100 solutions to reverse global warming | Chad Frischmann

[@thejesuschrist]

Ok, let's get on this mortals!

[@lllool8404]

You're omnipresent in comment section man

[@HayderAbdulridha]

Jesus Christ, could you please get Trump impeached.

[@lilme453]

Ma savioooorrr

[@jesusinskyrim3770]

@Twenty one Vultures Well, without global warming there will be no rapture...

[@mr.spartan6313]

Ok I see you everywhere dude

[@jamiehay1027]

*Do you believe in climate change?*
Like - Yes
Reply - No

[@HayderAbdulridha]

10,000 Subscribers With No Videos Challenge, Is that Mr.Bean?

[@hardtruthhall7777]

Not man made. The climate is all ways changing no matter what. But there are bigger forces at work. And it ain't fake jesus or fake god.

[@jackedwards7322]

Yes

[@stuartpound4782]

10,000 Subscribers. It wouldn’t be a climate if it didn’t change.

[@danyburlacu825]

I think you have to restate that question, because that's obvious

[@MattRoszak]

Let's all try not to buy stuff we don't need.
Good for the planet, but also good for our personal finances!

[@DSAK55]

buying stuff we don't need is the Basis of Capitalism

[@robertvandeneijk1284]

Buying stuff we don't need is the basis for unhappiness. You become a slave to your possessions.

[@jlg5622]

*buys bubble wrap just to pop
*ok*

[@timduncan8450]

@Matt Roszak “need” is a big word. Frugality is always solid advice but “to each his own” trumps it!!

[@ADerpyReality]

It would've been nice if I had gotten to make solar panels in high-school tech class when I was in high-school. On the plus side lots of schools now run on solar.

[@Triastase]

He did such a good job at showing that it's not climate action OR an economy that benefits most people, but that action on the climate crisis WILL benefit most people. Changing our way of living to reduce climate change will not make our lives worse, but better! Thank you for this talk!

[@arifulislamleeton]

Thank you

[@ktozkan]

One of the best presentations I have ever listened. Not only governments but only ordinary people should take into consideration what have been explained in this video! We all need to take action! I am gonna share it on twitter and send it my friends!

[@garrettellisryan]

Me too!

[@phantomsoil]

I think this is the best way to confront this subject. Empowering people to take action instead of trying to scare them into action. It's nice to see so many solutions. I will continue to help in the implementation of them.

[@AliciaOnlineGameplay]

The problem is no corporate will ever do something about this, since they don't care about sustainability and renewability, they care about rapid exponential growth and about grabbing as much cash as they can as fast as they can with no thought on consequences. The flaw in today's world is that everything needs to grow, expand and make more money than the year before, no businesses are happy until they have grown to own all the money in the entire world. We need to change the entire system.

[@evannibbe9375]

Minnah & Alex The only solution that anyone should expect to happen is putting a 2,000 km diameter mirror at L1, the point of gravitational stability between the Earth and the sun that continues to remain directly between the Earth and the sun arbitrarily far into the future.
This can be done by any country that feels directly threatened by global warming because it only involves building a 1 km tall rail gun into a mountain next to a power plant to keep shooting high mirror (payload) to fuel ratio rockets that are just there to use the vast initial velocity from the rail gun and a few course corrections to get to L1, which while that looks hard, is extremely easy relative to getting everyone on Earth to act against their own self-interest by reducing CO2 emissions or continuously going through the extremely energy intensive process of getting the final product of a chemical reaction (CO2) back into fuel.
Also, the extremely energy intensive process he described in the video is required by the rules of chemistry to require at least 5,000 times more energy than putting this mirror in place. This energy his plan would require has a real cost, and even if you are using solar panels to get this energy, those solar panels will increase Earth’s albedo value, the amount of sunlight the Earth absorbs, which inherently increases the temperature of Earth.
Building windmills to get this energy necessarily involves pouring vast quantities of concrete and reducing iron and aluminum from their natural oxides, which itself takes energy.
The energy that would be required for his plan could far more efficiently solve the problem faced directly by humanity of global warming with 99.98% left over to help humans with their personal lives if used to build a 2000 km diameter mirror at L1.
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by itself is actually beneficial to humans by allowing crops to grow better, and so humans should and will continue to release more CO2 than is taken back. This is because by reducing the amount of sunlight reaching Earth in the first place with a mirror, we can keep the global economy going and keep the ice caps, the only things for which we were thinking about taking drastic measures to protect.
The slightly different weather we would end up getting can be solved in the future with better climate models and using that same rail gun to place more mirrors in space wherever necessary to avoid the worst storms.

[@categorille8330]

EXACTLY. this green growth bullcrap is not viable. We need to learn to be part of nature as a positive force, not as living outside of it more and more. Growth, would it be "green(-washing)", won't help on the long-term

[@rea8585]

This is way more concrete and efficient than the usual "lower the hear" and "air dry your laundry". This guy shows there are real solutions and we could even make a profit out of it!
The governments who don't try to make this happen are as guilty as you can be...

[@Lildizzle420]

those everyday solutions make a huge impact though because of compounding

[@JlutherDoD]

All about that profit Al Gore...$$$

[@piperpipe201]

Id imagine its not as simple when you look at the global economy as a whole. He assumes the economy will stay stable until 2050. WRONG. The economy is built to rise and crash.
This is an era all its own. To believe it will be a stable utopia is a mistake. 30 years is a long time and theres no telling what kind of violence or dystopian fortune is ahead. Im not sure if we can make it to the hundred year mark without another world war.

[@Lildizzle420]

@@waynealan3067 its not the planet that needs saving genius its us from our own pollution. close the garage door with your SUV and see how it feels

[@Lildizzle420]

@@waynealan3067 al gore has the money to buy air filtration and clean water, he can fly his private jet to any climate in the world and how does it make sense to do more of what china is doing? they poison us so you want to poision yourself? ok

[@Lavenderainn159]

They literally just gave us the solution we need to do stuff with this. Show it everywhere, market it, teach it in schools, something. I never thought I'd say this but it seems so easy to just start.

[@chrisrosch4731]

in our world solutions need to be economically viable to be acted upon.

[@noodleheadclub8846]

This video still holds up, however, another problem is how willingly nations are willing to work together in combating these issues. Vote peoples!

[@carlogaytan7010]

We have to use Ballot and Wallet to show what we support! Lets do it!

[@Bfould3120]

These are the solutions and we all collectively benefit from doing them. The missing part of the plan is the individual. For example, the reason modern agriculture is a net emitter is because it is profitable. If a farmer changes their method of framing to be a carbon sink but is at a competitive disadvantage they will not stay in business. We need make it cost more to pollute, then these ideas will be more widely adopted. A revenue neutral GHG fee that increases he cost of GHG intense products or services, then returns all fees collected to everyone as a averaged rebate is needed. This will give the needed financial signals for change without taxing the consumer.

[@Lildizzle420]

I know people like the idea of protecting farmers but its a dying industry and drones are taking over, people need to start organic farming and composting in their yards it needs to be standard practice to at least produce a portion of your daily greens and herbs its much more beneficial on a wide scale to convert our yards and farming will sustain population growth or will become protected land.

[@dancenow1337]

Agreed. Down with animal agriculture. Unsustainable nonsense! We can all do our thing by purchasing products that are sustainable and boycotting those destroying the planet. The documentary "Cowspiracy" is a good starting point if this interest any of you. We are all voting 3 times a day with our fork.
"Extinction Rebellion" is also a great group trying to create structural changes to save the planet. Check them out!

[@elinope4745]

That would be very difficult to implement given the corrupt government systems of the world. Any rebate to the consumers would likely be stolen by some government institution then spent on a private company as per the usual cronyism.

[@Bfould3120]

​@@elinope4745 Thanks for replying to the idea rather than my example. The distrust of our elected representation is why progress is not being made on this and many other issues. The establishment of trust is the solution we should all be working towards. Unfortunately, more and more in the modern world we are selling peoples attention. The idea of increasing the cost to do things that harm people as a group but not the individual then returning the funds collected equally to all the individuals within the group is a good catalyst for positive change. This requires trust and trust takes time to establish. With so many in politics, the media and corporations after peoples attention, trust is elusive.

[@DSAK55]

The missing part of the plan is Capitalism.

[@JonNobleNobelOne]

I came up with the blueprint on how to fight climate change nearly 2 decades ago. This was futile. Nobody listened. My blueprint involved reforestation of deserts using large pipelines of water from the ocean pumped through the desert. As the water passed through the pipes it would be heated from the desert sun and using solar power and the resulting water vapor would then be used as freshwater to create rainforests. Theoretically, you cold turn the Sahara desert to a massive Co2 sucking rainforest, the biggest Forrest on earth using this method. This method would also solve the rising sea water problems of the next 300 years. Micro climates would be created worldwide, which would, in turn, cool the lands and eventually cool the seas. There are zero known planets in the entire universe similar to earth, or even contain life. So why are we searching for another planet when we should be focusing on saving our own? Trust me, Mars is a shithole.

[@Angelinay-vw6dw]

It sounds like a phenomenal idea. Do you believe that you could share a link of sorts to your blueprint? As we get closer and closer to the inevitability of a climate cataclysm- grimly, those well educated cognize that we have passed a tipping-point in which if we have any hope of avoiding all known planetary life diminishing, we’re going to have to act much further that just reducing. It would be nice if I could study this plan; it sounds plausible and interesting, and could fundamentally mean hope.

[@MetallicAddict15]

Hi Jon. Like Angelina said, your idea sounds very promising. Would you consider sharing your blueprint in an open-source way, so that other brilliant minds can develop it further?

[@MrCarolienSerno]

Hello, would you consider mailing me, i've got an idea about a website. [e-mail]

[@user-mj5ss3vw4g]

The deserts are actually really important for Oceanic life. Plankton needs iron to grow and the only thing that provides it in the middle of the ocean is dust from deserts.

[@y37chung]

lol..

[@connieliew]

This is why #Ecosia is my favourite search engine.

[@Aang_L._Jackson]

I saw your hashtag and downloaded right away

[@Ben-kv6er]

everybody should share this on social media, and everywhere else

[@kiki5279]

Ok this makes so much sense that all the problems are connected and can be solved by looking at the big issue. The solution to global warming is the solution to global food security, and the solution to equal rights among minorities. We have to listen to people like this, these ideas are so important for everyone to know. This is how we overcome our issues.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex

[@rafinha7081]

Exactly.

[@s.j.villalobos9220]

Family planning, please hear this man!

[@KarlSnarks]

I think he overestimated family planning (though still useful). Countries that emit the most, already have really low birth-rates. Countries with the highest birth-rates emit very little (the bottom 50% of the world, emit less than 10% of greenhouse gasses iirc). When countries get wealthier birth rates tend to decline by themselves. So while it might help, the impact wouldn't be much. We should still advocate for family planning and education of girls though, because it's about human rights.
Overpopulation is not the problem at this point in time, over-consumption in wealthy countries is. We could cut emissions much more by consuming less and consuming more sustainably. Policies like right-to-repair laws, taxing large emitters, wealth redistribution, better recycling methods, restrains on advertising, transition to more durable products and packaging etc. could help with that.

[@s.j.villalobos9220]

@@KarlSnarks in 1994, as declaration of the Cairo conference, the attending countries established 6,5 billion people as the limit for a sustainable world, we are dangerously close to 8 billion

[@jean-pierredevent970]

I always think about cars, planes, cement and concrete production as an important but hard to solve problem and yet it's not in the top 20

[@vedgupta1686]

They ARE leading emitters, don't know why it's not on the list here... Maybe because it's a list of "implementable solutions" rather than "biggest polluters"

[@carlogaytan7010]

I actually agree, cars alone are disasterous. Yet, they did put highspeed rail powered by electricity as something that reduces emissions. Something like highspeed rail, having to do all the policy to encourage less car use is certainly more expensive than the top solutions and probably takes longer. I would say that these solutions are top priority, while all the infrastructure naturally and in the background has to keep up, but it will not go as fast as these top solutions.

[@doritoification]

Interesting point about refrigerants, that seems like something we could actually do without causing a political mess just in the background without anyone giving it too much thought. Why is nuclear number 20 when wind is number 2? Nuclear is far more scalable and completely carbon free

[@snowcold5932]

Just because of the nuclear waste we don't know what to do with

[@doritoification]

@@snowcold5932 nuclear waste has absolutely no impact on climate change and it's only the politicians who don't know what to do with it... our scientists actually do know what to do with it and that's exactly what they do... dry cask storage on site where it doesn't hurt anybody... for comparison, air pollution kills 7 million a year. Merry Christmas:)

[@doritoification]

@@mrkackwurst Yeah people just can't get over the small issue of the waste storage despite the fact we have this enormous issue called climate change which we're gonna struggle to mitigate at all without nuclear power

[@TheInsaiyan]

they under implemented nuclear in their calculations.
People dont like nuclear, thats all.
Nuclear and moslty 4th generation Plants could save us waaaay over 100 Gtons till 2050 of carbon emissions.
They are just bit docile about the idea bc of backlash.

[@kevinjohnbetts]

@@doritoification The biggest problem with nuclear power is the time it takes to build a plant. The lead time for a new one is a decade at a bare minimum and that can stretch to two. Add in the fact that many of the plants in current service need to be decommissioned and you can see why the nuclear industry does not expect to be supplying more than 12% of global electricity needs by 2050. We need workable solutions before 2050. The time to start building nuclear power stations which would solve the problem was during the 1990s but nuclear power was much more expensive to generate so governments were reluctant to sink money into vast fleets of expensive power stations that were not going to be competitive. In hindsight this appears foolish but given the electoral cycle, the unpopularity of nuclear power and basic economics it made perfect sense at the time.

[@zedshan1]

I'm from Pakistan n the 2 solutions i.e women education/ family planning & food waste are actually applicable if we try even once.... Thanks

[@domsau2]

Plant trees!

[@mariona.5261]

totally- and go plant-based

[@flytrapYTP]

That's the kind of thing uninformed people say. Planting trees will not solve the problem. Yeah, it might help a tiny bit, but it's not the solution.

[@arkinyte13]

That’s not enough to stop climate devastation.

[@lukascampaert8532]

It'll not reverse climate change

[@abbybeginyazova7812]

Trees sequester carbon and in turn mitigate the effects of climate change, the video touched upon this in terms of forest conservation. It may not be enough to completely reverse global warming but it has a HUGE impact and helps a lot!
Switch your search engine from google to ecosia! They plant trees for every coupe of searches and don’t track you like other search engines! ♥️

[@neiloakey5183]

Has to be the best ted talk ever.. wow.. let's do it..

[@elisabethsun7059]

Agreed

[@elisabethsun7059]

I’m already on it by rooting as many plant cuttings as I can

[@artfx9]

The unsung heros of the 21st century - The Amish

[@Kewbix]

When he said we should limit and cut down on the population, i was like nope

[@randomguy22777]

for people complaining about overpopulation, there you go. family planning and educating girls. now do your thing.

[@GeaVox]

Not that simple.
1) CONSUMPTION; Wealthy nations consume several HUNDRED times more than poorest ones, meaning that 1 American consumes over 100 times what someone from Burkina faso uses in a year.
2) TYPES of consumption - heavy on meat, dairy, manufactured luxury and consumer goods, with high demand for electricity generated from Fossil Fuels; or mineral water abstracted by the likes of Nestlé and Coca Cola, robbing whole Countries of fossil water, the ONLY reserves in times of drought
3) METHODS or production, e.g. applying Hydrocarbon-derived NPK fertilisers tha get washed out into waterways, causing eutrophication (and consequent putrefaction that emits huge amounts of CH4, hs2, NO2 and CO2)
I could go on, but I doubt most Climate Change Deniers here are willing to open their closed minds.
The problem is not just ignorance, but the stubborn REFUSAL of some to accept science because they don't like what it is telling us...

[@modelt179]

The solution to stopping climate change should not be killing people

[@DebjeetDasjeet]

This talk is gold mine, very beautifully articulated

[@shreygarg3846]

I don’t understand why countries are spending billions to know the ways by which we can colonise moon or mars.
Instead, they should spend on saving the earth instead.

[@manelumi3985]

Because they are planning on taking the richest people on earth to move there and let all of us behind dying in agony !

[@frozenunicorn2381]

I disagree. Spending money on science and technology and preparing to leave earth one day is perfectly fine with me. The earth will one day not be habitable I hope it's not because of us humans and global warming but just one big meteor, the outburst of one of the supervulcanos or the switch of the earth's magnetic field will possibly extinct human kind. So spending money and time on (space) science is not the problem. Imagine the billions spend on the military now that's a problem in my opinion.

[@OlCrunch]

No one is really spending money on space, and even if we were, I would be all for it, Don’t take money away from space and science, take money away from pointless nuclear weapons and endless wars! Colonising Mars, alongside global warming, should be at the top of humanity’s priority list.

[@Punky260]

This is one of the most underrated messages ever!

[@abhimanyugaur2865]

I reckon this talk concluded the ongoing global warming issues along with the potential parameters. The figures are impressive, great job Mr. Chad and thanks to TED.

[@ThyBookie]

I have the book Drawdown and it’s been a wonderful learning tool for me! The 20 Coming Attractions are especially interesting

[@GrumpySouthbayBRAT]

20 coming attractions? Care to elaborate just a little?

[@RobertHildebrandt]

@@GrumpySouthbayBRAT Solutions, which are not possible right now, but might become in near future. Like capturing carbon directly from the air.

[@KarlSnarks]

@@RobertHildebrandt "I capture carbon from the air all the time, but sadly I keep releasing more of it than I took in"-Sad Humans

[@schalazeal07]

Accdg. to this guy,
"Regenerative agriculture, a plant-rich diet and reduced food waste can produce enough food on current farmland to feed a growing population a healthy rich diet now until 2050 and beyond. That means we don't need to cut down forests for food production. The solutions to reversing global warming are the same solutions to food insecurity." It's a win win win win win.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex....

[@timann0567]

I know it's a long time ago, but this video need some more attention, because it is not a protest, it's peacfull solution presentation that shows solution that have a relative small impact on the suciety, compared to some other says "simple" solution, eks vagain, this is a change for the individual, not for politics that is relative far from the indevidual. Love you man ❤️

[@zazenora7225]

This man raises some great points, however we're faced with a big problem that's preventing these holistic solutions.
Corporate greed, a fundamentally historic barrier that is keeping ideas like this from gaining ground.
Our society has been raised on a monetary system where the success of a few comes at the cost of many.
I could repeat many points that have already been discussed about this problem, but until more people see the benefits of replacing the
monetary system with something that will truly benefit everyone and put us all on equal ground, these solutions will just remain dreams...
It's hard to motivate change on this scale on all levels of society, not just at the top. People struggling to get by are entranced by money, and believe it to be the only way to have a better quality of life. You can't blame people for feeling this way, but the effort needed to make this monumental shift will require more effort on educating entire populations on ways to replace the monetary system with something that will be fair to everyone.
Now, I'm not here to debate the ifs and abouts of this problem, I'm only presenting the biggest barrier that I feel is keeping our society from moving forward with these critical solutions. I don't know what the solutions would look like, but if we're ever going to gain any ground on solving these big issues, it has to start with serious discussions on all levels of human society and push for the willingness to change how people are able to grow and succeed in life.
There has to be an alternative to using money as the driving force of innovation and success. Money has definitely served our civilization greatly as a means to motivate people to to both good and bad things, but we're now at a point where we could replace the way we do a lot of things with technology.
If we could at least figure out a way to provide a "safety net" to everyone, meaning that every single person has the right to basic human needs no matter what, it would enable us to better implement these kinds of solutions.
I know I sound like a netflix documentary lol, but if we're ever to reach the next step in civilization we have to do more than make documentaries and TED talks about these issues and start finding ways to discuss these solutions (and barriers of) in broader contexts where more people will take them seriously.
I just hope this can actually happen before it's too late.

[@brantsears1]

Not one mention of nuclear power which is the technology that can do the most heavy lifting on this problem right away. Not only is nuclear already our largest source of green electricity - providing 20% of American electricity, it’s the most environmentally sustainable and safest method we have for electricity generation. The largest sources for greenhouse gases are coal natural gas and petroleum in that order. Nuclear is the only real alternative to coal that we can use in the time we have left to innovate our way out of the problem.
If you think that nuclear is unsafe, think again. Nuclear has a 50+ year track record of safety that beats even solar and wind energy.

[@sachamm]

I largely agree that we *should* have put in a lot more nuclear power -- it should have been put in a few decades ago, when the cost of wind, solar and storage tech was orders of magnitude higher than it is now. Today, solar is literally the cheapest power you can buy in large portions of the world. We've already reached peak demand on coal (2013), largely driven by the falling cost in solar and wind, and they are still getting cheaper as economies of scale ramp up. Nuclear may yet play a role, but the window where grid-scale nuclear power is needed is rapidly vanishing.

[@GeaVox]

AmmarraKKKa... teh Country that has had THE most Nuclear accidents, preaching to the world that Nuclear is safe... Well, neWSFLaSH: the cost of ONE nuclear plant will allow hundreds of thousands of solar panels to be built, installed and either grid-connected of fed into close-circuit hydro storage and backup generation, not even necessary to add batteries...
Then there is wind generation that is now supplying much of Scandinavia, the uk and Hollad, and beginning to make a difference in other regions too...

[@GeaVox]

"If you think that nuclear is unsafe, think again. Nuclear has a 50+ year track record of safety that beats even solar and wind energy."
WHAAAAAAAAT??? You are working for the nuclear industry, clearly!
PLLLLLLLLEEEEEAAAAASE! READ before making such idiotic comments!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents

[@farfetchedfarade3197]

While complete Nuclear Power is a nice idea in theory, renewable energy resources are better. Nuclear power is extremely expensive compared to solar energy.

[@TheInsaiyan]

nuclear isnt just for lowering CO2 emissions. Nuclear is also preferable of future energy needs.
People talk about using renewables like we wont increase energy needs in the futures.
Thats unrealistic.
WE NEED NUCLEAR

[@Lildizzle420]

I love how its all about personal responsibility and what we are expected to do as a global community

[@GeaVox]

Who do you think is making the choices that create the conditions for Climate Change? WE! CONSUMERS!

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex...

[@yole7390]

Great Talk! We should take advantage of the beauty coincidence: the same thing which avoid the climatic disaster is the same which improve our lives.

[@clmhellraiser]

Incredbily frustrating that this has so few views

[@ChessMasteryOfficial]

*Life is the art of drawing without an eraser...*

[@thorodinson5062]

Awesome

[@Schoko4craft]

what if you draw with acid?

[@MrWildBrew]

Life is what happens to you when you're making other plans.

[@sarcasticbutsincere6661]

So a marker?

[@dominicgalante6669]

D E E P

[@Nonsanity]

The problem is that much of that 80 trillion global GDP is coming from the operation and expansion of the systems that would need to be replaced. The money needed to make these changes (and grow the economy at the same time) therefore can’t simply be shifted from the old systems to the new. There are some exceptions, like the car industry moving from fossil fuels to electric, but that’s just a change to the method of manufacturing cars. Complete replacements of one industry with another-coal to solar, for example-result in inherent competition that impedes progress. I don’t have any answers, I just wanted to point out that problem.

[@gsp_admirador]

Yes agreed. No change can be brought out in a night, the transition from depletion to sustainability to regeneration is a slow process.

[@evannibbe9375]

This is why the only real solution to global warming is to put a mirror 2000 km across at L1, the point of gravitational stability between the Earth and the sun, as this can be accomplished by several countries that could otherwise be destroyed by melting ice caps together funding a 1 km tall rail gun built into a mountain next to a power plant to shoot rockets that are mostly mirror in an easily correctable trajectory to L1.
No one has to work against their self interest, no costly regulations need to be put in place and the economy moves forward as always.

[@PatandSylus]

Nonsanity crazy to see you in a non minecraft video

[@guitarhand3205]

That's simply not true. Industry replaces one methodology with new ones all the time, changing the players, creating new industries and sometimes shutting down old ones .. all the while the economy chugs along. People used to get all their videos from Blockbuster ... now, not so much. Shell will likely be one of the leading global energy providers 40 years from now .. it just won't be based on oil. It is true that it is a slow process .. but fortunately, we aren't starting today. People have been working on the transitions discussed in this video for decades in many cases.

[@garrettellisryan]

This needs to be shared! I wish there was a way I could help rather than just liking and subscribing! Is there?

[@lilyinnetherlands2987]

I love his calm and firming pace of speech. His attitude makes what he said even more pursuasing.

[@StayRed]

The solutions also need to be economically assessed not just in costs but where companies and corporations lose profit and what marketing they'll deploy to prevent change to non profitable but sustainable society

[@guillaumeclosset6407]

Excellent discourse! Creating such a doable, pragmatic and hopeful view of the future is so important at the present moment. A real eye-opener that should serve as an inspiration to all decision-makers! Thank you

[@vsilligirlbestie3973]

But main question....
Will people do those ?

[@tathagataroy9859]

@Mike C of course it will happen in future because when people understand vegetables and fruits and trees and forest actually save their lives and children they must be do it in a natural way..... It's just a time to feel deeply

[@tathagataroy9859]

@Mike C if we believe we can save humanity and ourselves future

[@gemz_stone]

will you?

[@bipinpataskar7273]

Don't think about others, start by yourselves and encourage others to do the same.

[@Ou8y2k2]

Education for women and girls is spreading, along with family planning. Refrigeration methods will eventually shift because of cost. Various forms of agriculture will get more technical and competitive to reduce cost. Renewable energy is now one of the least expensive forms of energy. The changes are already happening. The question is: are they happening fast enough?

[@kittenclawsguitarvideos6147]

I learned a lot watching this, I feel some hope

[@Sylocat]

I don't want to get my hopes up, but I also don't see how my NOT getting my hopes up is going to affect anything either, so...

[@KarlSnarks]

Keep your hopes medium??

[@maxpalombella11]

This man needs a WAY bigger platform on which to speak!

[@jmkbartsch]

The Sad thing is: This would absolutely not solve global warming. Yes, it would stop new emissions, but there is not a single of these eighty measures, that would help bringing the carbon back into the ground where it once laid as fossil fuel and thereby not reversing ("drawdown") the already risen temperatures. It's important to get this started, but we should keep in mind that even if all these measures would be implemented to their full and likely utopian extend, then it would still just halt the rise in temperature and not reverse what damage is already done. Good video thought.

[@duschinger]

Depends on reforestation efforts, since they at least temporarily bind CO2, but you're right. We can only do what is possible now and hope for refined future technologies for the rest, and not just keep going and rely 100% on the future of science.

[@jmkbartsch]

@@duschinger I have no exact numbers but given how many billions of barrels of oil we combusted in the last century I believe that the worlds forests could hardly even absorb ten percent of manmade CO² in the air. Better than nothing I guess, but far from what we would need.

[@jmell2562]

Forests and woods

[@DoubleStudentLoans]

jmkbartsch still far better than any other presented alternative.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex...

[@giordanobruno9106]

A crucial oversight in these talks is how growth overshadows the gains in resource preservation from efficiency improvements and reduced consumption. This situation now is so desperate that it requires emergency shutdowns in all nonessential industries with matching consumption quotas.

[@dr.zoidberg8666]

Growth is accounted for -- he talks about it in the talk. Experts who spend years crunching the numbers on this aren't gonna miss something that a RUclips comes up with in a few minutes.

[@giordanobruno9106]

@@dr.zoidberg8666 No it isn't. The only time growth is even brought up is when he talks about feeding the growing population. I'm talking about growth -- in all forms of consumption -- outstripping conservation gains.

[@antonikudlicki1100]

Ekofascists: We have to change the world by force so people won't be consumed by flames!
Medieval catholics: I like the way you're thinking

[@gohdux]

After watching this I turned of my baseboard heater.

[@jhonkramer9119]

I have this kinda plan.....
What if we build something like a floating base in ocean and we let small trees grow there,
Instead in land so that we can use the space for building structures that have vertical farms inside instead of using hectares of space for farming, so we can also use the land space for building houses with solar panel so we can help those poor people who lives in streets etc.
All at the same time.....

[@Zahlenteufel1]

Really good talk, I liked the part about the connectedness of it all best. Just shows it's not unachievable but rather self-propelling and as you said so nicely, "a win win win, win win situation" :)

[@HanumantMittal]

This all sounds fascinating.
Can I see the research behind all this? How do we know the statistics are all that reliable and practical?

[@m.aruchi]

I believe there´s a book called Drawdown where everything is explained with more detail: www.amazon.com/Drawdown-Comprehensive-Proposed-Reverse-Warming/dp/0143130447/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=drawdown&qid=1593036597&sr=8-1

[@gamebugz-blockstrike842]

Imagine if every country did every thing in this video

[@snowcold5932]

Please read this for a summary
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased more since 1800 to today than during the 10 000 years before 1800.
I don't know if you realise how bad this is. What the gas does is prevent solar rays from escaping the atmosphere. This is great when the planet is cold, as it warms it up. Mars has no atmosphere to keep solar heat trapped, and as a result it's extremely cold. On the other hand, Venus' atmosphere is more than 90% CO2, and the average temperatures there exceed 400°C (673°K). Earth's atmosphere doesn't even have 1% CO2, but the huge increase in the tiny percentage means the average temperature already went up by 1°C compared to before the industrial revolution.
This seems like nothing, but it has a huge impact on us and the environnement. Many animals suffer; the gender of reptiles depends on what temperature it was while they were in the egg, and they are becoming more and more female (which means they can't reproduce), polar bears are losing the ice they hunt on and being driven to extinction.
The melting of ice due to the "small" temperature increase is also a huge problem. There's this thing called albedo that measures how much something reflects sunlight, and snow and ice have a high albedo (which means they reflect almost all the light they receive, which is why they are cold even in the sunlight while a black highway will be scorching hot). If a little ice melts, there's less sunlight being reflected and more being absorbed by the sea, which has a much smaller albedo. And that spirals into an uncontrolable chain reaction of melting, that will cause sea levels to rise hugely, massive floods and more tidal waves, as well as increasing global warming even more because of the lack of polar caps to reflect sunlight.
If you live in a cold area, you might not care about temperature going up a bit. But the thing is, more water means the sea currents change. For instance, the gulf stream could be reversed, and New York could become as hot as southern Spain, while Florida would turn into a new Sahara. More water and higher temperatures also means more humidity, and that causes hurricanes in places that were previously untouched. You saw how in 2017 and 2018 the carribean was hit by 5 total hurricanes, when there wasn't even 5 total in the years 2000 to 2010. Earthquakes and volcanoes are not linked to climate change, but the higher sea levels mean earthquakes causing tsunamis will be much more destructive.
Then there's the whole theme of pollution. Water becomes undrinkable, soils become sterile, turtles die by suffocation by eating plastic bags that look like jellyfish, toxic metals from electronic parts are being dumped in land and sea, trees are being cut down worldwide (which prevents them from absorbing some of the CO2).
And if you have a doubt on where the CO2 is coming from, let me tell you a "fun" fact. A book I read when I was little mentioned that, if you put all the cars in the world in a line, you could go around the equator 30 times. This book was from 2004. Now imagine how many cars there are now being used in the world.
Then there's also methane (CH4) which is being mass produced by the huge farming industry. Cows have bacteria in their gut which digest the cellulose of grass and produce methane. This gas has the same trapping effect as CO2 and is also hugely responsible for climate change.
What can you do to try and prevent this from happening? Here are a few solutions:
-Walk or use a bicycle/public transport rather than a car
-Eat less beef and instead eat more plants (that aren't farmed with pesticides, because those destroy the soil). GMO's are perfectly fine, the only problem with them is Monsanto, the main company in charge, making it so the seeds they sell don't give new seeds and forcing farmers into buying their products. There is no ecological or biological reason to avoid GMO's, only a social one.
-Alternatively, eat chicken or even insect meat instead of beef and pork, as they produce far less greenhouse gases.
-Save as much electricity as you can by remembering to turn off lights, not leaving chargers plugged in all night, etc. Most electricity isn't produced with renewable energies sadly, so best to not abuse it.
-Pick up the trash you see in parks or forests, since damaging nature means damaging the only way to get rid of greenhouse gases (like CO2 or CH4) we have.
There's much more you could do, like using Ecosia, a browser that plants trees when it's used, buying products like Nutella that do not get their ingredients from deforestation, etc.
Climate change is not "natural". We humans are the cause of it, and we have to fix this mess. The Earth will survive even if global temperature skyrockets and disasters strike everywhere; we humans will not.

[@MrWildBrew]

Volcanos produce far more co2 in a year than we do in a hundred.

[@snowcold5932]

@@MrWildBrew That's completely false. Might've been true in 4000 BC, but certainly not in the past 200 years

[@MrWildBrew]

@@snowcold5932 Please research this subject yourself if you are so confident in hearsay. Experts that are used to push this corrupted science are paid by governments that have an agenda. Don't let them into your thoughts unless you are capable of critical thinking. Wake up to the theater acts they have pulled on us from the very beginning of civilization. Free yourself from being a thoughtless worker drone.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex...

[@hunterhunter106]

I think this is a great way of looking at it. Focus on the biggest parts first. Also, it would be great if cost was taken into account. Cost matters. Especially in these poorer countries. It's silly to think that it's feasible to work towards giving solar panels to people in straw huts.

[@starrynight_._]

This was such a good video. One of the best presentations I’ve ever seen.

[@tathagataroy9859]

We have to balance our food habit.. less meat and lot of green vegetables and fruits is good replace ment

[@4everfatjoe]

No, it's not.

[@tyalikanky]

Ruminants are able to convert some cellulose to human-useful food. So why not use this source?

[@HS-en4fd]

4everfatjoe I’m not a vegan nor a vegetarian but it is a handy solution half of the crop we grow around the world goes towards feeding livestock
On a 1.6 acre property you can grow 33 thousand pounds worth of fruit and vegetables each year when it takes 9 acres to produce 600 pounds of meat.

[@urichock8873]

oh the fucking vegans bandwaggoning on climate change
bet you still drive to the wholefoods in your Range Rover V6 though

[@dzitiatri]

@@HS-en4fd lets just forget dream world with chemicals and sprayments, you can get about 15 pound of wheat from 1.6 acre. And if you want to go eco friendly wheat you will get , just 1/3 of the size as it grows much slower. Agriculture and farmers would love to make eco friendly food, as this is more safe for them too. But as always big companies like bayer enjoy their money and are happy with their life i guess. Farmers just follow technology and test it.

[@sojournern]

A good video, thanks! I particularly like the point about food being so important, most people miss that. Of course, educating girls is about so many things and so important!

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex maybe....!?

[@TheEmbrio]

This talk needs to be no1 and pinnedon the TED channel

[@syoo-]

People needs to see this 🌳

[@samlair3342]

Bravo! Common sense doable approaches to not only saving the world but, also, making it a better one.

[@samlair3342]

Emphasis on mitigation is most important. Also, helping “skeptics” to understand the science of how the ‘greenhouse effect’ is about the blanketing effect of carbon dioxide on infrared radiation. This necessitates an expansion of our approach to adult education. One way is high quality videos with lab demonstrations showing the reality of CO2 having a blanketing effect on infrared radiation.

[@WadcaWymiaru]

@@samlair3342
GHG theory is proven wrong, i can show you,

[@karthikckrishna]

This is just not another speech on climate ..this is consolidated concrete approach .. To create this u need mind heart that thinks about Mother Earth… great great work guys

[@DanA-nl5uo]

So the cost is roughly equal to the USA military budget. I can we allow voters to choose which one we fund? I would rather fund drawdown then military build up.

[@hardtruthhall7777]

Why for something that is fake . and was made up by a person named Al gore . who was invested in big fracking companies. Wake up. Global warming is a natural cause . the planet is going to change it has for billions of years..I would tell you the true cause of the heat up but you would not believe.

[@DanA-nl5uo]

@@hardtruthhall7777 stop listening to the oil companies they are lying to your for their profits.

[@captainheat2314]

Just get rid of your failing national healthcare because it costs over 3 times as much as the millitary

[@MrWildBrew]

@@DanA-nl5uo why don't you go after them then? stop taxing the small people to death for something that has not one point of truth.

[@DanA-nl5uo]

@@MrWildBrew I would be completely in favor of closing the loophole the oil industry uses.
www.investopedia.com/articles/07/oil-tax-break.asp
There are some we could start with. But unfortunately the GOP seems to think taxing the little people and removing taxes for the wealthy is the right solution judging by they last round of taxes law.

[@reid-dallin]

this ted talk is blessed 💚

[@filmeseverin]

Reforestation will solve the global warming.

[@filmeseverin]

Scientists estimate that 50-80% of the oxygen production on Earth comes from the ocean.(it is still not much over 50% so that the reforestation is definitely the solution, besides reducing pollution).

[@guggallima]

North American friends.
I have a very important suggestion to save the planet.
China reforested the Hunshandake Desert.
The Chinese turned an inhospitable territory into a rainforest.
Why don't Americans do the same with Great Salt Lak, Sevier, Painted and Colorado Desert?
The southern United States may have a rainforest, with fruits and animals.
Just start planting some trees, nature will finish the progress all by itself.
The jungle always knows what to do.

[@jhunt5578]

Be Vegan, Don't have kids and Tax Carbon.

[@nylaaa8310]

jhunt5578 YES! More people who are vegan, or even just being vegetarian, less resources would be needed to raise animals (like water, clearing more land, growing more food to feed them, etc), not having kids (or just not having more than, let’s say, three) will slow down overpopulation, meaning we use less resources, and taxing carbon would not only create an income flow for money that would go back into helping the environment AND hopefully less carbon would be put into the atmosphere than necessary.

[@jhunt5578]

@@nylaaa8310 Will the world take these simple steps though? Anyone I talked to about quitting meat seems personally offended I'd even suggested it. Peter Singer was right - "We are, quite literally, gambling with the future of our planet - for the sake of cheeseburgers" 🌍🍔🤔

[@nylaaa8310]

jhunt5578 Most people probably won’t, every time i try suggesting vegetarianism to my family, they think I’m being ridiculous and don’t even want to try it for a day (like a meatless Monday or something like that). It’s quite sad that most people don’t even consider other lifestyle options than what they’re used to

[@jhunt5578]

@@nylaaa8310 If the IPCC are to be believed, we have less than a generation to turn this climate crisis around. Previous generations went to war to secure the societies they belonged to. The Baby boomers, Millenials and Gen Z find rationing food, something children and the elderly coped with in WW2, a task too far.

[@Joshua-Samarita]

Nyla Kawaii tell that to all Latinos here in America.

[@jUstSash2207]

The real problem is something noone really thinks of: ALL humans have to do this. not only the US, not only the EU, even Russia and ALL Asian countries!!!

[@MaZe741]

well then it isnt 100 solutions, but rather 1 solution with 100 steps

[@rubs77]

Random Schmid yes the video should be name 100 steps to stop climate change

[@elisabethsun7059]

Yep

[@elisabethsun7059]

I wouldn’t say 100 steps, rather 1 solution with 100 steps but 20 are optional

[@valeriahelena3699]

It's a complex subject that needs everybody's commitment. First, we should think deeply about how each of us can help; then start sharing ideas as a brainstorm.

[@lorenzoblum868]

the carbon footprint of the military industrial complex...

[@dclaet1135]

Sadly, everyone I try and talk to about this subject do not care. Such denial and apathy!!!

[@kevinellazar9875]

Couple of things I disagree about the lecture are when educating and family planning are only for women or girls. It is a little sexist that women only needed to be educated thinking that it's their fault. Men and boys should also needed to be educated and know about family planning. Ladies don't get pregnant by themselves but it is an action from both sexes thus make both sexes accountable not only ladies. Guys should also know the consequences and responsibilities as a result of their actions and own it.
Nonetheless, this is very educational and informational.

[@jjwhalley4145]

The point on educating girls and women is focussed in areas around the world where women have to give up their education to stay home and care for the family and in other areas where education is not offered to women at all. So it is more about reducing the education gap rather than 'just educate women.' Which doesn't necessarily subtract from your point, as you are correct, men/boys should equally know about their responsibilities.

[@jay24176]

this man is a legend

[@ericedlund3140]

while educating women is definitely good, how does it effect global warming?

[@dr.zoidberg8666]

In general, educated people are likely to earn more money which is likely to allow them to live less impactful lives (buy solar to put on your roof, shop at the local farmer's market instead of Walmart, own a more expensive electric car instead of a cheaper gas car, etc.) -- but also, it is educated people who innovate & implement solutions to global warming.
More innovators means that global warming is solved more quickly (which translates to fewer gigatonnes of CO2 being put into the air) -- & the largest untapped demographic in many parts of the world is women.

[@AdamBechtol]

Best answer I've read to this question yet. I'm still rather curious how they got the exact 59.60 Gigaton figure though. @@dr.zoidberg8666

[@wade2bosh]

@@AdamBechtol educated women have less kids

[@arthisanjeevi]

i have done the math.overall electricity generates about 160 gigawatts of co2 while food generates about 240 gigawatts of co2 and land management generates about 120 gigawatts of co2. women and girls only generates about 110 gigawatts of c02

[@inferno7289]

lol gigawatts of co2????

[@dukeysnider]

Chad, you missed one of the biggest game changers. If our society used a mixed alcohol fuel made from sewage and human waste, it would reduce emissions in our cars, trucks, airplanes and trains by 95%. Please do your due diligence on "Higher Mixed Alcohol".

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex....

[@ianprado1488]

14:07 I appreciate nuclear is on the list

[@lo-ero]

Do we know what to do with the waste?

[@jhunt5578]

@@lo-ero As long as you store it safely it's fine.

[@77Avadon77]

Nuclear should be top of the list that's the fastest way to get the power consumption we need without polluting and increasing global warming

[@carpetsnake83]

Water vapour is a way worse greenhouse gas

[@77Avadon77]

@@carpetsnake83 we need to ban water!

[@natejosich]

What a great presentation!

[@satyahitman7261]

Every country should practice it.

[@zhubajie6940]

So called "Natural refrigerants: include toxic ammonia or flammable vapor hydrocarbons (butane, propane, ethane, methane) which are greenhouse gases. They also include Carbon dioxide (another greenhouse gas) that can be used but it is less efficient requiring larger amounts of electricity (around 40 percent more) for equivalent cooling. I don't see how they could be viable alternatives. We got rid of these types for safety reasons.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex...

[@martinbiza3943]

Best TED ever... thank you for your work so much....

[@mdnoman2684]

I think industrialization and urbanization are just as responsible for climate change as it can be solved by creating rivers.

[@aadityashanmugam3872]

there is an alternative solution to the refrigeration and air conditioners using the magnetocaloric effect, only issue is with magnetocaloric materials we know of now, the highest temperature change it can produce from room temperature is onl about 6-7 c, significant but not exactly enough

[@atl5305]

Stop right there (1:24). The problem is also not global warming. The problem is that we are manipulating the chemistry of our atmosphere to produce heat, power, locomotion, etc with the unintended side effect of warming the planet. And before even watching the rest of the video our solution should be to continue manipulating the chemistry of our atmosphere only this time, with the explicit purpose to control average global temperatures and weather patterns.

[@charlesbidinger7064]

We need a green new deal and strict conservation laws

[@deathpenguin005]

The cost is a good portion of the US military budget.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The elephant in the room
ruclips.net/video/oMozyspFuBM/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/cw2Wm8T6tio/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/LLCF7vPanrY/видео.html
watershedsentinel.ca/articles/the-militarys-carbon-bootprint
www.athena21.org/in-english
If RUclips algorithm does not screw up and you receive notification and approve, please share. People must know. Thanks

[@salliemae9284]

Let me offer this suggestion that I learned in high school.Photosynthesis is the ability of plants to use light energy to convert carbon dioxide into oxygen.Oxygen is the air that we breathe and Oxygen is good for environment. So my suggestion why can all nation plant more trees,plants,vegetables,fill the barren land in places where there is no plant Trees are good to prevent flooding because the big roots of those trees are capable of holding water..And then I read somewhere sometime ago that the chemical that they used in our vegetables are toxic.I usually like to eat corn but after reading that article I have to think twice.I usually like to go to an organic store but then the cost of that organic fruit is very high and now the store has closed.My thinking is why organic are so costly when they are not using fertilizer or chemical to enhance the food.The regular food fruits and vegetables are laden with fertilizers.fertilizers are extra money therefore they should cost more than the organic.If a store carrying organic food is charging less amount of money compared to the regular fruit/vegetables I bet everybody will go to that store.Isnt it less price plus higher demand equals more profit.I am learning about the solar panel used in the roof.Make the price lower I bet all the homeowner will install that in their houses .Lastly the chemical that they are spraying in the fruits and vegetables that we ate has a effects in our body.In my country where the vegetables and fruits are grown naturally when i was growing up there was no mention of cancer.What about the chicken that they raised here.How many times hormones are used to make the chicken get bigger and fat and we are eating those meat.Why can they grow these animals without using hormones.Are we becoming countries of more profits rather than the good of our body?

[@Ninjaeule97]

While I love those ideas I am not so optimistic that we will achieve them all. There are many people that have a stake in the current (broken) system and they will fight to stop it from changing.

[@LisaNarozhnykh]

He forgot the easiest one: Just pretend it doesn't exist until it's too late and you've ruined the lives of all the youngest generations. It's also known as "The Trump Approach".

[@friendofamir349]

Also, I hate trump and his terrible decisions as much as the next guy, but big, polluting companies are a big problem. I wouldn't be surprised if he was affiliated with them to be perfectly honest with you.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex

[@dreamskeepmesane2729]

Whatever you do, dont look at the comments. The trolls are at it again..

[@orangswiss8946]

And you start using your brain.... troll !

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex... Trok and Trolls

[@leonardkellum6984]

i went from solar fairs in 70's to waiting for an abrupt rise in temperature. wall st and dc beat all life out of the earth.

[@samlair3342]

The good news about global warming is that it’s not being caused by increasing solar output or any other natural uncontrollable cause, and also that mankind generally understands that it’s the ‘amplified greenhouse effect’ which is the source of increasing global temperatures. With this in mind, it behooves us to rapidly advance and apply our scientific and technological knowledge to the point that the burning of fossil fuels to produce electricity will become as antiquated as the burning of whale oil for light.
Quote: “Anxiety must go. It must be replaced by faith and solemn confidence in the outworking of the divine plan.”
Note: As sunlight (photons) is warming the surface of the world, surface heat energy is also radiating away from our planet in the form of ‘infrared radiation’ which passes freely thru the atmospheric gases of nitrogen and oxygen which do not absorb heat. Indeed, if it weren’t for greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide that ‘do interact’ strongly with infrared energy and ‘impede the escape’ of Earth’s radiant heat, then the planet would be perpetually frozen solid. Thankfully, even though greenhouse gases comprise only 4/10ths of one percent of the atmosphere, they are so powerful that they maintain a ‘blanketing effect’ by constantly ‘absorbing and releasing’ infrared heat energy over and over, again and again. In doing so, they gyrate wildly, thus causing them to vigorously collide with other atmospheric molecules which, in turn, collide with other air molecules, imparting the kinetic energy of motion throughout the atmosphere - and this vibratory state registers as temperature.
For the big picture, search:
Marcott reconstruction chart
For more, search:
‘CO2 infrared radiation quantum level’
‘Amplified greenhouse effect’
‘Doable drawdown solution global warming’

[@mybuttyissagin2040]

DYSON SPHERES!!

[@smallkloon]

mercury: "mom please pick me up I'm scared..."

[@flaviobiancolli9569]

More like fusion energy. It's still really difficult to achieve but still easrier than dyson spheres which will remain science fiction for a long time

[@smallkloon]

@@flaviobiancolli9569 yeah, also water is just a tad bit more abundant and realistic than taking apart a planet.

[@JoshuaKisb]

i had to pause the video to ask this very important question.
incase we don't want to give up air conditioning... is there a way we can mange to do artificial photosynthesis

[@talhatariqyuluqatdis]

Yeah I was thinking that aswell

[@Wacov1]

Artificial CO2 drawdown is perfectly possible, but it's very expensive in materials and electrical energy, and generally more difficult to scale than just letting forests grow by themselves. There's a place for both.

[@talhatariqyuluqatdis]

@@Wacov1 what if you made machines and tech that could artificially convert CO2 to O2 etc.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex...

[@sarcasmo57]

Let's do it.

[@lorenzoblum868]

The carbon footprint of the military industrial complex

[@therealflo]

Treibhauseffekt (siehe auch Frage 5).
Beim natürlichen Treibhauseffekt ist der Wasserdampf ausschlaggebend: dieser verursacht etwa zwei Drittel des natürlichen Treibhauseffekts, der seit Jahrmillionen die Erde bewohnbar macht. Ein geringerer Teil stammt von CO2 und den restlichen Treibhausgasen.
Warum steht der Wasserdampf nicht stärker im Zentrum der Diskussionen um die anthropogene Klimaänderung ? Weil der Wasserdampf zwar beim natürlichen, jedoch nicht beim anthropogenen Treibhauseffekt die Hauptrolle spielt. Denn die Atmosphäre nimmt - in Abhängigkeit von ihrer Temperatur - nur eine bestimmte Menge an Wasserdampf auf. So nimmt eine wärmere Atmosphäre mehr Wasserdampf auf als eine kalte (siehe auch Frage 4). Bei gleichbleibender Temperatur kann s

[@highcotton63664]

I agree with these solutions and in a perfect world we could achieve them easily, but tell me how women/girls are going to be given a choice for family planning when their 100% patriarchal countries and husbands deny them this choice? You can talk all day long about equality but when countries that have laws forbidding equality for women still exist, its'a hard pill to swallow.

[@KarlSnarks]

True, but educated women (and people in general) are harder to control.

[@highcotton63664]

@@KarlSnarks Exactly. It's truly sad and pathetic.

[@EV-ye6mx]

Thank you for bringing attention to the girls education factor! I feel like that isn’t talked about enough.

[@hanna5421]

Great solutions, but where is buying local food?? Or reduce flights ??

[@wolfgangr.3268]

Fair question. I assume Project Drawdown does not take the usual approach "What can you do as an individual". They are looking at "What ought to be promoted by the United Nations".

[@mickaelsflow6774]

As @Wolfgang said, more of "how do gov and company solve the issue" rather than "it's the individual who must do solve this all by themselves".
The social experiment known as 2020 did show us one good thing: with close to 4.5 Billion people in lockdown or very similar around the world for close to half a year, global emissions only dropped by around 10% (I believe 7% as calculated in June 2020). It wasn't a sustainable method, but that's as far as we went with "individuals diminushing their impact".
I think it's rather fair and, after 2020, fairly obvious why focusing on corporations and governments makes more sense short and long-term.
PS. But we do have to voice discontent when they don't perform or ignore their job.

[@millertas]

Interesting that 'Family Planning' in 'Women & Girls' Sector when I thought that 'Men & Boys' needed to be involved? I see him explain what he meant - I 'jumped the gun'.

[@elenahadzieva1823]

The misogyny in this video is just...