the business

16:18

side of things, got a chance to try out DeleteMe

16:20

and let us know how it went. DeleteMe

16:23

sent me a report highlighting dozens of sites

16:25

where my name, address, age, or phone number

16:27

were listed, and they're actively removing them on

16:30

my days. You can take control

16:32

of your data and keep your private life

16:34

private by signing up for DeleteMe. And

16:36

there's a special discount for our listeners. You

16:39

can get 20% off your DeleteMe plan

16:41

if you go to joindeleteme.com/weeds and use promo

16:43

code weeds at checkout. That gets you 20%

16:45

off. You

16:47

can go to joindeleteme.com/weeds

16:49

and enter code weeds at

16:52

checkout. That's joindeleteme.com/weeds code

16:54

weeds. It's

16:59

another year, but we got the same wars. Hamas

17:02

and Israel have been at it for 100 days as of this

17:04

week. 100 days of hope and despair and hope

17:06

again. 100

17:10

days that I enter Omar's room and tell him to

17:12

be strong. And I pray.

17:16

We got another deal to deliver

17:18

humanitarian aid to Gazans. Qatar says

17:21

it has brokered an agreement that

17:23

would get medicine delivered to Israeli

17:25

hostages in Gaza in exchange for

17:28

medicine and humanitarian aid for

17:30

Palestinian civilians. And the war continues

17:32

to expand. As was the

17:34

fourth day of U.S. strikes in less than

17:36

a week on Iran-backed Houthis militants who have

17:38

been attacking merchant ships in the Red Sea.

17:42

Before this spins further out of control, we

17:44

want to ask how it could end. What

17:46

would a permanent ceasefire look like? How

17:49

Would we get there? We Found a guy

17:51

who says he knows how this story ends.

17:53

We're going to ask him to share on

17:55

Today Explained. In

18:09

preparing for this interview, you know

18:11

I was reading a conversation he

18:13

recently had with the New York

18:16

Times and he said something that

18:18

I found really interesting. You said?

18:20

I think in general the role

18:22

of science is not to dictate

18:24

policy. Science identifies the problems. It

18:26

can identify potential impacts. It doesn't

18:28

dictate solutions. And. I'm

18:31

wondering what you make of what

18:33

policy makers do with the science

18:35

because it sounds like he sort

18:37

of think as be of the

18:39

your role as I'm presenting the

18:41

information and people kinda do. With

18:44

that information what they want and. It seems

18:46

like you know it seems very obvious the

18:48

things that people could and should be doing

18:50

with the information, but I'm wondering. What

18:53

you think of that action or and a

18:55

lot of cases Inaction. I

18:57

think it's quite hard so often to

18:59

separate panels professional know from past role.

19:01

Of course there's like I get for

19:03

see each of us. Acts in

19:05

the isn't half men have it should

19:07

be happening Oregon for seated with decisions

19:09

that events where the wrong ones bobbing

19:11

in our professional sounds like a cells

19:13

that by that statement I think the

19:15

role of sciences to so what the

19:17

problems on the scale of the problems

19:19

and hopefully that trying to the urgency

19:22

to act bozo talking about solutions and

19:24

what the solutions are more that would

19:26

mean and then I think they are

19:28

split has to be a bridge of

19:30

other people doing the work of bringing

19:32

not and to policy i mean eat

19:34

and to quite a danger. Zone we

19:36

are as scientists are constantly

19:38

dictating. Different. Policy decisions

19:41

I think it's and com out of

19:43

sync with all our priorities on the

19:45

political lens. The. The. Key

19:47

point of policymakers is that the have

19:50

an abundance problems they have to balance

19:52

right arms. If I might just have

19:54

a gods the tip for claim option

19:56

I mean to say let's to to

19:58

all of our money. Into to

20:00

solving climate change because that's something I'm really

20:03

passionate about and I think is the biggest

20:05

thing. but we also live in democracies. On

20:07

the Zola problems with a soul Aids, then

20:09

the tricky job for policymakers of how to

20:11

allocate resources and different ways and of course

20:14

the often ends up. That they don't

20:16

allocate resources that I've it's want.

20:18

To see Bobby less? That's the nature

20:20

of live in or democracy. I.

20:23

Think. Another thing that

20:25

we deal with at least

20:27

in the Us. is sort

20:29

of this overall distrust of

20:31

science and experts. I wonder

20:33

how you navigate that? how

20:35

you go in. With. All

20:38

this information, all of this data

20:40

and the handle. The fact that

20:42

you know they're just some people.

20:44

Who. Won't trust said. Even if you

20:47

know it's there's evidence for it.

20:49

I mean I think Apollo in the

20:52

Us I think that this test is

20:54

probably much higher earning his own of

20:56

maybe a little obe of an outlier.

20:58

but yeah I think in general there

21:00

is like often as a distrust but

21:02

I think that's partly why I have

21:04

this quite stat line about policy prescription

21:06

Because I think and order for us

21:08

to try to maintain trust a scientists

21:11

you have to very much stick to

21:13

the science as six to honest descriptions

21:15

of the science and having once you

21:17

get really heavily into the space on.

21:20

Skype. And policies having. Them

21:22

people in the public will become suspicious of

21:24

why are you pussy not as are

21:26

all other or incentives behind this adding that

21:29

they are there and as then the potential.

21:31

For people to start to lose

21:33

trust. I get that this

21:35

is ten of the purpose of the book. Because

21:38

there are people who are just

21:40

really. Turned off by the catastrophic. Way

21:42

that we often talk about climate

21:44

Change: Do you think changing that

21:47

approach will have an impact on

21:49

those people Are They're just going

21:52

to be a subset of people

21:54

who are always apathetic when it

21:56

comes to sustainability. I. Think

21:59

the message saying. The theory messaging to

22:01

different audiences is vivid a for so

22:03

I think some people do actually just

22:05

respond to the the field a catastrophic

22:07

messages and that's what I'd make some

22:09

that's what get some involved and climax

22:11

and and that's fine. I'll miss that

22:13

Works Valley. There's also like a big

22:15

group of people that. Don't like that,

22:17

are a bit skeptical of that. And to

22:19

sonic that I'm trying to bridge that ground

22:21

a little bit and that people that might

22:23

be on the fence or about disengage to

22:25

to engage a bit more when they're put

22:27

off by that messaging so there is like

22:30

a big group they are that would get.

22:32

More involved as it's it's really

22:34

a bit more. To the mess

22:36

James I think there is another group

22:38

that just will always just be skeptical

22:41

of climate change and will not video

22:43

support claim actions by Think. As I

22:45

said to I discussed in the The

22:48

New York Times piece, I think there

22:50

is still awaiting gates people on solutions

22:52

even if they're not there. For.

22:54

Climate. Change. Or Climate Action

22:56

Mary Felix at surveys across the

22:58

Us for example. There is very

23:00

strong bipartisan support for Climax and right

23:03

on the last. Most people are really

23:05

cool claim accents or on the right

23:07

there seem to be much more skeptical.

23:10

Everyone looks clean energy even on the

23:12

right. There's a large majority support

23:14

for clean energy. Super Bowl of them

23:16

back Clean Energy of the economics works

23:19

as it they can see benefit the

23:21

community as the see employment opportunities are

23:23

wasting gaze people beyond just. The same

23:26

a message sent to some extent makes me.

23:28

A little bit more optimistic because I think we

23:30

were waiting for just everyone on the while to

23:33

get so passionate about climate change that I think

23:35

we've it's really feel on this. I think there

23:37

are ways to engage. People will be clear

23:39

about climate change are not that would drive

23:41

action. Is still so difficult

23:43

though because at least you know here

23:45

in the U S. Everything.

23:48

Becomes political like everything becomes

23:51

the political fight like gas

23:53

stove become real partisan issue.

23:56

I'm wondering how do you

23:58

separate those things? How do

24:01

you parse those out for

24:03

an audience that is so

24:05

inherently. Part as them. Of.

24:08

It's often they won't necessarily be reading the

24:10

same Pcs are serving to some I sent.

24:13

You can tailor it depend on what outlet

24:15

you're right and on or who has begun

24:17

to put pressure on you can can avast

24:19

and understand a little bit of the demographics

24:22

and till a message that li of income

24:24

Illston gas Why I'm not more political or

24:26

people get angry that I'm not more political

24:29

on this spice quite deliberate. I think there

24:31

are lots of people working on committees are

24:33

very some with political and they do an

24:35

amazing job a lot bus to some extent

24:38

I'm. Not gonna be that affected by just

24:40

join in that right? I think there is

24:42

also of xp for trying to bridge the

24:44

gap for that by trying to be as

24:47

people as calm. As possible. There's.

24:51

A lot of talk about what

24:53

individuals can do to curb climate

24:55

change. After the break. A

24:58

paper straw debate. I.

25:15

Also wanna get into something.

25:17

You spend time in the book

25:19

discussing. And that's what you

25:21

consider an effective policy is like

25:23

plastic straw for instance, I live

25:25

in Dc were. Restaurants.

25:28

Do Not use plastic straws. It's a

25:30

lot of paper. It's a lot of

25:32

very wet sir. Office I'm curious why

25:34

you think it's an effective and also

25:37

why. They're so much focus

25:39

on these policies that aren't

25:41

may be the most effective.

25:44

Having those two reasons to count or some

25:46

other and effect of stuff of Ain't No

25:48

one is that some of the other people

25:50

think emits a positive Ziffren that some is

25:52

a negative difference and I think we should

25:55

just call the is We're not doing negative

25:57

stuff above the other diamonds and to this

25:59

is either. People often become so

26:01

overwhelmed within the number of decisions they

26:03

should be making about environmental stuff and

26:06

some people i mean they go for

26:08

their day that question a nebula a

26:10

decision about as this that for the

26:13

planet as as bad as upon us

26:15

aren't for many people that can become

26:17

overwhelming like the to spend the whole

26:19

day trying to optimize than actually the

26:22

probably like five the decisions that make

26:24

up again. Pots on your carbon

26:26

footprint. And then the rest

26:28

of decisions really make very little difference

26:30

at all. and you can do those

26:33

if you're one of those. Also with

26:35

us, a which is called Moral Laws

26:37

insane were. A few the

26:39

have done a behavior that they think

26:42

has made a positive difference. Often you

26:44

can have were other things fall by

26:46

the wayside so you might think oil

26:48

is the people saw at dinner. Therefore.

26:51

It doesn't matter that I take the car,

26:53

I take the flay or I the meat

26:56

because I've done my bit because I use

26:58

of people Shaw has a the people saw

27:00

them and thought to the paper so as

27:03

so incredibly small compared to the other decisions

27:05

sobbing gets also but this moral license in

27:07

effect where people think that because they've made

27:09

us small decision that justifies I'm making than

27:12

making a decision. But. Are some

27:14

of those things that we think have

27:16

a positive impact? Books actually are not.

27:18

Helpful at all or actually kind of damaging.

27:21

I. Think one that comes up a law is like

27:23

local. Foods were of and if you ask people

27:26

at what's the best way to reduce the

27:28

carbon footprint of your diet. So often

27:30

sale at a local and.

27:33

I guess the rationale for that makes. Sense.

27:35

Like. Transporting. Stuff of

27:37

assume absolute emissions as on a truck

27:39

or on a plane or com by

27:41

boat bobbing. The key thing when you

27:43

break down the data on emissions. From

27:45

foods is that what you retain? Mars

27:48

much much more. Than. Has less

27:50

hello to reach us if you look at their

27:52

carbon footprint of different foods. Across

27:55

the world ear the average percentage of

27:57

the transport apartments up so the sit

27:59

mail part. The topic is five percent

28:01

some most of the and parts of your

28:03

food or coming from my lawn just change

28:05

or the coming from lessons on the farm

28:08

so bought you eat much much much more.

28:10

Than. With him from you often hear

28:12

people say it all my local

28:14

bees is obviously much more carbon

28:17

than your avocados. Shipped in from

28:19

from a given country or to

28:21

the Us is not true. What

28:23

you're into the business is the

28:25

avocados mars much much more than

28:27

whether it's local or whether that's

28:29

and put his. What? Are

28:31

some of the things we could be

28:33

doing better? Actually helpful. Like you mentioned,

28:35

eating locally will not always reduce that

28:37

footprint, but what are some things that

28:39

people can do that will actually have

28:42

an impact? I mean, I think it's

28:44

important on the local sauce is that

28:46

there are other reasons why someone would

28:48

want to eat local and that's perfectly

28:50

fine as just earnest, not necessarily the

28:52

best way. To reduce your carbon footprints. Of

28:54

the zola, resist the local like support

28:56

in your local community or and then

28:59

go ahead and to that's Southern Lady

29:01

effective. Will make up the most into

29:03

com zip printers Like on what you

29:05

eat is primarily about me in. Dairy

29:07

consumption. That's probably the biggest part

29:09

of your footprint. They are unanswered.

29:12

Least loser like the to massive

29:14

ones on says on energy is.

29:17

Largely about travel so let's dive in

29:19

a car obviously walking, cycling, public transport

29:21

as best as we have a cough

29:23

you need to thaw said I went

29:25

to cars definitely bear and a pencil

29:28

Car flights are obviously a big them

29:30

for people his life and then in

29:32

your home it's not necessarily still slate

29:34

your lights or like plugin your phone

29:37

charger and as like often detain and

29:39

kicking the room was really upset to

29:41

this is a unless a heat pump

29:43

that tends to be much much better

29:45

than of a boiler. And

29:48

one additional thing that, as you can like

29:50

of the to in a solar panel on

29:52

your wrist, just massively reduces your energy fit.

29:55

It's. Very easy to spiral

29:57

when you think about. The

29:59

state. The World is an. And

30:02

I'm wondering how you keep from spiraling. How. Do

30:04

you like clearly it? You

30:06

are overall pretty optimistic about

30:08

our ability to change things

30:10

than like you know, saying

30:12

like don't panic it will

30:14

be okay. They're just things

30:16

we have to do. How

30:18

do you. Stay. That

30:21

clear headed about it? Because it's

30:23

It's very easy to start panicking.

30:25

It's understandable why the doom and

30:27

gloom messaging takes over. I. Mean,

30:29

I'm I'm definitely not saying that things are going

30:31

to be okay. I get depends on a depends

30:33

on what we do with the boldest the impacts.

30:35

Regardless of what we do like. Climate

30:37

Change it. I mean as this equipment

30:39

is coming the clemency does here and

30:42

living sees every increase in some serbia

30:44

increase impact some be increased risks to

30:46

thought that we're gonna have no and

30:48

pots pans and things are all going

30:50

to be fine but the gradient of

30:52

have. Fainaru. Or okay things

30:54

will be will depend on a lot sins and

30:56

I think we have this opportunity here to view

30:58

the tea. Stall. Action having

31:00

the balance there is really important thing

31:02

you do need won't not a solid

31:04

panicked says that I don't know that

31:06

select an effective response be didn't concern

31:08

I need a sense of urgency like

31:10

these are bad problems that we need

31:12

to solve Bank for me it's also

31:15

important to full this are also on

31:17

the solutions and stuff that happens. thing

31:19

is he just tell people this is

31:21

a massive problem and just leave them

31:23

with it like what this was to

31:25

do have a duty to also highlight

31:27

the solution is also important to highlight

31:29

solutions. are been implemented see can actually

31:31

see stuff hop names that I think it

31:33

can up to some extent get you a

31:36

little bit of the spiral on help. To

31:38

build momentum all inside the highlight like

31:40

signs of progress and that's not necessarily

31:42

to know till it and gradually a

31:44

cell is and and cheer about her

31:47

were was done but it are often

31:49

about building momentum and suing people like

31:51

this stuff contains and there is room

31:53

to to. Drive much more that. yeah

31:55

i guess like it's this idea

31:57

of celebrating small wins so that

32:00

people don't feel despondent and like there's

32:02

no point. Yeah I mean

32:04

I think you can relate it to like even

32:06

really small personal stuff in your own life like

32:09

say say you're

32:12

training for a marathon and you've like never been

32:14

a runner but you want to do a marathon

32:16

like the most demotivating thing ever is if you've

32:18

been training for three months and you've made no

32:21

progress then you just stop could

32:23

you think what I've been doing this for three months

32:25

like clearly nothing is managing to help I'm

32:27

wasting my time I'm just gonna stop but

32:30

actually what's really motivating is if you

32:32

say you've been training for three months

32:34

and okay you're not at the marathon

32:36

level standard and that's where we're

32:38

on climate change but like we're not anywhere near where we

32:41

need to be on climate change but we have you have

32:43

got fitter over that period of time and you can now

32:45

run a 10k it's about building on that

32:47

momentum to say okay if I can build

32:49

up to 10k then with more training and

32:52

with much more effort then I can get

32:54

to the marathon distance so I think it's

32:56

about using momentum to drive more progress rather

32:58

than just copying and saying that's fine with

33:01

where we are I think

33:03

for a lot of people that care about

33:06

the environment these you know

33:08

small actions matter

33:10

like it offers I think

33:12

in addition to actually helping it offers

33:14

a sense of control in a world

33:16

where so much feels

33:18

out of our control and you know

33:21

these are small steps that we can

33:23

take without the backing of companies or

33:25

federal governments and I think

33:27

it really is a way not to feel despondent

33:29

and powerless what advice do you

33:33

have for people who you know want

33:35

to make a change want to see

33:37

those changes but aren't

33:39

in power or don't have proximity to

33:41

power I think we often envision

33:43

this has been a very top down so like we need

33:45

to wait for the government to tell us what to do

33:48

or we need to make for

33:50

you know a big international body to tell us what

33:52

to do and I think many of

33:54

the successes on this have come from

33:56

like more community efforts so probably a

33:58

lot of the the benefits

34:00

in building wind power in Texas, for

34:02

example, have come from small communities saying

34:04

we're going to build a wind farm

34:06

for a community. So often I think

34:08

it can start to come from grassroots

34:11

and build up. I think the key

34:13

there, one, is to make

34:15

the changes yourself. And

34:17

then a big thing is like showing them

34:20

or talking about them. And that's not necessarily

34:22

of saying you're a terrible person because you

34:24

haven't done what I've done. I think there's

34:26

a lot of that in environmentalism where it's

34:28

often like a blame and pointing fingers. I

34:30

think that's really ineffective at getting people to

34:32

change. But I think changing

34:34

yourself can often be really infectious and

34:37

people get interested at all. So actually

34:39

highlighting some of the positives around

34:41

these behavior changes can often have a kind

34:44

of infectious impact. Like one house gets a

34:46

solar panel and the neighbors across the street

34:48

are interested, so they get a solar panel.

34:50

So you can see how this can start

34:52

to build up from a community level. Actually

34:54

taking that action often makes you

34:56

not going to believe all of the anxiety around

34:59

climate change, but it can relieve it a bit

35:01

because you feel like stuff is happening. As

35:03

we're having this conversation, it feels like there's an

35:05

elephant in the room and the elephant in the

35:07

room is capitalism. And,

35:09

you know, in many cases, the

35:11

economics don't always make

35:14

sense at scale, at this large

35:16

scale. I wonder what your

35:18

thoughts on that are. Is

35:20

it possible to make these

35:23

necessary changes within

35:25

the system we have now? Like can we

35:27

do that from bottom up

35:29

approach with the way

35:31

things work in a lot of wealthy

35:33

countries right now? So I think

35:36

there's often this question of do we need economic growth? And

35:38

I think it's very clear, especially in low

35:41

income countries and at the global level, we

35:43

do, because we still got billions of people

35:45

living in poverty and their way out of

35:47

poverty is economic growth. And there's a question

35:49

of rich countries and what they should do.

35:52

I mean, I'm not of the belief system that, you know,

35:55

GDP should be our North Star and

35:57

that's what we should be optimising for.

36:00

Having the question, they're

36:02

all trying to dismantle

36:04

capitalism. More Or move. Away from

36:06

he said on the growing beards is the

36:08

challenges as get in public support for last

36:10

on I. I think there's important

36:13

really important more talking about

36:15

team skills steaming. Leaders to stand

36:17

up and try to promote law and then

36:19

to get you know public support to get

36:21

them answer to office. or indeed Paula Be

36:23

talking about taking a pretty long time to

36:26

get there and often the same schools that

36:28

were talking about to take claim option on

36:30

much, much shorter. Seems to me there's a

36:32

ton of an income possibility of time there

36:34

of whether you'd be able to do so.

36:37

I don't think we necessarily need to accept

36:39

just to see is cool of the system.

36:41

I think there are ways to. Improve

36:43

things about will send the system

36:45

which lean more and favor of

36:48

us taking action that there are

36:50

ways to subsidize low carbon technologies

36:52

to change the the economic solve

36:54

Fossil Fuels says he's low carbon

36:56

energy sources so think we should

36:58

just accept the status quo by

37:00

most is quite skeptical that you

37:02

would be able to know dismantle

37:04

in vivo the whole economic system

37:06

and time to tackle climate change.

37:09

What? Are some of the ways

37:11

journalists could be navigating not

37:14

only the data differently, but

37:16

the narrative. Around climate change

37:18

differently. I think most

37:20

of the coverage of climate change so

37:22

far has just been on impact so

37:24

assist about disasters and it's not as

37:26

as so matter that those stories aren't

37:29

important though of course there are important

37:31

and this showing the the large empire

37:33

and reporting on the logs and parts

37:35

that we could see as is important

37:38

for driving us to act of war

37:40

I think would actually drive more a

37:42

sinister. Also balance that with more focus

37:44

on listens sir Alan just people's as

37:46

feeling like or can of heady for

37:49

them and. and there's nothing we can do

37:51

about it to highlight the urgency of why we

37:53

need to act but also highlight stuff that we

37:55

can do and highlight the stories of stuff that

37:57

actually going on as many people does not aware

38:00

of a lot of stuff that's going on

38:02

behind the scenes because it's

38:04

not making the headlines. What

38:07

do you think the role of optimism is in our

38:09

climate future? I think

38:11

it needs to be balanced with the

38:14

sense of urgency and the need

38:16

to act. So it's not useful to just

38:18

be kind of, yeah, yeah, things

38:20

will be fine. That doesn't help us at

38:22

all. But I think a lot of people

38:25

are feeling quite paralysed at the moment. I

38:27

think they are in some sense

38:30

disengaging because they feel like

38:32

we're making no progress and we probably won't make

38:34

any progress. And this is such a critical time.

38:37

We need to really get moving on this stuff.

38:39

So this is the worst time for

38:41

people to disengage and look away. So for

38:44

me, the role of optimism there is to

38:46

drive people to actually take actions and drive

38:49

more of it. There are

38:51

ways that we can actually have

38:53

a much bigger impact by speaking

38:55

to people, by getting

38:57

involved politically, by changing your career

38:59

into a path that helps to

39:02

contribute to solutions. Yeah,

39:04

your carbon footprint is important, but I think we can think

39:06

much bigger than that. Think about how can

39:08

I contribute on a bigger level

39:10

that influences more people, that drives,

39:12

that might drive political change, might

39:14

drive economic change or drive solutions.

39:20

Hannah Ritchie, thank you so much for joining us in the

39:22

leads. Thank you. That's

39:28

awesome. We want to

39:31

hear from you. Your thoughts on the show,

39:34

topics you'd like to hear more about. Send

39:37

us an email to weeds at box.com. Thank

39:40

you to Hannah Ritchie for joining me, our

39:43

producer, Sophie Lalonde, Chris

39:45

Shiala engineered this episode, Melissa Hirsch fact

39:47

checked it, our

39:49

editorial director is A.M. Hall, and I'm

39:51

your host, John Flynn Hill. This

39:55

podcast is part of Vox, which doesn't have a paywall. Help us keep

39:57

it that way. Is

40:00

that going to work?