1 00:00:09,960 --> 00:00:13,560 Speaker 1: Welcome back to Drilled. I'm Amy Westerwald. You might remember 2 00:00:13,720 --> 00:00:17,480 Speaker 1: I was slowly making my way through the most recent 3 00:00:17,640 --> 00:00:22,320 Speaker 1: IPCC report. That's the Mitigation Report, which came out in April. Well, 4 00:00:22,360 --> 00:00:26,840 Speaker 1: it's almost three thousand pages, and between life and work, 5 00:00:26,880 --> 00:00:29,200 Speaker 1: it's taken me a while. But today I want to 6 00:00:29,240 --> 00:00:31,520 Speaker 1: get into one of the main topics I saw a 7 00:00:31,520 --> 00:00:35,800 Speaker 1: lot of people focusing on in the report, carbon dioxide removal. 8 00:00:36,520 --> 00:00:39,840 Speaker 1: People really kind of saw what they wanted to see 9 00:00:39,880 --> 00:00:44,080 Speaker 1: about CDR in this report. Some heralded it as proof 10 00:00:44,159 --> 00:00:48,800 Speaker 1: that CDR will in fact save us, so no need 11 00:00:48,840 --> 00:00:52,519 Speaker 1: to look into anything else. Others claimed the IPCC had 12 00:00:52,520 --> 00:00:55,880 Speaker 1: actually said quite the opposite, and I wondered, how could 13 00:00:55,920 --> 00:00:58,160 Speaker 1: that be. It was the first time I can remember 14 00:00:58,240 --> 00:01:02,360 Speaker 1: people having that diverse of views about what the IPCC 15 00:01:02,560 --> 00:01:07,520 Speaker 1: report actually said. For all its inscrutability, the IPCC report 16 00:01:07,600 --> 00:01:13,039 Speaker 1: is generally not ambiguous about what the science says. So 17 00:01:13,280 --> 00:01:15,840 Speaker 1: I read the report with a particular interest in all 18 00:01:15,880 --> 00:01:19,440 Speaker 1: the places where CDR showed up and what the underlying 19 00:01:19,520 --> 00:01:22,840 Speaker 1: data and research and the report actually said about it. 20 00:01:23,520 --> 00:01:26,200 Speaker 1: Lucky for me, the smart folks over at the Center 21 00:01:26,280 --> 00:01:29,760 Speaker 1: for International Environmental Law or CL had the same idea 22 00:01:30,000 --> 00:01:33,560 Speaker 1: and put together a brilliant report on this subject. Today, 23 00:01:33,600 --> 00:01:36,279 Speaker 1: I'm joined by the architects of that report, Nikki Reisch, 24 00:01:36,520 --> 00:01:39,600 Speaker 1: director of the Climate and Energy Program at CL and 25 00:01:39,760 --> 00:01:43,920 Speaker 1: Carol Muffett, the organization's president and CEO. They walked me 26 00:01:43,959 --> 00:01:47,080 Speaker 1: through a whole bunch of the discrepancies on carbon removal 27 00:01:47,120 --> 00:01:49,960 Speaker 1: tech in this report and were able to actually answer 28 00:01:49,960 --> 00:01:54,240 Speaker 1: the question what did the IPCC say about the potential 29 00:01:54,320 --> 00:01:58,960 Speaker 1: of this tech that's coming up? Right after this quick break. 30 00:02:10,400 --> 00:02:14,799 Speaker 2: I was hoping that we could start with kind of 31 00:02:14,840 --> 00:02:17,959 Speaker 2: your focus in this most recent analysis. 32 00:02:18,360 --> 00:02:24,280 Speaker 3: The genesis of this report lies in a phenomenon that 33 00:02:24,360 --> 00:02:29,799 Speaker 3: I've seen going back across several IPCC reports, and particularly 34 00:02:29,840 --> 00:02:33,080 Speaker 3: saw it in the special report on one point five degrees, 35 00:02:33,200 --> 00:02:38,840 Speaker 3: and that is that people will cherry pick individual lines 36 00:02:38,880 --> 00:02:42,960 Speaker 3: out of the summary for policymakers and use those lines, 37 00:02:43,120 --> 00:02:46,760 Speaker 3: often taken out of context, to spend very simple but 38 00:02:46,880 --> 00:02:51,000 Speaker 3: deceptive narratives about what the IPCC is saying. And nowhere 39 00:02:51,360 --> 00:02:56,560 Speaker 3: has that been clearer than in lines taken out of 40 00:02:56,600 --> 00:03:00,400 Speaker 3: the summary for policymakers on things like carbon capture and 41 00:03:00,520 --> 00:03:04,600 Speaker 3: storage and the role for CDR, and you know, with 42 00:03:04,680 --> 00:03:07,800 Speaker 3: the SR one point five report. I found that to 43 00:03:07,880 --> 00:03:12,480 Speaker 3: actually explain to people what the IPCC was really saying 44 00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:15,320 Speaker 3: about these technologies, you actually had to go through the 45 00:03:15,360 --> 00:03:18,480 Speaker 3: whole report and pull out, like here are all the 46 00:03:18,480 --> 00:03:23,320 Speaker 3: cautionary notes that the IPCC had included around these technologies. 47 00:03:23,639 --> 00:03:26,360 Speaker 3: There were warning signs flashing everywhere if you read the 48 00:03:26,360 --> 00:03:31,280 Speaker 3: whole report, But if you read not only the executive summary, sorry, 49 00:03:31,280 --> 00:03:34,960 Speaker 3: the Summary for policy Makers, but the press releases characterizing 50 00:03:34,960 --> 00:03:38,320 Speaker 3: that Summary for policy makers, you would have believed that 51 00:03:38,840 --> 00:03:42,560 Speaker 3: the IPCC was doing nothing but seeing the praises of 52 00:03:42,640 --> 00:03:45,440 Speaker 3: these technologies, when nothing could be further from the truth. 53 00:03:46,000 --> 00:03:50,280 Speaker 3: And so that's why we sent out to analyze these documents. 54 00:03:50,280 --> 00:03:52,840 Speaker 3: And I'll say that part of the reason for the 55 00:03:52,880 --> 00:03:56,880 Speaker 3: focus on the Summary for policy Makers is that it 56 00:03:57,040 --> 00:04:01,120 Speaker 3: is the window into which the vast majority of the 57 00:04:01,160 --> 00:04:07,320 Speaker 3: world views what the IPCC has examined and what it's found. 58 00:04:07,760 --> 00:04:12,200 Speaker 3: And so our goal was to actually unpack what the 59 00:04:12,200 --> 00:04:17,720 Speaker 3: IPCC is really saying about these technologies, to push back 60 00:04:17,760 --> 00:04:22,920 Speaker 3: against those oversimplified and frankly false narratives that the IPCC 61 00:04:23,120 --> 00:04:27,000 Speaker 3: is saying. You know, CCS and CDR are the solutions 62 00:04:27,040 --> 00:04:30,719 Speaker 3: to the climate crisis, because the IPCC really doesn't say that. 63 00:04:31,160 --> 00:04:34,640 Speaker 3: I think the additional complication comes from the fact that, 64 00:04:35,000 --> 00:04:41,120 Speaker 3: you know, the Summary for Policymakers is unique among the 65 00:04:41,200 --> 00:04:47,320 Speaker 3: IPCC documents in being the one moment where politics really 66 00:04:47,360 --> 00:04:52,279 Speaker 3: does come into play. As states negotiate that summary line 67 00:04:52,440 --> 00:04:56,240 Speaker 3: by line by line, and when you've got a thousand 68 00:04:56,279 --> 00:05:00,520 Speaker 3: pages of text to work with, like, there is a 69 00:05:00,680 --> 00:05:04,000 Speaker 3: lot of leeway in terms of word choice, in terms 70 00:05:04,000 --> 00:05:08,080 Speaker 3: of emphasis in what goes into that summary, And this 71 00:05:08,120 --> 00:05:10,320 Speaker 3: is part of what we were trying to expose, is 72 00:05:10,360 --> 00:05:14,960 Speaker 3: that you know, the IPCC has these complex and extensive 73 00:05:15,000 --> 00:05:18,479 Speaker 3: warnings on these technologies and the over reliance on them, 74 00:05:19,120 --> 00:05:21,920 Speaker 3: but you don't get that in the Summary for policy Makers, 75 00:05:22,240 --> 00:05:25,760 Speaker 3: precisely because there was all this political pressure to tell 76 00:05:25,800 --> 00:05:27,000 Speaker 3: a very different story. 77 00:05:27,240 --> 00:05:29,640 Speaker 4: I think I would just add that the other critical 78 00:05:29,680 --> 00:05:33,599 Speaker 4: piece we wanted to unpack in this analysis was to 79 00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:40,280 Speaker 4: expose the way that the assumptions built into the models 80 00:05:40,320 --> 00:05:43,800 Speaker 4: that the IPCC is reviewing and reporting on really skew 81 00:05:43,920 --> 00:05:48,719 Speaker 4: perceptions of what's possible, and that those assumptions, while acknowledged 82 00:05:48,760 --> 00:05:52,720 Speaker 4: in passing by the IPCC in its report, really play 83 00:05:52,760 --> 00:05:57,440 Speaker 4: a much greater role in the way that the report 84 00:05:57,600 --> 00:06:02,200 Speaker 4: describes mitigation pathway and can really skew the way that 85 00:06:02,240 --> 00:06:05,800 Speaker 4: the public and policymakers take away messages. And so we 86 00:06:05,880 --> 00:06:10,840 Speaker 4: really examine some of the key political and economic assumptions 87 00:06:11,560 --> 00:06:18,760 Speaker 4: that constrain the way the models represent what mitigation pathways 88 00:06:18,800 --> 00:06:22,800 Speaker 4: are available and what outcomes are possible. And so we 89 00:06:22,920 --> 00:06:26,440 Speaker 4: go into unpacking some of that about the focus on 90 00:06:26,480 --> 00:06:31,800 Speaker 4: and assumptions about economic growth that really exclude the possibility 91 00:06:32,040 --> 00:06:38,320 Speaker 4: of reconceiving growth as something other than the inexorable accumulation 92 00:06:38,520 --> 00:06:42,120 Speaker 4: of and use of resources, So that possibility is really 93 00:06:42,160 --> 00:06:45,000 Speaker 4: written out of many of the underlying models. And the 94 00:06:45,040 --> 00:06:50,520 Speaker 4: models also really have an approach to cost and portraying 95 00:06:50,600 --> 00:06:54,880 Speaker 4: the cost of mitigation measures that don't capture the costs 96 00:06:54,920 --> 00:06:58,039 Speaker 4: of climate change itself or adaptation to climate change. So 97 00:06:58,080 --> 00:07:00,960 Speaker 4: what you get is a really skewed picture of the 98 00:07:01,080 --> 00:07:05,719 Speaker 4: least cost mitigation measures for a particular temperature target, and 99 00:07:05,839 --> 00:07:11,600 Speaker 4: that bias towards avoiding near term costs really ends up 100 00:07:12,360 --> 00:07:19,280 Speaker 4: skewing the models towards reliance on future speculative technologies rather 101 00:07:19,360 --> 00:07:22,400 Speaker 4: than near term available mitigation measures. 102 00:07:22,400 --> 00:07:23,720 Speaker 2: Now I want to talk to you about that a 103 00:07:23,760 --> 00:07:26,400 Speaker 2: little bit more, because I think it's so interesting that 104 00:07:26,560 --> 00:07:31,240 Speaker 2: in this report, where you had this new chapter, chapter five, right, 105 00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:35,840 Speaker 2: which is really questioning a lot of these economic assumptions, 106 00:07:35,880 --> 00:07:39,360 Speaker 2: you also still had these models that were based on 107 00:07:40,200 --> 00:07:46,040 Speaker 2: the traditional interpretations of growth and on some economic models 108 00:07:46,040 --> 00:07:48,440 Speaker 2: that are starting to be more and more questioned. So 109 00:07:48,920 --> 00:07:51,400 Speaker 2: I'm curious, I guess just what you think of that. 110 00:07:51,720 --> 00:07:55,680 Speaker 3: Maybe I'll start with that point about things being contradictory. 111 00:07:55,720 --> 00:07:59,200 Speaker 3: I think that was actually one of the precise reasons 112 00:07:59,240 --> 00:08:03,720 Speaker 3: that we wanted to do this analysis, is because there 113 00:08:03,760 --> 00:08:08,160 Speaker 3: are really clear warning signs in the Working Group one 114 00:08:08,360 --> 00:08:13,200 Speaker 3: and Working Group two reports that emphasize that we have 115 00:08:13,520 --> 00:08:18,640 Speaker 3: extraordinarily limited amount of time that we need to reduce 116 00:08:18,760 --> 00:08:23,360 Speaker 3: fossil fuel emissions into the atmosphere because we have to 117 00:08:23,440 --> 00:08:26,240 Speaker 3: keep warming below one point five degrees. And the OBBOCC 118 00:08:26,760 --> 00:08:30,520 Speaker 3: warns in the clearest possible terms that going beyond one 119 00:08:30,560 --> 00:08:38,040 Speaker 3: point five degrees, even temporarily, will result in irreversible losses 120 00:08:38,080 --> 00:08:42,680 Speaker 3: to ecosystems, to communities, to human lives. And you really 121 00:08:42,720 --> 00:08:48,560 Speaker 3: don't see the recognition of that urgency, the recognition of 122 00:08:48,600 --> 00:08:51,640 Speaker 3: the critical importance of not going beyond one point five 123 00:08:51,679 --> 00:08:57,200 Speaker 3: degrees reflected in Working Group three, and I think that 124 00:08:57,960 --> 00:09:01,679 Speaker 3: in a similar way, the Working Group two report really 125 00:09:01,800 --> 00:09:06,839 Speaker 3: highlighted the critical importance of centering issues of social justice, 126 00:09:06,880 --> 00:09:12,760 Speaker 3: of human rights, of centering issues of equity, including in 127 00:09:12,880 --> 00:09:16,040 Speaker 3: responses to the climate crisis. And you would think that 128 00:09:16,040 --> 00:09:20,600 Speaker 3: that as well would frame the analysis of options that 129 00:09:21,040 --> 00:09:24,240 Speaker 3: Working Group three was looking at, but in fact it doesn't. 130 00:09:24,760 --> 00:09:28,319 Speaker 3: And you mentioned the point about constant I think one 131 00:09:28,320 --> 00:09:31,120 Speaker 3: of the things that was really striking for us, even 132 00:09:31,160 --> 00:09:35,080 Speaker 3: in the late stages of this report is Fig. Seven 133 00:09:35,360 --> 00:09:39,480 Speaker 3: from the Working Group three report, which lays out in 134 00:09:39,559 --> 00:09:43,839 Speaker 3: really stark terms. I think that the difference between the 135 00:09:43,880 --> 00:09:48,120 Speaker 3: promise of renewable energy and the reality of renewable energy 136 00:09:48,160 --> 00:09:52,679 Speaker 3: and electrification and the potential of some of these technologies 137 00:09:52,760 --> 00:09:56,440 Speaker 3: like carbon capture and storage and CDR. If you look 138 00:09:56,480 --> 00:10:00,400 Speaker 3: at Fig. Seven, what you find is that there enormous 139 00:10:00,600 --> 00:10:05,360 Speaker 3: near term emission reductions to be made at relatively low cost, 140 00:10:05,520 --> 00:10:08,880 Speaker 3: some in fact, you know, at negative cost, which means, 141 00:10:08,920 --> 00:10:13,040 Speaker 3: you know, the economy benefits from accelerating wind and solar 142 00:10:13,160 --> 00:10:18,200 Speaker 3: energy deployments. You could you could achieve more reductions from 143 00:10:18,559 --> 00:10:21,520 Speaker 3: reducing methane emissions from oil and gas, and of course 144 00:10:21,520 --> 00:10:24,439 Speaker 3: you could achieve even more if you stopped producing so 145 00:10:24,559 --> 00:10:27,040 Speaker 3: much oil and gas in the first place. And then 146 00:10:27,080 --> 00:10:33,000 Speaker 3: you compare that with the IPCC's own evaluation of the 147 00:10:33,040 --> 00:10:38,600 Speaker 3: costs and potential of CCS and CCUS, and it's striking 148 00:10:38,679 --> 00:10:44,000 Speaker 3: because the IPCC is saying here in graphic terms, literally, look, 149 00:10:44,360 --> 00:10:48,840 Speaker 3: this stuff is extraordinary expensive and it has very limited potential. 150 00:10:49,600 --> 00:10:52,440 Speaker 3: And yet you know when you look at the report itself, 151 00:10:52,800 --> 00:10:56,640 Speaker 3: you don't see that reflected in the analysis at all. 152 00:10:56,960 --> 00:10:59,480 Speaker 3: In fact, the story that the some of it for 153 00:10:59,600 --> 00:11:04,160 Speaker 3: policy appears to tell is one that really puts CCS 154 00:11:04,200 --> 00:11:06,640 Speaker 3: and CDR at the forefront of solution. 155 00:11:07,520 --> 00:11:08,600 Speaker 2: That's so interesting. 156 00:11:08,679 --> 00:11:11,720 Speaker 4: We focus a lot in this analysis on the major 157 00:11:12,400 --> 00:11:16,600 Speaker 4: gap or contradiction or disconnect if you will, between this 158 00:11:16,720 --> 00:11:20,480 Speaker 4: report and what the headlines are and the last report 159 00:11:20,520 --> 00:11:24,800 Speaker 4: that really emphasized in loud and clear terms the irreparable 160 00:11:24,840 --> 00:11:27,680 Speaker 4: harm that will result from overshooting one point five. So 161 00:11:27,760 --> 00:11:31,520 Speaker 4: you would think, following on the heels of that report, 162 00:11:32,080 --> 00:11:38,199 Speaker 4: that a report focused on mitigation strategies would center or 163 00:11:38,240 --> 00:11:41,680 Speaker 4: at least focus heavily on those measures that would enable 164 00:11:41,720 --> 00:11:45,199 Speaker 4: the world to avoid overshoot of one point five degrees. 165 00:11:45,240 --> 00:11:49,239 Speaker 4: And the irreparable harm that the IPCC just showed would follow. 166 00:11:49,520 --> 00:11:54,199 Speaker 4: And yet we see a presentation of these modeled pathways 167 00:11:54,760 --> 00:11:57,679 Speaker 4: side by side, so that in presenting the C one 168 00:11:57,800 --> 00:12:00,839 Speaker 4: modeled pathways, those that involve no or low overshoot of 169 00:12:00,880 --> 00:12:06,720 Speaker 4: one point five right alongside scenarios that model at temperature 170 00:12:06,840 --> 00:12:11,720 Speaker 4: rise to catastrophic levels can be misread or would suggest 171 00:12:11,760 --> 00:12:14,080 Speaker 4: that all options are on the table, that all those 172 00:12:14,120 --> 00:12:19,640 Speaker 4: pathways are somehow acceptable or conceivable policy options. And you 173 00:12:19,760 --> 00:12:22,440 Speaker 4: referenced the chapter on demand side measures, which I think 174 00:12:22,480 --> 00:12:25,200 Speaker 4: you know is a really important one to see in 175 00:12:25,280 --> 00:12:29,200 Speaker 4: this report. But we did notice similarly that many of 176 00:12:29,240 --> 00:12:35,800 Speaker 4: the most new and radical and critically progressive thinking about 177 00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:40,439 Speaker 4: reconceptualizing demand and the systemic change needed to actually reduce 178 00:12:41,000 --> 00:12:46,040 Speaker 4: energy demand is not yet reflected in the modeling of 179 00:12:46,120 --> 00:12:50,479 Speaker 4: mitigation pathways, in those integrated assessment models that really underlie 180 00:12:51,080 --> 00:12:54,520 Speaker 4: the graphs and charts of projected pathways. And you know, 181 00:12:54,559 --> 00:12:58,840 Speaker 4: there's a lag time always between new science and the 182 00:12:58,880 --> 00:13:01,760 Speaker 4: consensus science. That's sort of summarized here. But what we're 183 00:13:01,800 --> 00:13:05,520 Speaker 4: also seeing is that the scientific studies that are produced 184 00:13:05,960 --> 00:13:11,760 Speaker 4: are influenced by the government sources, the corporate entities, and 185 00:13:11,840 --> 00:13:15,920 Speaker 4: other funders that really guide what research is done, and 186 00:13:15,960 --> 00:13:18,400 Speaker 4: so there's a real gap and a need to ensure 187 00:13:19,080 --> 00:13:23,120 Speaker 4: that research is being done to actually map and model 188 00:13:23,200 --> 00:13:25,360 Speaker 4: what it would look like to implement some of these 189 00:13:25,400 --> 00:13:29,560 Speaker 4: systemic changes, because there is a deep contradiction between the 190 00:13:29,600 --> 00:13:33,800 Speaker 4: IPCC's own recognition and multiple places in the report that 191 00:13:34,040 --> 00:13:38,800 Speaker 4: economic growth, businesses usual economic growth and conceptions of it 192 00:13:38,840 --> 00:13:42,440 Speaker 4: is one of the major drivers of emissions and is 193 00:13:42,679 --> 00:13:45,440 Speaker 4: a driver of this current crisis. So we need to 194 00:13:45,480 --> 00:13:50,320 Speaker 4: reconceptualize growth, and yet the models are sort of prisoner 195 00:13:50,400 --> 00:13:56,720 Speaker 4: to this fixed concept of growth continuing apace and even 196 00:13:56,760 --> 00:13:59,959 Speaker 4: accelerating in the future, when if we want to tackle 197 00:14:00,559 --> 00:14:05,080 Speaker 4: this crisis and avoid human catastrophe, we need to upend 198 00:14:05,120 --> 00:14:08,120 Speaker 4: those assumptions and rethink the approach entirely. 199 00:14:09,520 --> 00:14:13,560 Speaker 2: M Yeah, I'm curious what you guys think. You know, 200 00:14:13,679 --> 00:14:15,880 Speaker 2: do you mention the research just how much this sort 201 00:14:15,920 --> 00:14:21,200 Speaker 2: of illustrates the need to get certain umber interests out 202 00:14:21,240 --> 00:14:23,680 Speaker 2: of the research realm. 203 00:14:24,040 --> 00:14:24,240 Speaker 1: You know. 204 00:14:24,360 --> 00:14:27,760 Speaker 3: I think there's a simple answer and a complex answer. 205 00:14:27,920 --> 00:14:31,400 Speaker 3: I'll start with a simple one. We have seen a 206 00:14:31,520 --> 00:14:39,560 Speaker 3: long history of the fossil fuel industry funding research programs, 207 00:14:39,600 --> 00:14:47,320 Speaker 3: funding research projects, funding entire research institutions at colleges and universities, 208 00:14:47,360 --> 00:14:53,840 Speaker 3: particularly at many of the most prestigious universities like MIT, 209 00:14:55,120 --> 00:14:57,880 Speaker 3: and you look at the research that comes out of 210 00:14:57,920 --> 00:15:02,400 Speaker 3: those programs, and much of it emphasizes technologies like this. 211 00:15:02,800 --> 00:15:06,560 Speaker 3: MIT ran a whole program on carbon capture and storage 212 00:15:06,600 --> 00:15:09,560 Speaker 3: for a long time. I think you see a heavy 213 00:15:10,080 --> 00:15:14,520 Speaker 3: focus in a lot of this industry funded research on 214 00:15:15,040 --> 00:15:20,320 Speaker 3: what can be done that allows business as usual while 215 00:15:20,640 --> 00:15:25,000 Speaker 3: managing the problem, or appearing to manage the problem, and 216 00:15:25,040 --> 00:15:30,000 Speaker 3: I think that is just a fundamental conflict. Importantly, much 217 00:15:30,000 --> 00:15:33,640 Speaker 3: of that government support has also come from government agencies 218 00:15:33,680 --> 00:15:38,280 Speaker 3: who have the promotion of fossil fuel production and use 219 00:15:38,640 --> 00:15:42,160 Speaker 3: as part of their agency mandate. And so I think 220 00:15:42,200 --> 00:15:47,000 Speaker 3: the net consequence is you get this body of science 221 00:15:47,240 --> 00:15:52,200 Speaker 3: that is funded by, supported by, and driven by the 222 00:15:52,680 --> 00:15:58,160 Speaker 3: underlying agendas of the companies and government agencies that are 223 00:15:58,200 --> 00:16:03,840 Speaker 3: funding it. And even with the best intentions of the 224 00:16:03,880 --> 00:16:07,560 Speaker 3: researchers involved, I think the pressure is clear to produce 225 00:16:07,640 --> 00:16:10,800 Speaker 3: outcomes that are going to keep the money flowing. The 226 00:16:10,880 --> 00:16:15,720 Speaker 3: net result is these modeled realities become our perception of 227 00:16:15,840 --> 00:16:20,600 Speaker 3: the real reality, and modeled realities are pushing us towards 228 00:16:20,600 --> 00:16:22,760 Speaker 3: the planet that is frankly unlivable. 229 00:16:23,480 --> 00:16:25,360 Speaker 4: Yeah, just on that, if I can just jump in 230 00:16:25,440 --> 00:16:29,000 Speaker 4: on that, on that last point, just to underscore something 231 00:16:29,520 --> 00:16:32,880 Speaker 4: that we were talking about before about all of the 232 00:16:32,960 --> 00:16:37,880 Speaker 4: assumptions built into these you know, modeled realities and how 233 00:16:37,920 --> 00:16:41,880 Speaker 4: they skew the outcomes. I think, you know, a critical 234 00:16:42,000 --> 00:16:45,200 Speaker 4: reflection that may seem obvious, but I don't think is 235 00:16:45,280 --> 00:16:51,480 Speaker 4: frequently acknowledged, is that, you know, models that incorporate various 236 00:16:51,520 --> 00:16:57,680 Speaker 4: mitigation measures reflect outcomes based on what would happen if 237 00:16:57,680 --> 00:17:01,440 Speaker 4: those mitigation measures worked in practice like they do in theory. 238 00:17:01,880 --> 00:17:05,600 Speaker 4: They don't model what happens when they fail. So the 239 00:17:05,640 --> 00:17:11,600 Speaker 4: models that build in, for example, reliance on CCS model 240 00:17:12,320 --> 00:17:19,800 Speaker 4: what happens if CCS worked perfectly as designed in theory. 241 00:17:19,920 --> 00:17:23,199 Speaker 4: But in reality, what we've seen to date is that 242 00:17:23,280 --> 00:17:27,040 Speaker 4: CCS projects have repeatedly over promised and under delivered on 243 00:17:27,080 --> 00:17:32,680 Speaker 4: emissions reductions and haven't achieved those promised outcomes. The IPCC's 244 00:17:32,760 --> 00:17:37,040 Speaker 4: report says explicitly that what's assumed is where it refers 245 00:17:37,080 --> 00:17:43,159 Speaker 4: to CCS in modeled scenarios that assumes a capture a 246 00:17:43,160 --> 00:17:46,399 Speaker 4: carbon dioxide capture rate of ninety to ninety five percent. 247 00:17:46,960 --> 00:17:49,800 Speaker 4: That's a rate that just simply has not been consistently 248 00:17:49,800 --> 00:17:53,159 Speaker 4: achieved by any CCS projects to date. So when your 249 00:17:53,359 --> 00:18:02,560 Speaker 4: model is reflecting a theoretical, hypothetical, imagine possible outcome, and 250 00:18:03,359 --> 00:18:08,120 Speaker 4: real world policy choices are being based on that aspirational picture, 251 00:18:08,840 --> 00:18:12,240 Speaker 4: we find ourselves in, you know, the very deep water 252 00:18:12,440 --> 00:18:16,879 Speaker 4: and very you know world ablaze that we're currently living in. 253 00:18:18,760 --> 00:18:22,680 Speaker 2: That to me was like the scariest thing in your analysis, 254 00:18:22,720 --> 00:18:26,200 Speaker 2: because I was just like, oh God, that's just not 255 00:18:27,119 --> 00:18:30,760 Speaker 2: gonna work. There was that paper last year that Ben 256 00:18:30,960 --> 00:18:34,240 Speaker 2: Fronta did about how some of the economists who had 257 00:18:34,280 --> 00:18:38,760 Speaker 2: been commissioned to do white papers in the nineties and 258 00:18:38,920 --> 00:18:42,280 Speaker 2: came up with some of the economic growth models are 259 00:18:42,320 --> 00:18:45,440 Speaker 2: now kind of saying, oops, we didn't include the cost 260 00:18:45,640 --> 00:18:51,000 Speaker 2: of inaction. But you know, that's now what twenty years on. 261 00:18:52,760 --> 00:18:55,639 Speaker 2: I guess I'm curious what you guys think the chances 262 00:18:55,680 --> 00:18:59,679 Speaker 2: are of these models being updated to actually reflect reality 263 00:19:00,600 --> 00:19:05,720 Speaker 2: quickly enough for policymakers to actually find them useful. 264 00:19:06,119 --> 00:19:11,320 Speaker 3: I think we've suffered from this approach to modeling for 265 00:19:11,359 --> 00:19:16,959 Speaker 3: a very long time, and we've seen the impacts of 266 00:19:17,200 --> 00:19:21,720 Speaker 3: climate change and the costs of those impacts systemically and 267 00:19:21,840 --> 00:19:27,600 Speaker 3: systematically underestimated for years. If you look at any given 268 00:19:27,920 --> 00:19:31,760 Speaker 3: year in recent years, what we see are climate fueled 269 00:19:32,000 --> 00:19:37,800 Speaker 3: or climate exacerbated disasters in countries around the world that 270 00:19:37,880 --> 00:19:42,960 Speaker 3: take an array of forms and add up to untold 271 00:19:43,040 --> 00:19:47,520 Speaker 3: billions of dollars literally every year, year and year out. 272 00:19:47,960 --> 00:19:53,679 Speaker 3: I think the problem now is like the accumulated costs 273 00:19:53,720 --> 00:19:57,119 Speaker 3: of those losses are accelerating every year, and they're only 274 00:19:57,160 --> 00:20:01,640 Speaker 3: going to accelerate what it would take to integrate projections 275 00:20:01,680 --> 00:20:06,720 Speaker 3: of those increased costs into the models. Frankly, I don't know, 276 00:20:07,200 --> 00:20:10,240 Speaker 3: but I think part of my concern is that we 277 00:20:10,320 --> 00:20:13,639 Speaker 3: have lost an extraordinary amount of time and waiting for 278 00:20:13,800 --> 00:20:17,280 Speaker 3: more economic models to prove to us a reality that 279 00:20:17,320 --> 00:20:22,119 Speaker 3: we see unfolding around us every day is maybe not 280 00:20:22,320 --> 00:20:25,359 Speaker 3: the strategy we need. What we need is to recognize 281 00:20:25,880 --> 00:20:29,119 Speaker 3: that we have solutions right in front of us and 282 00:20:30,320 --> 00:20:34,119 Speaker 3: crafting extraordinarily complex models to say that, well, maybe the 283 00:20:34,160 --> 00:20:37,639 Speaker 3: solutions that we have, you know, aren't necessary because we 284 00:20:37,640 --> 00:20:40,560 Speaker 3: could admit something that might work fifty years from now. 285 00:20:40,960 --> 00:20:43,560 Speaker 3: It's just not the way to address this crisis. 286 00:20:44,040 --> 00:20:48,040 Speaker 4: I think one of the key takeaways from this report buried, 287 00:20:48,119 --> 00:20:52,920 Speaker 4: though it may be in places, is really that we 288 00:20:53,320 --> 00:21:01,160 Speaker 4: have the mitigation measures we need. They exist, their affordable, proven, 289 00:21:01,920 --> 00:21:04,240 Speaker 4: they work, and what we need to do is to 290 00:21:04,320 --> 00:21:08,600 Speaker 4: deploy them rapidly and now. And those measures are clearly 291 00:21:08,920 --> 00:21:14,200 Speaker 4: renewable energy reduction and energy demand. Those are the key 292 00:21:14,359 --> 00:21:17,320 Speaker 4: center pieces of an effective strategy. And there are some 293 00:21:17,600 --> 00:21:20,720 Speaker 4: models in the mix of the thousands that are reviewed 294 00:21:20,760 --> 00:21:25,520 Speaker 4: here that of course do show just how quickly we 295 00:21:25,680 --> 00:21:31,119 Speaker 4: could reduce emissions and how hopeful the world might be 296 00:21:31,400 --> 00:21:35,600 Speaker 4: if we were to accelerate those policy measures that rely 297 00:21:35,760 --> 00:21:41,560 Speaker 4: on proven mitigation strategies that are available now and not 298 00:21:42,000 --> 00:21:45,919 Speaker 4: speculative ones that may or may not work at all, 299 00:21:46,000 --> 00:21:48,960 Speaker 4: and that bring a host of other environmental and social 300 00:21:49,200 --> 00:21:54,200 Speaker 4: risks along with them. What's lacking is the political will 301 00:21:54,800 --> 00:21:59,520 Speaker 4: not this scientific proof, and I think that's a real 302 00:22:00,320 --> 00:22:03,680 Speaker 4: change in where we are. And the importance of these 303 00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:08,960 Speaker 4: reports is that, yes, there's of course benefit in deeper 304 00:22:09,480 --> 00:22:14,879 Speaker 4: and more extensive study and intensifying that the scientific study 305 00:22:14,960 --> 00:22:19,760 Speaker 4: of climate change, its dynamics, impacts, et cetera. But the 306 00:22:19,880 --> 00:22:22,800 Speaker 4: science on the causes of climate change is crystal clear, 307 00:22:23,400 --> 00:22:28,720 Speaker 4: and the known solutions that address those underlying drivers are 308 00:22:29,640 --> 00:22:33,800 Speaker 4: evident and available, and so really we're not facing a 309 00:22:33,880 --> 00:22:38,639 Speaker 4: gulf of scientific knowledge. We're facing a tremendous gulf and 310 00:22:38,840 --> 00:22:43,320 Speaker 4: an absence of political will, and we need to unleash 311 00:22:43,359 --> 00:22:48,000 Speaker 4: the stranglehold that vested interests have on our collective future 312 00:22:48,119 --> 00:22:51,040 Speaker 4: and the policies that are going to keep it livable. 313 00:22:51,160 --> 00:22:54,600 Speaker 3: If I can add just one point that I think 314 00:22:55,960 --> 00:22:59,439 Speaker 3: is too often lost in these analysis, and that is 315 00:23:00,800 --> 00:23:07,760 Speaker 3: that a CO two molecule omitted to the atmosphere today 316 00:23:08,000 --> 00:23:12,720 Speaker 3: doesn't warm the atmosphere once and disappear. It warms the 317 00:23:12,720 --> 00:23:17,760 Speaker 3: atmosphere and keeps on warming the atmosphere until ten years, 318 00:23:17,840 --> 00:23:20,960 Speaker 3: one hundred years, sometimes a thousand years from now, when 319 00:23:20,960 --> 00:23:23,639 Speaker 3: it eventually decays out of the atmosphere or it's pulled 320 00:23:23,640 --> 00:23:27,680 Speaker 3: out of the atmosphere for some reason. That is really 321 00:23:27,680 --> 00:23:31,480 Speaker 3: important because it means the impacts of each individual's CO 322 00:23:31,720 --> 00:23:35,399 Speaker 3: two molecule are accumulative. It will keep contributing to warming 323 00:23:35,440 --> 00:23:38,040 Speaker 3: as long as it's in the atmosphere, and that means 324 00:23:38,080 --> 00:23:42,440 Speaker 3: that cutting emissions early, Cutting emissions now has a much 325 00:23:42,560 --> 00:23:47,639 Speaker 3: higher impact than trying to cut emissions or pull carbon 326 00:23:47,680 --> 00:23:50,520 Speaker 3: out of the atmosphere a decade from now. Or three 327 00:23:50,560 --> 00:23:53,520 Speaker 3: decades from now. One of the really striking things that 328 00:23:53,600 --> 00:23:56,880 Speaker 3: comes out of the IPCC report is there's a place 329 00:23:56,880 --> 00:24:02,520 Speaker 3: where the ibc C acknowledges that the divergence between the 330 00:24:02,600 --> 00:24:06,879 Speaker 3: high ambition pathways and the low ambition pathways would become 331 00:24:07,000 --> 00:24:10,200 Speaker 3: clear in terms of emissions, in terms of other sorts 332 00:24:10,200 --> 00:24:14,359 Speaker 3: of pollutants within a few years, and by twenty thirty 333 00:24:14,400 --> 00:24:17,320 Speaker 3: we would start to see that divergence in terms of 334 00:24:17,359 --> 00:24:20,040 Speaker 3: what the levels of nw CO two accumulating in the 335 00:24:20,040 --> 00:24:25,399 Speaker 3: atmosphere are. That's an extraordinary thing to recognize, and I 336 00:24:25,440 --> 00:24:30,640 Speaker 3: think our policy processes don't appreciate it enough. Literally, if 337 00:24:30,680 --> 00:24:36,240 Speaker 3: we accelerate these responses, we'll start seeing the outcomes from that, 338 00:24:36,119 --> 00:24:41,159 Speaker 3: the shifts in that really really rapidly. And by contrast, 339 00:24:41,240 --> 00:24:44,280 Speaker 3: if we delay action, you know, we're not just fighting 340 00:24:44,359 --> 00:24:48,280 Speaker 3: the emissions in twenty thirty, We're fighting the cumulative warming 341 00:24:48,680 --> 00:24:51,800 Speaker 3: from all the missions between now and twenty thirty. 342 00:24:52,280 --> 00:24:54,480 Speaker 2: Why do you think that there was such a difference 343 00:24:54,560 --> 00:24:59,320 Speaker 2: between Working Group two and Working Group three, especially given 344 00:24:59,400 --> 00:25:01,760 Speaker 2: that I feel like a lot of people were expecting 345 00:25:01,920 --> 00:25:05,680 Speaker 2: Working Group three to kind of come out guns blazing 346 00:25:05,720 --> 00:25:07,639 Speaker 2: in a way that it didn't really. 347 00:25:07,760 --> 00:25:12,920 Speaker 4: The key difference between these past reports on the physical 348 00:25:12,960 --> 00:25:17,080 Speaker 4: science and the impacts and experiences of climate change and 349 00:25:17,440 --> 00:25:21,840 Speaker 4: this Working Group three report on what can and effectively 350 00:25:21,880 --> 00:25:23,879 Speaker 4: what should we do about it. Although the report is 351 00:25:23,920 --> 00:25:29,120 Speaker 4: not prescriptive, it lays out science and research about what 352 00:25:29,800 --> 00:25:32,800 Speaker 4: can be done to address this problem and really tease 353 00:25:32,920 --> 00:25:36,880 Speaker 4: up what is ultimately a political and economic question about 354 00:25:37,359 --> 00:25:39,720 Speaker 4: which steps are we going to take. All of them 355 00:25:40,080 --> 00:25:46,520 Speaker 4: carry some cost, but some costs are born disproportionately by 356 00:25:47,600 --> 00:25:51,879 Speaker 4: future generations but also by disadvantage populations today, and some 357 00:25:51,960 --> 00:25:55,200 Speaker 4: of those costs are absolutely necessary to bear. What we 358 00:25:55,280 --> 00:26:00,320 Speaker 4: saw was a sort of battleground between states with really 359 00:26:00,400 --> 00:26:05,480 Speaker 4: vested interest in maintaining a business as usual approach to 360 00:26:06,440 --> 00:26:11,200 Speaker 4: their economies to energy sector and trying to, as they might, 361 00:26:11,480 --> 00:26:15,879 Speaker 4: to blunt any messages that suggest we need to radically 362 00:26:15,920 --> 00:26:22,160 Speaker 4: rethink and drastically and dramatically move, beginning immediately away from 363 00:26:22,480 --> 00:26:27,640 Speaker 4: all fossil fuels and replace them with renewables, and focus 364 00:26:27,720 --> 00:26:31,800 Speaker 4: on the necessary systemic changes in the way that we 365 00:26:31,960 --> 00:26:38,399 Speaker 4: use resources to lower demand and make our approach to 366 00:26:38,480 --> 00:26:39,520 Speaker 4: living sustainable. 367 00:26:40,040 --> 00:26:44,040 Speaker 3: Yeah, And I think what I would add to that is, 368 00:26:46,160 --> 00:26:51,880 Speaker 3: first to recognize the extraordinary resistance on the part of 369 00:26:54,080 --> 00:26:58,040 Speaker 3: some core governments, not just Saudi Arabia as a producer 370 00:26:58,080 --> 00:27:02,800 Speaker 3: of oil and gas, but the US to grappling honestly 371 00:27:03,480 --> 00:27:10,240 Speaker 3: with what the IPCC science tells us, and grappling honestly 372 00:27:10,440 --> 00:27:13,560 Speaker 3: with what that means for how things need to change, 373 00:27:13,640 --> 00:27:19,720 Speaker 3: because changing is politically unpalatable and politically uncomfortable, even when 374 00:27:19,720 --> 00:27:25,080 Speaker 3: it's vitally necessary. And I think that is compounded by 375 00:27:25,400 --> 00:27:29,240 Speaker 3: where we are in the trajectory of denial. We talked 376 00:27:29,320 --> 00:27:33,600 Speaker 3: earlier about the role of industry and funding funding scientific 377 00:27:33,640 --> 00:27:36,480 Speaker 3: research in the space, and I think if you if 378 00:27:36,480 --> 00:27:39,400 Speaker 3: you watch the history, if you want, if you watch, 379 00:27:39,920 --> 00:27:43,679 Speaker 3: if you pay attention to denial efforts across spaces and 380 00:27:43,720 --> 00:27:49,720 Speaker 3: across time, they follow a pretty predictable arc. First, you 381 00:27:49,920 --> 00:27:55,320 Speaker 3: deny that a phenomenon exists, and then you deny that 382 00:27:55,359 --> 00:27:58,359 Speaker 3: the phenomenon is a problem, and then you deny that 383 00:27:58,400 --> 00:28:02,000 Speaker 3: the problem is severe, and when that no longer works, 384 00:28:02,040 --> 00:28:06,280 Speaker 3: then you deny that people are causing the problem or 385 00:28:06,280 --> 00:28:10,240 Speaker 3: that you specifically are causing the problem. Then you turn 386 00:28:10,280 --> 00:28:13,280 Speaker 3: to economics and say, oh, well, it's too expensive to 387 00:28:13,400 --> 00:28:16,640 Speaker 3: address it. And then in the final stages, you take 388 00:28:16,760 --> 00:28:19,720 Speaker 3: one or two one or two courses and we're seeing 389 00:28:19,720 --> 00:28:22,760 Speaker 3: both of them play out. You argue that, oh, yes, 390 00:28:22,800 --> 00:28:25,160 Speaker 3: the problem exists, and we're part of the solution, we've 391 00:28:25,200 --> 00:28:29,119 Speaker 3: been part of the solution all along, or you couple 392 00:28:29,200 --> 00:28:31,960 Speaker 3: that with the problem exists, but it's really too late 393 00:28:32,000 --> 00:28:34,280 Speaker 3: to do anything about it, so we really just need 394 00:28:34,280 --> 00:28:40,680 Speaker 3: to learn to adapt. And that schema, that playbook is 395 00:28:40,720 --> 00:28:43,120 Speaker 3: one that we've seen play out over and over again. 396 00:28:43,240 --> 00:28:47,040 Speaker 3: And so what does that mean for these IPCC analysis Well, 397 00:28:47,080 --> 00:28:50,680 Speaker 3: I think it means that we know that the fossil 398 00:28:50,680 --> 00:28:53,880 Speaker 3: fuel industry spent a really long time arguing that there 399 00:28:53,960 --> 00:28:57,320 Speaker 3: was no such thing as climate change, and it lost 400 00:28:57,360 --> 00:29:00,280 Speaker 3: that arguments in the weight of the overwhelming evidence, and 401 00:29:00,320 --> 00:29:03,479 Speaker 3: so engaging in that part of the fight really doesn't 402 00:29:03,520 --> 00:29:07,200 Speaker 3: benefit it anymore. And then they spent a long time 403 00:29:07,360 --> 00:29:10,800 Speaker 3: arguing that it wasn't worthwhile to address the climate crisis. 404 00:29:11,560 --> 00:29:16,280 Speaker 3: But again, the evidence makes clear that we have to act. 405 00:29:16,720 --> 00:29:19,240 Speaker 3: And so what I think you've seen isn't a really 406 00:29:19,320 --> 00:29:22,960 Speaker 3: heavy shift in the debate away from those early parts 407 00:29:22,960 --> 00:29:27,360 Speaker 3: of the denial equation. This problem doesn't exist, this problem 408 00:29:27,480 --> 00:29:33,360 Speaker 3: is manageable to focusing denial efforts on you know what 409 00:29:33,920 --> 00:29:37,360 Speaker 3: we can manage this. Fossil fuels are part of the solution. 410 00:29:37,440 --> 00:29:40,240 Speaker 3: They've been part of the solution early on all along, 411 00:29:40,760 --> 00:29:46,720 Speaker 3: and that I think is that disproportionate focus of industry efforts, 412 00:29:46,760 --> 00:29:50,880 Speaker 3: and that efforts and funding of countries like the United 413 00:29:50,920 --> 00:29:54,600 Speaker 3: States and Saudi Arabia, I think has a disproportionate impact 414 00:29:55,160 --> 00:29:59,480 Speaker 3: on the science around mitigation as compared to the science 415 00:29:59,720 --> 00:30:03,480 Speaker 3: that speaks to the physical reality of climate change and 416 00:30:03,560 --> 00:30:07,560 Speaker 3: the mounting and incontrovertible evidence of its impacts. 417 00:30:07,920 --> 00:30:12,600 Speaker 4: There are just some really critical and really damning quotes 418 00:30:12,640 --> 00:30:19,240 Speaker 4: in the report about the consequences of continued fossil fuel 419 00:30:19,280 --> 00:30:22,640 Speaker 4: production and use that try as the you know, the 420 00:30:22,680 --> 00:30:25,200 Speaker 4: governments might have to water things down. In the summary, 421 00:30:25,240 --> 00:30:28,240 Speaker 4: policy makers are there in black and white about, you know, 422 00:30:28,760 --> 00:30:32,680 Speaker 4: the way that committed emissions from existing fossil fuel infrastructure 423 00:30:32,680 --> 00:30:35,560 Speaker 4: are going to blow through the remaining carbon budget, implying 424 00:30:35,600 --> 00:30:38,160 Speaker 4: that there's a clear need to you know, phase out 425 00:30:38,240 --> 00:30:41,240 Speaker 4: and shutter existing facilities, let alone you know, halt expansion. 426 00:30:41,320 --> 00:30:43,200 Speaker 4: That is all there, and I think it's really valuable 427 00:30:43,280 --> 00:30:45,800 Speaker 4: to pull that out because though it may not make 428 00:30:45,840 --> 00:30:51,280 Speaker 4: the headlines, it is certainly incontrovertible based on the cumulative science. 429 00:30:51,400 --> 00:30:53,880 Speaker 3: There is one of those factoids that I'd like to 430 00:30:53,960 --> 00:30:58,480 Speaker 3: highlight for you because it's actually, yeah, please, ordinarily important, 431 00:30:59,400 --> 00:31:02,280 Speaker 3: and that is, you know, when we talk about we've talked, 432 00:31:02,840 --> 00:31:05,360 Speaker 3: you know, a lot about ccs, but two of the 433 00:31:05,400 --> 00:31:11,360 Speaker 3: biggest carbon dioxide removal technologies that figure in the Working 434 00:31:11,360 --> 00:31:15,360 Speaker 3: Group three report and indeed in the business models of 435 00:31:15,840 --> 00:31:19,120 Speaker 3: oil and gas companies and in the national action plans 436 00:31:19,480 --> 00:31:23,520 Speaker 3: of the United States and other countries are bio energy 437 00:31:23,520 --> 00:31:27,680 Speaker 3: with carbon capture and storage called BEX and direct air capture, 438 00:31:28,480 --> 00:31:32,080 Speaker 3: which is all the rage lately, the idea that you 439 00:31:32,120 --> 00:31:36,280 Speaker 3: can suck carbon directly out of the ambient air. And 440 00:31:36,600 --> 00:31:44,160 Speaker 3: I mentioned this because there's a extraordinary and growing reliance 441 00:31:44,200 --> 00:31:49,440 Speaker 3: on BES and DAC, particularly in these models. And you 442 00:31:49,520 --> 00:31:53,080 Speaker 3: hear even climate advocates say, well, we're going to need 443 00:31:53,120 --> 00:31:55,920 Speaker 3: that to address the problem. And I think one thing 444 00:31:55,960 --> 00:31:59,640 Speaker 3: that the IPC scene makes really abundantly clear that people 445 00:31:59,680 --> 00:32:03,800 Speaker 3: should understand is that BEX and DAX, even according to 446 00:32:03,840 --> 00:32:09,760 Speaker 3: their advocates, wouldn't make any meaningful contribution to removing CO 447 00:32:09,960 --> 00:32:13,560 Speaker 3: two from the atmosphere until well after twenty fifty. Some 448 00:32:13,600 --> 00:32:18,160 Speaker 3: models say twenty sixty, twenty seventy or beyond. In a 449 00:32:18,200 --> 00:32:20,400 Speaker 3: world where we need to cut emissions in half by 450 00:32:20,440 --> 00:32:24,680 Speaker 3: twenty thirty and eliminate them by twenty fifty, you know, 451 00:32:26,600 --> 00:32:30,080 Speaker 3: strategies that say, oh, we'll start contributing to the solution 452 00:32:30,560 --> 00:32:34,880 Speaker 3: sometime after twenty fifty simply have no significant place. 453 00:32:35,880 --> 00:32:39,040 Speaker 2: I find that so concerning too, just the number of 454 00:32:40,000 --> 00:32:44,000 Speaker 2: climate people that I see kind of being like, well, 455 00:32:44,000 --> 00:32:45,960 Speaker 2: we're going to need this, but it's not being clear 456 00:32:46,000 --> 00:32:51,680 Speaker 2: about how far off and potentially impossible it is. The 457 00:32:51,760 --> 00:32:54,720 Speaker 2: idea of a giant CO two vacuum is like so 458 00:32:54,960 --> 00:33:00,440 Speaker 2: viscerally appealing to people that I think it's it's just 459 00:33:00,520 --> 00:33:01,400 Speaker 2: so dangerous. 460 00:33:01,520 --> 00:33:05,520 Speaker 4: Well, and I think there's been a real misperception and 461 00:33:05,560 --> 00:33:10,640 Speaker 4: misreading of the messages on CDR carbon dioxide removal, and 462 00:33:10,800 --> 00:33:14,120 Speaker 4: the two most prominent forms of which discuss our backs 463 00:33:14,120 --> 00:33:19,320 Speaker 4: and DAC. In that short many scientific studies will show 464 00:33:19,480 --> 00:33:23,000 Speaker 4: that we may need some amount of CDR at some 465 00:33:24,120 --> 00:33:30,280 Speaker 4: time in the future to address residual emissions. That statement 466 00:33:31,000 --> 00:33:35,400 Speaker 4: is not the same as saying CDR is a central 467 00:33:35,640 --> 00:33:39,040 Speaker 4: part of combating the climate crisis and we need to 468 00:33:39,120 --> 00:33:42,560 Speaker 4: invest in it now. Those things are quite different, and 469 00:33:42,840 --> 00:33:46,680 Speaker 4: the latter has been portrayed as a key takeaway of 470 00:33:46,720 --> 00:33:49,480 Speaker 4: this latest report, when that's far from the truth. If 471 00:33:49,560 --> 00:33:52,000 Speaker 4: you look at what as Carol was just saying, if 472 00:33:52,000 --> 00:33:56,840 Speaker 4: you look at the underlying science and the observations about 473 00:33:56,880 --> 00:34:01,640 Speaker 4: the tremendous uncertainties about whether these technologies will even work 474 00:34:02,040 --> 00:34:04,400 Speaker 4: if and when they are deployable because they are not 475 00:34:04,520 --> 00:34:09,600 Speaker 4: demonstrated at scale, and the tremendous social, environmental economic risks 476 00:34:09,640 --> 00:34:12,960 Speaker 4: they pose because of the massive inputs of land, energy, 477 00:34:13,000 --> 00:34:16,440 Speaker 4: and water that they require. When you look at those 478 00:34:16,760 --> 00:34:22,680 Speaker 4: facts in combination with the urgent need to reduce emissions 479 00:34:22,920 --> 00:34:26,959 Speaker 4: now in the immediate future, and the fact that any 480 00:34:27,000 --> 00:34:31,759 Speaker 4: emissions that we continue to release have a cumulative impact, 481 00:34:32,520 --> 00:34:36,640 Speaker 4: the takeaway is clear that we need to focus efforts, 482 00:34:36,840 --> 00:34:41,759 Speaker 4: energy and investment on the available, deployable, proven strategies they 483 00:34:41,760 --> 00:34:48,600 Speaker 4: can do that near term dramatic reduction today, and that CDR, 484 00:34:49,520 --> 00:34:55,960 Speaker 4: BEX and DAC are really dangerous distractions and speculative possibilities 485 00:34:56,520 --> 00:35:01,880 Speaker 4: in the future are not a response to an ever 486 00:35:02,560 --> 00:35:08,960 Speaker 4: more urgent and oppressive present where climate change is literally 487 00:35:09,600 --> 00:35:11,360 Speaker 4: taking lives as we speak. 488 00:35:25,719 --> 00:35:27,919 Speaker 1: That's it for this time. Thanks for listening, and we'll 489 00:35:27,920 --> 00:35:42,239 Speaker 1: see you next week.