Endowments should technically make college cost less...and the rich and privledged want to make sure their kids stay rich and privledged. Donating to an endowment is a sure fire way to make sure your 'legacy' child gets a spot they didn't work for and don't deserve at an ivy league school. Endowments are basically legalized educational bribery
That's funny because the Planet Serf is crushing cold records. Did you know we are in a Solar Minimum? Solar Maximum was a couple years ago. The sun has 11 year cycles did you know that? We don't heat the planet, we contaminate it. Co2 is plant food, and sheeple believe anything they're told without any critical research.
@@morenitomoreno1282 With the new ice age(1950's), I mean global warming (1980'-2000's), I mean climate change (2000's-current) (consolidating all into one for the ease of substantiating the argument) it is not very intelligent to use those same people as sources for an argument! So the answer is you see a doctor who tells you the truth instead of one telling you what you want to hear for monetary gain (The carbon tax is a ponzi scheme)
@@joenorris449 that could pretty much be said about all taxes. They sure have been able to come up with multiple ways to create more taxation. It's a legalized protection racket.
I’m actually shocked that I saw live coverage of this on CBS during the UGA game...and they were clear about the details of protesting fossil fuel endowments of the universities.
lmao, ahh have you not been paying attention? They protest over protesting, no cause to small no idea to ridiculous; it gains them social points in the leftest victim ideology scale; which is the real reason they protest!
@@joenorris449 The earth is being damaged by the pipelines that carry & the burning of fossil fuels. These kids will inherit the hell we are leaving them. It's important they learn to put pressure on the schools they are paying to attend so the schools will divest away from those investments. In other words, it's called consciousness. That has nothing to do with ideologies or a victim mentality. You have obviously no concern for our water supplies, food or even the air we breathe. That makes you the one who is not paying attention.
@@anael55 Typical leftest, calling people with facts climate deniers. lmao! Arguing one side of a subject is not consensus! For every scientist whom claims climate change is real the opposing side can offer one saying the opposite. Trying to conform a consensus? lol. No the left is trying to propagandize the subject to use fear as a means to sway public concerns regardless of facts! Pipelines and fossil fuels, code for carbon! America is at a record low for carbon production! :Arctic sea ice volume continues its eleven year long expansion." Danish Meteorological Society "There has been a large expansion of thick ice into the Chukchi, Beaufort and East Siberian Seas since 2008." "Arctic sea ice extent is close to the 1981-2010 median." At the same time so called experts are saying it is gone and there is nothing we can do to stop it; so much for consensus! "The world’s leading climate expert from NASA predicted the Arctic would be ice-free last year." yet at the same time "Arctic ice is developing faster then it is melting."NOAA If you want to argue carbon has an effect on the climate, okay most would be accepting of the conversation or that man made carbon production has an effect; but trying to scaremonger, use fear, etc.......and try to tell people what they are going to do rather then discuss the science is not going to work: people tend to not like being told what to do! The truth is scientist really don't know and if they did they have no idea what to do about it to actually solve or minimize the impact! Scientists on both sides of the argument; yet one side claims doomsday scenarios to use fear as a means to propel their theory;the other side (until recently on the defensive are now switching to the offensive) spend their time debunking the claims. Example: A organization that believes climate change is a clear and present danger offers a grant for a scientist to study climate, the scientist then manipulates the data input to make the computer model simulation reach the conclusion they want; thus justifying the current grant and increasing the prospects of future ones! Science one thought the world was flat, the the solar system revolved around the earth, that splitting the atom would ignite the entire atmosphere; These of course have been proven wrong. The climate and atmosphere are way to complex and complicated for anyone to say what is or is not going (especially long term) to happen with any degree of certainty! The only consensus is that there is no consensus! You will not have trouble convincing that man made carbon has an effect, (that clean water, air, etc... is important) the amount of effect, to what degree, and long term predictions are just that predictions; predictions that have historically been proven WRONG! realclimatescience.com/2019/01/eleven-years-of-arctic-sea-ice-thickening/
Trust funds are used to maintain steady income to fund scholarship and research projects year over year. The better the trust fund and its year over year performance the more deserving youth from low income families can attend a top school. Not sure about this kid he dodges hard the China question, which is the top polluter in the world, with India being a close second.
And whiny right-wing pundits will say that these kids should be taking their protests elsewhere instead of interrupting a football game. Slight echoes of Colin Kaepernick here.
It's the youths that will have to save this planet. The older folks seem to be unconscious. I've canceled Christmas. the powers the be won't take U serious if U keep giving them your wealth
There are many of these student-led divestment campaigns in universities worldwide. At Auckland University in New Zealand faculty didn’t want to listen for a long time (5yrs) but they did finally change their stance this year! Keep it up!!
I think China is leading the world in electric vehicles, green energy development, recycling, and other initiatives toward environmental protection. It would be hard for us to put pressure on another country when we are doing fracking, pulled out of Paris Accord, and other practices that diminish our reliability in fighting climate change.
I applaud the Divest Harvard protest! We need to see more of this. Look to the Anti-Apartheid Movement and see how they were successful in isolating South Africa under the racist regime.
Good news everyone! The Hill has reached critical mass, as evidenced by the appearance of trolls in the comment section. No stopping Krystal and Saagar now!
So the "greatest" country in the world was the leader in lowering emissions last year. Bravo. Now, what about the past 40 years. Looks like the U.S. still has some catching up to do when compared to certain European countries. Oh well, enjoy your "victory".
Carbon capture natural gas? Are you high or just full of it? There's no such thing. Let's go back to 9th grade science class when we're taught that burning ANY gas releases carbon.
Sparky Gump , actually there are industrial process like creating cement that result in massive amounts of damage but could be eliminated via tech, there are also chemicals used to make electrical wires fire safe that are causing absurd levels of damage to the environment
@@sparkygump Carbon capture is about capturing CO2 released AFTER the gas is burned. Not claiming natural gas does not release CO2. It is a very recent development; you should look it up
@@gwarlow Why do you say "you victory?" I'm assuming your also American, but even if you aren't, is it not a victory for everyone for one of the top air polluters to drastically cut that pollution? Cut the tribalistic in-group, out-group bs. We're both human beings living on Earth who want to create a better Earth. I assume your strong reaction is due to this comment seemingly promoting a fossil fuel, but pray tell how you plan to not use any fossil fuel and power any major electric grid in the world? Andrew Yang's advocacy towards nuclear is the only realistic path towards zero emissions while maintaining the necessary power, but even his plan requires fossil fuels to not disappear overnight. We should research better use of ALL resources if we really want to solve environmental problems.
Harvard, Yale etc. pay no federal and little or no local taxes. They are _"non-profits". Yale and Harvard have 71 billions_ to invest. Harvard is the richtest university in the world. Plus Harvard * needed to be forced to pay their blue collar workers a living wage a few years ago (not sure if the struggle was successful). These colleges drive costs of living up for regular people in the area, and the staff likely is not employed or underemployed during holidays. * Pete Buttigieg mentions that labor action supported by many Harvard students in his book. (See the article: All you need to know about Pete, that deals with what is in the book - and what is missing). That book was the preparation for running for prez - somehow he feels qualified for that - well this is the age of Trump and Pete is certainly more intelligent. Not that that is necessarily an advantage given that he would use that to advance Corporate causes and suck up to the donors while deceiving the public (case in point his spirited attack on M4A. he has not done his homework or is not able to think beyond the thought stopping clichés of the lobbyists. Or he is a skillful con-artists who is admittedly good in delivering the industry talking points well). Pete seems to be an educated fool - or more precisely an educated IGNORANT. Which better conveys the possibility that he very willingly stays blissfully ignorant on certain issues. Intelligence and education can help with the exercise called double think. The action to force Harvard to pay their blue collar staff better wages was supported by SOME students. Needless to say Pete did not support it (likely busy being a good conformist and collecting good grades). Also: when he describes how he was thrilled by Harvard when he came there he or his ghost writer fogot to mention a little detail. The narrative of the book was "simple, nice country boy comes to Harvard and is mightily impressed". All the many magazines in foreign languages they sold at the little stands !! I suppose they thought that persona would resonate better with Midwest voters. One of the locations that impressed him is nearby where so many homeless people "hang out" (because they cannot afford the Harvard level rent, or they think it is a good spot to beg for money). Those homeless people (a common sight around Harvard) escaped his notice or he did no bother to mention them. Most likely case: he told the ghost writer the anectode how he liked his first encounter with Havard - and the guy or gal had of course no idea what else was going on there.The contrast between the well-off students (most are from wealthy or rich families, the scholarships are fig leaves for the insider club) and the homeless did not make enough impression on young Pete - so the ghostwriter was deprived of that little detail, and only covered the fawning over the grandeurs of Harvard. Tells you everything you need to know about the empty suit / careerist.
Compromising one's professed morality for the sake of business interests only makes one duplicitous in nature, effectively amplifying the reprehensibility of that individuals character well beyond that of one who openly touts such immoral behavior.
Really Saagar the same old tired talking points against protesting? “Won’t that piss people off” Sorry guys but the facade of “we’re all one big happy family” is wearing very thin”
Why would Harvard or Yale administration listen to the students lol. You pay them hundreds of thousands to go to school there, not the other way around.
Because the protests will bring unfavourable attention to Harvad and yale profiteering from industries their own experts say are harmful. That's why it's a protest not a request.
Maybe he should watch CNBC's report. China is upgrading their public transportation nationwide with electric buses, so to reduce fossil fuel consumption ruclips.net/video/5wWJW4WJzd0/видео.html
@@jeromegreen3626 Electricity still uses fossil fuels, it's something, I'll give them that, but that's honestly no different than Tesla. (No hate towards Telsa, one of my buddies has one, they're really nice. Lol)
@@jeromegreen3626 Also true, but do you know where Proterra buses are getting their electricity? Even on their site, it just says stuff like "To date, Proterra buses have displaced more than 45 million lbs of CO2 emissions and over 2 million gallons of diesel fuel. Together we can improve air quality and create healthier communities with clean, quiet transportation for all".
@@tr0llbuster292 electric buses can reduce carbon emission, not eliminate it. During night time or when no wind blowing, if there is no energy storage system to provide electricity, you need fossil fuel. but overall, it still reduces CO2, not to mention reduces air pollution.
Saagar claims that a lot of people were upset by this protest? Does he have a source for this comment or is it just a Fox News talking point that came out of someone's ass! I wish that James or Krystal had challenged him.
Saagar: "James … I have a question for you; I understand you wish Harvard to divest from the fossil fuel industry. But why is there no attempt to divest Harvard's assets from Chinese corporations? They are some of the greatest polluters on the planet." James: "look at my f'ing face beootch; you got any more other questions?"
Time to “divest” from ... capitalism. There are no pure investments. “Renewable” energy means solar investor bonanza with LESS energy at MUCH HIGHER COSTS for workers. No surprise this not an issue at ... Harvard.
James Coleman should just stop using fossil fuels and the products that use fossil fuels in their manufacturing. Don't just talk the talk but walk the walk.
You do realize there are already alternatives to fossil fuels and products made from alternatives to fossil fuels and even vehicles such as electric cars that don't use fossil fuels.. You think everything is made from fossil fuels and there are no cars that don't use fossil fuels either? What a moron!
@@kekwayblaze3176 The electronic device you just used to write and post your reply also plays a part in the emissions, and its components are very hard to decompose.
@@alvincyt That's why we should change our hyper-consumerism, use our product for longer time to reduce emission, not like, buying a shirt, only wearing a summer before throwing it away.
Unnecessary delay of the event serves no purpose but prolonging the stay of the audience, makes them order more junk food which leads to more global emissions.
I actually agree. By the time the U.S. finally takes drastic steps to combat climate change, it will be irreversible. Doesn't help that China and India will be behind the curve in helping out.
5:30 Sagaar can't help himself, from time to time he brings the mindless rightwing talking points which are incorrect as well). China has a lot of _pollution_ but this is about *_CO2_* - that conflation is typically made by rightwingers who want to deflect from the responsibility of the U.S. (... China and India are bad too, they should lead, THEN the U.S. could do something - maybe ...) China 1,38 billion people, developing / emerging nation, workbench of the world U.S. 330 million people, used fossil fuels to a large extent since more than 70 years, has deindustrialized (but uses a LOT of products made in China, which of course needs energy there), is a rich if very inequal country _Both countries use about the same volume of fossil fuels_ and emit roughly the same volume of CO2. In *absolute numbers !* In other words on average a Chinese citizen uses 25 % of the energy that the average U.S. citizen uses. The U.S. uses the most energy per person of any relevant nation (some small oil theocracies like Brunei might have more per person, but they do not make a dent). All first world nations use too much energy - but the U.S. is a class of its own when it comes to SAVINGS POTENTIAL. Bonus for China: they drove the solar and wind industry. Provided a market for wind turbines for instance from Germany, Denmark, and starting to manufacture solar in China. At a time when the First world nations were occupied with the Great Financial Crisis, austerity the Chinese went big on solar and big on bullet trains. They followed: Go big or go home. With the large numbers of unit manufactured, installed, and used economy of scale set it, more research became worthwhile. Battery producers got a market and an incentive. Not only for cars, also for solar roof production, surplus of wind and solar farms. Batteries / storage is another very important part of the switch, since the production of renewable energy fluctuates more, storage is very important to make it work. The companies working in the field also profited from the Chinese setting the stage with solar. Dr. Eicke Weber (international renowed German expert on material research for solar). The first PV panels were used to power satellite - at the end of the 1970s or beginning of 1980s. The production costs for the kWh were high then - but with satellites the PAYLOAD matters. Every time the globally installed PV area doubled the costs for electricity produced with the panels came down by 20 %. Economy of scale. That had nothing to do with "passing of time", whenever an effort was made (government programs, subsidies) considerable prograss was made, but it did not occur spontanuously. The Chinese increased production and installation, to the degree that especially solar became more viable in rich countries or states with relatively high electricity costs and a lot of sunshine. Think California and Australia. Now these markets meant even MORE sales .... rinse and repeat. POLLUTION is bad for the health of the Chinese, that is NOT a problem for the global population. It even contributes to global dimming which has a mild ! cooling effect (not much, but once they clean up their act regarding pollution CO2 and methane will even have more effect). Air pollution can be cleaned up within 5 - 10 years, the technology was used in Europe, North America in the 1980s (acid rain crisis). Since it was invented an paid for it could have been used at lower costs in developing countries. BUT: The Western oligarchs (with help of Western politicians) just decided that they wanted manufacturing with less costs and the Chinese ruling class went willingly along. Which btw is NOW a major motivator to clean up their coal act to produce renewable energy, to switch to electric vehicles and have the bullet trains instead of airtraffic. Their elites cannot escape the pollution, they can send the children abroad but some must stay in the country to oversee political rule and management of manufacturing. Pollution of water and soil is more lasting and more expensive to clean up.
Your entire precious existence relies on fossil fuels. How about a little respect for the fuel source that changed what it is to be a human so dramatically? These are the same people who wantwww to eliminate nuclear as well. I can’t believe how stupid these Harvard students are! Apparently, their diplomas aren’t worth wiping with. I
Bullshit... There have been alternatives to fossil fuels for decades and with investment and research use of fossil fuels will one day become redundant. Hydro, geothermal, solar and wind are just a few alternative energy sources to fossil fuels... Electric cars are just one example of vehicles that don't use fossil fuels.. The list goes on and on.. You might think the world can't live without fossil fuels and there will never be alternative energy sources to replace fossil fuels ever but that just goes to show you have spent your entire life with your head up your ass..
With all due respect, no one is denying how much we choose to rely on fossil fuels and how much it changed the world. The focus is the fact that fossil fuels is killing us and the planet and we don't actually have to rely on fossil fuels.
KeKway Blaze I agree but the last part was uncalled for. Learn decency to fellow people. It will make you seem a better, more intelligent person. Just sayin
These hypocritical rich kids and activists should start by personally planting 200+ trees each and also documenting how they curbed/halved their own personal consumption. It's easy to blame other people to feel good about yourself.
John McGlasson Spoken like a true fossil fuel apologist. That's the spirit. Just give in and accept the inevitability of choking to death on gas fumes! Please explain how you came up with the idea of "rolling over" the protestors with fire hoses. How would that work exactly? Cheers.
It is sad that you gave these people the time of day. If he didnt agree with what the school was doing, he could have just left the school and stopped giving them any money.
@@sparkygump such an intelligent response you have given me. You disagree with my thought so I MUST be a troll? Maybe one day you will be able to express yourself in an adult manner and not voice opinions that have no facts behind them.
So he doesn't have a right to speak freely is what you are saying.. I didn't realize going to college means you give up your rights such as free speech.
@@kekwayblaze3176 nowhere did I say any person didnt have the right to speak. That is one of the great parts of America. The fact that we do have the right to free speech. The people at the football game expressed those rights in a place where they were not allowed to be.
@@sirmayse1545 You seem to know nothing about protests in general..The Civil Rights Marches were "illegal" in many instances and were held in places where they had no permission to be..In fact some Civil Rights marchers were even killed or beaten by law enforcement back in the 60's. The protests against the Vietnam War were held at colleges across the country with students having sit-ins in places they had no permission to be and protesting in places on campus they had no permission to be... It appears you are more upset about the inconvenience of a football team and spectators then what these protestors were there for and that was to bring attention to that the fossil fuel industry is donating money to colleges in an era of awareness that the fossil fuel industry is contributing to the climate change crisis.
@@kevinschmidt2210 Ok. So when you go to the bank to ask for a loan, the bank (not you) is acting as a "capitalistic vulture vampire", even though in this case, you would be asking for billions of dollars in loans with no plans to repay them?
@@sparkygump At least China is doing something. they are upgrading public transportation nationwide with electric buses, so to reduce fossil fuel consumption. ruclips.net/video/5wWJW4WJzd0/видео.html
Only in America do we see postponing a football game for an hour as a drastic measure. We need to check our priorities as a society.
It wasn't even a big ten game
If this pisses off conservatives, imagine what a general strike would do
71 billion dollars?! Geez no wonder college cost so much
The money is primarily from alumni,
Not tuition. They use *a little* of it on scholarships ;)
clearly you didn't go for economics
Endowments should technically make college cost less...and the rich and privledged want to make sure their kids stay rich and privledged. Donating to an endowment is a sure fire way to make sure your 'legacy' child gets a spot they didn't work for and don't deserve at an ivy league school. Endowments are basically legalized educational bribery
@@Saylor_On_Shore O well that's comforting
You know what is more annoying than an hour delay on a football game, a burning planet.
That's funny because the Planet Serf is crushing cold records. Did you know we are in a Solar Minimum? Solar Maximum was a couple years ago. The sun has 11 year cycles did you know that? We don't heat the planet, we contaminate it. Co2 is plant food, and sheeple believe anything they're told without any critical research.
downtourth is that what you do when you go to the doctor? you dismiss their diagnostics and make your own?
@@morenitomoreno1282 With the new ice age(1950's), I mean global warming (1980'-2000's), I mean climate change (2000's-current) (consolidating all into one for the ease of substantiating the argument) it is not very intelligent to use those same people as sources for an argument! So the answer is you see a doctor who tells you the truth instead of one telling you what you want to hear for monetary gain (The carbon tax is a ponzi scheme)
California's burning because of their stupid environmental policies. The rest of the world is fine
@@joenorris449 that could pretty much be said about all taxes.
They sure have been able to come up with multiple ways to create more taxation.
It's a legalized protection racket.
We will be hearing more from this kid in the future
I'd vote for him for Congress.
Yeah, he'll be crying from his Mommy's basement, angry that he can't find a job with his useless degree.
@Jamie Swanson why do you say that?
I’m actually shocked that I saw live coverage of this on CBS during the UGA game...and they were clear about the details of protesting fossil fuel endowments of the universities.
It's almost like someone wants the planet to survive for their children. I hadn't expected that. (No, really, I hadn't, America's gone insane.)
Good for them. We need these young people to take up the mantle and protest.
lmao, ahh have you not been paying attention? They protest over protesting, no cause to small no idea to ridiculous; it gains them social points in the leftest victim ideology scale; which is the real reason they protest!
@@joenorris449 The earth is being damaged by the pipelines that carry & the burning of fossil fuels. These kids will inherit the hell we are leaving them. It's important they learn to put pressure on the schools they are paying to attend so the schools will divest away from those investments. In other words, it's called consciousness. That has nothing to do with ideologies or a victim mentality. You have obviously no concern for our water supplies, food or even the air we breathe. That makes you the one who is not paying attention.
@@anael55 Typical leftest, calling people with facts climate deniers. lmao! Arguing one side of a subject is not consensus! For every scientist whom claims climate change is real the opposing side can offer one saying the opposite. Trying to conform a consensus? lol. No the left is trying to propagandize the subject to use fear as a means to sway public concerns regardless of facts! Pipelines and fossil fuels, code for carbon! America is at a record low for carbon production! :Arctic sea ice volume continues its eleven year long expansion." Danish Meteorological Society "There has been a large expansion of thick ice into the Chukchi, Beaufort and East Siberian Seas since 2008." "Arctic sea ice extent is close to the 1981-2010 median." At the same time so called experts are saying it is gone and there is nothing we can do to stop it; so much for consensus! "The world’s leading climate expert from NASA predicted the Arctic would be ice-free last year."
yet at the same time "Arctic ice is developing faster then it is melting."NOAA If you want to argue carbon has an effect on the climate, okay most would be accepting of the conversation or that man made carbon production has an effect; but trying to scaremonger, use fear, etc.......and try to tell people what they are going to do rather then discuss the science is not going to work: people tend to not like being told what to do! The truth is scientist really don't know and if they did they have no idea what to do about it to actually solve or minimize the impact! Scientists on both sides of the argument; yet one side claims doomsday scenarios to use fear as a means to propel their theory;the other side (until recently on the defensive are now switching to the offensive) spend their time debunking the claims. Example: A organization that believes climate change is a clear and present danger offers a grant for a scientist to study climate, the scientist then manipulates the data input to make the computer model simulation reach the conclusion they want; thus justifying the current grant and increasing the prospects of future ones! Science one thought the world was flat, the the solar system revolved around the earth, that splitting the atom would ignite the entire atmosphere; These of course have been proven wrong. The climate and atmosphere are way to complex and complicated for anyone to say what is or is not going (especially long term) to happen with any degree of certainty! The only consensus is that there is no consensus! You will not have trouble convincing that man made carbon has an effect, (that clean water, air, etc... is important) the amount of effect, to what degree, and long term predictions are just that predictions; predictions that have historically been proven WRONG! realclimatescience.com/2019/01/eleven-years-of-arctic-sea-ice-thickening/
We should listen to the kid , I almost had a tornado touch down on my house today and I live in Arizona. He couldnt be more right in his cause
$71 Billion dollars?? Really??? How in the world did these colleges accumulate so much wealth?? I am in shock!
Trust funds are used to maintain steady income to fund scholarship and research projects year over year. The better the trust fund and its year over year performance the more deserving youth from low income families can attend a top school. Not sure about this kid he dodges hard the China question, which is the top polluter in the world, with India being a close second.
And whiny right-wing pundits will say that these kids should be taking their protests elsewhere instead of interrupting a football game. Slight echoes of Colin Kaepernick here.
Go James Coleman and Divest Harvard!!!
Love you James!!
I wish I was that aspirational AND inspirational at that age.
A true hero!
It’s great to see young people taking a stand for their futures! Bernie 2020❤️!
It's the youths that will have to save this planet. The older folks seem to be unconscious. I've canceled Christmas. the powers the be won't take U serious if U keep giving them your wealth
Nice. I like this smart kid.
Good for them.
Homeboy out here name dropping the Gravel Institute.
Shareholder Activism IS divestment. If they are not divesting, they are not activists.
There are many of these student-led divestment campaigns in universities worldwide. At Auckland University in New Zealand faculty didn’t want to listen for a long time (5yrs) but they did finally change their stance this year! Keep it up!!
I think China is leading the world in electric vehicles, green energy development, recycling, and other initiatives toward environmental protection. It would be hard for us to put pressure on another country when we are doing fracking, pulled out of Paris Accord, and other practices that diminish our reliability in fighting climate change.
I like this kid. Best of luck to him
In addition to bringing attention to the fossil fuel investments, how about bringing your activism towards the BDS of Israel's products?
Great interview, nice to hear the background. More please.
Awesome James !!!
I applaud the Divest Harvard protest! We need to see more of this. Look to the Anti-Apartheid Movement and see how they were successful in isolating South Africa under the racist regime.
Good news everyone! The Hill has reached critical mass, as evidenced by the appearance of trolls in the comment section. No stopping Krystal and Saagar now!
XR community should take note!
What about carbon-capture natural gas use being the main reason the USA was the leading country in lowering emissions last year?
So the "greatest" country in the world was the leader in lowering emissions last year. Bravo. Now, what about the past 40 years. Looks like the U.S. still has some catching up to do when compared to certain European countries. Oh well, enjoy your "victory".
Carbon capture natural gas? Are you high or just full of it? There's no such thing. Let's go back to 9th grade science class when we're taught that burning ANY gas releases carbon.
Sparky Gump , actually there are industrial process like creating cement that result in massive amounts of damage but could be eliminated via tech, there are also chemicals used to make electrical wires fire safe that are causing absurd levels of damage to the environment
@@sparkygump Carbon capture is about capturing CO2 released AFTER the gas is burned. Not claiming natural gas does not release CO2. It is a very recent development; you should look it up
@@gwarlow Why do you say "you victory?" I'm assuming your also American, but even if you aren't, is it not a victory for everyone for one of the top air polluters to drastically cut that pollution? Cut the tribalistic in-group, out-group bs. We're both human beings living on Earth who want to create a better Earth.
I assume your strong reaction is due to this comment seemingly promoting a fossil fuel, but pray tell how you plan to not use any fossil fuel and power any major electric grid in the world? Andrew Yang's advocacy towards nuclear is the only realistic path towards zero emissions while maintaining the necessary power, but even his plan requires fossil fuels to not disappear overnight. We should research better use of ALL resources if we really want to solve environmental problems.
You need to boycott the football game, the book store by buying books from somewhere else.
Harvard, Yale etc. pay no federal and little or no local taxes. They are _"non-profits". Yale and Harvard have 71 billions_ to invest. Harvard is the richtest university in the world. Plus Harvard * needed to be forced to pay their blue collar workers a living wage a few years ago (not sure if the struggle was successful). These colleges drive costs of living up for regular people in the area, and the staff likely is not employed or underemployed during holidays.
* Pete Buttigieg mentions that labor action supported by many Harvard students in his book. (See the article: All you need to know about Pete, that deals with what is in the book - and what is missing).
That book was the preparation for running for prez - somehow he feels qualified for that - well this is the age of Trump and Pete is certainly more intelligent. Not that that is necessarily an advantage given that he would use that to advance Corporate causes and suck up to the donors while deceiving the public (case in point his spirited attack on M4A. he has not done his homework or is not able to think beyond the thought stopping clichés of the lobbyists. Or he is a skillful con-artists who is admittedly good in delivering the industry talking points well).
Pete seems to be an educated fool - or more precisely an educated IGNORANT. Which better conveys the possibility that he very willingly stays blissfully ignorant on certain issues. Intelligence and education can help with the exercise called double think.
The action to force Harvard to pay their blue collar staff better wages was supported by SOME students. Needless to say Pete did not support it (likely busy being a good conformist and collecting good grades).
Also: when he describes how he was thrilled by Harvard when he came there he or his ghost writer fogot to mention a little detail. The narrative of the book was "simple, nice country boy comes to Harvard and is mightily impressed". All the many magazines in foreign languages they sold at the little stands !!
I suppose they thought that persona would resonate better with Midwest voters.
One of the locations that impressed him is nearby where so many homeless people "hang out" (because they cannot afford the Harvard level rent, or they think it is a good spot to beg for money). Those homeless people (a common sight around Harvard) escaped his notice or he did no bother to mention them.
Most likely case: he told the ghost writer the anectode how he liked his first encounter with Havard - and the guy or gal had of course no idea what else was going on there.The contrast between the well-off students (most are from wealthy or rich families, the scholarships are fig leaves for the insider club) and the homeless did not make enough impression on young Pete - so the ghostwriter was deprived of that little detail, and only covered the fawning over the grandeurs of Harvard.
Tells you everything you need to know about the empty suit / careerist.
Compromising one's professed morality for the sake of business interests only makes one duplicitous in nature, effectively amplifying the reprehensibility of that individuals character well beyond that of one who openly touts such immoral behavior.
👏👏👏👍
This Yale student is a robot.
Really Saagar the same old tired talking points against protesting? “Won’t that piss people off”
Sorry guys but the facade of “we’re all one big happy family” is wearing very thin”
@K Rab: Well, the water's getting warm so we might as well swim 💁🏽♂️
.....and this is why the word sophomoric comes into play ~~~~~
umm..pissed off? angry? irate?
Why would Harvard or Yale administration listen to the students lol. You pay them hundreds of thousands to go to school there, not the other way around.
Because the protests will bring unfavourable attention to Harvad and yale profiteering from industries their own experts say are harmful. That's why it's a protest not a request.
Triassic situations call for triassic actions!
Sagaar really whipping out the China card lol
Maybe he should watch CNBC's report. China is upgrading their public transportation nationwide with electric buses, so to reduce fossil fuel consumption
ruclips.net/video/5wWJW4WJzd0/видео.html
@@jeromegreen3626 Electricity still uses fossil fuels, it's something, I'll give them that, but that's honestly no different than Tesla. (No hate towards Telsa, one of my buddies has one, they're really nice. Lol)
@@tr0llbuster292 Nowadays, electricity can be largely from solar, wind, hydropower, etc., and thus electric buses certainly reduce carbon emission.
@@jeromegreen3626 Also true, but do you know where Proterra buses are getting their electricity? Even on their site, it just says stuff like "To date, Proterra buses have displaced more than 45 million lbs of CO2 emissions and over 2 million gallons of diesel fuel. Together we can improve air quality and create healthier communities with clean, quiet transportation for all".
@@tr0llbuster292 electric buses can reduce carbon emission, not eliminate it. During night time or when no wind blowing, if there is no energy storage system to provide electricity, you need fossil fuel. but overall, it still reduces CO2, not to mention reduces air pollution.
Saagar claims that a lot of people were upset by this protest? Does he have a source for this comment or is it just a Fox News talking point that came out of someone's ass! I wish that James or Krystal had challenged him.
You think Krystal would challenge him?
Gravel Institute LOOOOOL
Saagar: "James … I have a question for you; I understand you wish Harvard to divest from the fossil fuel industry. But why is there no attempt to divest Harvard's assets from Chinese corporations? They are some of the greatest polluters on the planet."
James: "look at my f'ing face beootch; you got any more other questions?"
India is also a big polluter. In fact, among the top 30 most polluted cities, 22 are in India, I wonder how Saagar would respond to that, divest much?
Time to “divest” from ... capitalism. There are no pure investments. “Renewable” energy means solar investor bonanza with LESS energy at MUCH HIGHER COSTS for workers. No surprise this not an issue at ... Harvard.
James Coleman should just stop using fossil fuels and the products that use fossil fuels in their manufacturing. Don't just talk the talk but walk the walk.
You do realize there are already alternatives to fossil fuels and products made from alternatives to fossil fuels and even vehicles such as electric cars that don't use fossil fuels..
You think everything is made from fossil fuels and there are no cars that don't use fossil fuels either?
What a moron!
@@kekwayblaze3176 The electronic device you just used to write and post your reply also plays a part in the emissions, and its components are very hard to decompose.
@@alvincyt That's why we should change our hyper-consumerism, use our product for longer time to reduce emission, not like, buying a shirt, only wearing a summer before throwing it away.
Unnecessary delay of the event serves no purpose but prolonging the stay of the audience, makes them order more junk food which leads to more global emissions.
LMAO....good one!
This is all too late.
According to you.
I actually agree. By the time the U.S. finally takes drastic steps to combat climate change, it will be irreversible. Doesn't help that China and India will be behind the curve in helping out.
Possibly so. But you've got to do what you've got to do.
5:30 Sagaar can't help himself, from time to time he brings the mindless rightwing talking points which are incorrect as well). China has a lot of _pollution_ but this is about *_CO2_* - that conflation is typically made by rightwingers who want to deflect from the responsibility of the U.S. (... China and India are bad too, they should lead, THEN the U.S. could do something - maybe ...)
China 1,38 billion people, developing / emerging nation, workbench of the world
U.S. 330 million people, used fossil fuels to a large extent since more than 70 years, has deindustrialized (but uses a LOT of products made in China, which of course needs energy there), is a rich if very inequal country
_Both countries use about the same volume of fossil fuels_ and emit roughly the same volume of CO2. In *absolute numbers !* In other words on average a Chinese citizen uses 25 % of the energy that the average U.S. citizen uses.
The U.S. uses the most energy per person of any relevant nation (some small oil theocracies like Brunei might have more per person, but they do not make a dent). All first world nations use too much energy - but the U.S. is a class of its own when it comes to SAVINGS POTENTIAL.
Bonus for China: they drove the solar and wind industry. Provided a market for wind turbines for instance from Germany, Denmark, and starting to manufacture solar in China. At a time when the First world nations were occupied with the Great Financial Crisis, austerity the Chinese went big on solar and big on bullet trains.
They followed: Go big or go home. With the large numbers of unit manufactured, installed, and used economy of scale set it, more research became worthwhile. Battery producers got a market and an incentive. Not only for cars, also for solar roof production, surplus of wind and solar farms. Batteries / storage is another very important part of the switch, since the production of renewable energy fluctuates more, storage is very important to make it work. The companies working in the field also profited from the Chinese setting the stage with solar.
Dr. Eicke Weber (international renowed German expert on material research for solar). The first PV panels were used to power satellite - at the end of the 1970s or beginning of 1980s. The production costs for the kWh were high then - but with satellites the PAYLOAD matters.
Every time the globally installed PV area doubled the costs for electricity produced with the panels came down by 20 %. Economy of scale. That had nothing to do with "passing of time", whenever an effort was made (government programs, subsidies) considerable prograss was made, but it did not occur spontanuously.
The Chinese increased production and installation, to the degree that especially solar became more viable in rich countries or states with relatively high electricity costs and a lot of sunshine. Think California and Australia. Now these markets meant even MORE sales .... rinse and repeat.
POLLUTION is bad for the health of the Chinese, that is NOT a problem for the global population. It even contributes to global dimming which has a mild ! cooling effect (not much, but once they clean up their act regarding pollution CO2 and methane will even have more effect).
Air pollution can be cleaned up within 5 - 10 years, the technology was used in Europe, North America in the 1980s (acid rain crisis). Since it was invented an paid for it could have been used at lower costs in developing countries. BUT: The Western oligarchs (with help of Western politicians) just decided that they wanted manufacturing with less costs and the Chinese ruling class went willingly along.
Which btw is NOW a major motivator to clean up their coal act to produce renewable energy, to switch to electric vehicles and have the bullet trains instead of airtraffic. Their elites cannot escape the pollution, they can send the children abroad but some must stay in the country to oversee political rule and management of manufacturing.
Pollution of water and soil is more lasting and more expensive to clean up.
Your entire precious existence relies on fossil fuels. How about a little respect for the fuel source that changed what it is to be a human so dramatically? These are the same people who wantwww to eliminate nuclear as well. I can’t believe how stupid these Harvard students are! Apparently, their diplomas aren’t worth wiping with. I
Bullshit... There have been alternatives to fossil fuels for decades and with investment and research use of fossil fuels will one day become redundant. Hydro, geothermal, solar and wind are just a few alternative energy sources to fossil fuels... Electric cars are just one example of vehicles that don't use fossil fuels.. The list goes on and on..
You might think the world can't live without fossil fuels and there will never be alternative energy sources to replace fossil fuels ever but that just goes to show you have spent your entire life with your head up your ass..
With all due respect, no one is denying how much we choose to rely on fossil fuels and how much it changed the world.
The focus is the fact that fossil fuels is killing us and the planet and we don't actually have to rely on fossil fuels.
KeKway Blaze I agree but the last part was uncalled for. Learn decency to fellow people. It will make you seem a better, more intelligent person. Just sayin
I don't think he is talking about eliminating fossil fuel, but we still can try to reduce emission, to reduce pollution to protect the earth
These hypocritical rich kids and activists should start by personally planting 200+ trees each and also documenting how they curbed/halved their own personal consumption. It's easy to blame other people to feel good about yourself.
What is this malarky
This is the kind of protest the Baby Boomers had every day on campuses across the country. Glad to finally see it's popularity return.
Watch, all them kids ain't never gonna land a good job from this.
LOL
@@stuuuuuuuu I'm talking about blowback from protest.
How will you charge anything without fossil fuel for electricity?
Are you that dumb?
Solar and wind turbines might be a good start.
@@MeditativeMoments1 huh? So no electricity at all?
Squirrels in a cage
Carlton Baggett Where have you been living for the past 20+ years? In a barrel of oil?
They couldn't storm Area 51 so they stormed the field. Lmao.
They should've been rolled over with fire hoses the moment they flittered onto the field. Admin knew they were doing it and allowed it.
Just like the protestors at Selma I imagine?
@@ruymartinez4526 and Standing Rock
@@ruymartinez4526 these were spoiled, entitled children interrupting a football game, it doesn't matter why.
Did they interrupt your precious football? Ahh, that’s a shame! 100 lashes with a fire hose for you.
John McGlasson Spoken like a true fossil fuel apologist. That's the spirit. Just give in and accept the inevitability of choking to death on gas fumes! Please explain how you came up with the idea of "rolling over" the protestors with fire hoses. How would that work exactly? Cheers.
He lost me on "student VOICES" indicating they are intersectional SJW activists.. That is where i tune out
What?
@@fogg0 To use an intersectional SJW answer to that.. I am not here to educate you.. Educate yourself
:-)
It is sad that you gave these people the time of day. If he didnt agree with what the school was doing, he could have just left the school and stopped giving them any money.
It's sad you're a troll who doesn't give a damn about the planet.
@@sparkygump such an intelligent response you have given me. You disagree with my thought so I MUST be a troll? Maybe one day you will be able to express yourself in an adult manner and not voice opinions that have no facts behind them.
So he doesn't have a right to speak freely is what you are saying.. I didn't realize going to college means you give up your rights such as free speech.
@@kekwayblaze3176 nowhere did I say any person didnt have the right to speak. That is one of the great parts of America. The fact that we do have the right to free speech. The people at the football game expressed those rights in a place where they were not allowed to be.
@@sirmayse1545 You seem to know nothing about protests in general..The Civil Rights Marches were "illegal" in many instances and were held in places where they had no permission to be..In fact some Civil Rights marchers were even killed or beaten by law enforcement back in the 60's. The protests against the Vietnam War were held at colleges across the country with students having sit-ins in places they had no permission to be and protesting in places on campus they had no permission to be... It appears you are more upset about the inconvenience of a football team and spectators then what these protestors were there for and that was to bring attention to that the fossil fuel industry is donating money to colleges in an era of awareness that the fossil fuel industry is contributing to the climate change crisis.
The fossil fuel industry I understand, but Puerto Rican debt is a just investment.
No. It's a vulture vampire extortionist form of capitalism, designed to enslave the people of Puerto Rico.
@@kevinschmidt2210 Ok. So when you go to the bank to ask for a loan, the bank (not you) is acting as a "capitalistic vulture vampire", even though in this case, you would be asking for billions of dollars in loans with no plans to repay them?
@@Anythingforfreedom That's your delusion. You're being willfully ignorant. Good bye!
🤦🏾♂️I do long for a day when this guy can stop demagoguing against China
Because they're perfect and above any criticism. Ok. Got it.
@@sparkygump Nope. Not what I said, like at all.
I recommend you read again if you deem it neccessary
@@sparkygump At least China is doing something. they are upgrading public transportation nationwide with electric buses, so to reduce fossil fuel consumption.
ruclips.net/video/5wWJW4WJzd0/видео.html