Permaculture farming does pull CO2 from the air and locks it in the soil. Not just machines but the understanding the ways of Nature which if encouraged will lead to a stable world.
Thank you very much! Excellent explanation on what is holding us back. Oil companies work for sure did a good job turning us against each others instead of doing the right thing. If you read this comment this is what you can do: - work in the solar or wind or battery or EV industry - install solar on your roof or balkony - learn more about these technologies and talk about them It took me years, but i now feel that i have a real impact. Working on MW Solar projects and helping dozens of people going solar, heatpumps, EV's.
I totally agree that we not just have to reduce the emissions but restore the lower CO2 levels. But the video is lacking an explanation on how to do that. Sure, abstinence isn't something that motivates many people. But buying a lot of things doesn't work either and also doesn't take CO2 out of the atmosphere. The technical solutions don't work well enough. The most effective ways are reforestation and rehydrating marshland while on the same time stop the destruction of them. At least as far as I know. But primarily we have to stop burning fossil fuels.
Hi, Adam! I love how deeply you and your team have thought about these climate problems and the technological solutions that we have at our disposal. I’m also very impressed by your ability to clearly communicate these complex concepts with both realism and optimism. I would love to have you on to my podcast for one or more long form discussions to dive deeper into these concepts and to promote your book.
A verbal 'Ooo!' when I refreshed my subscriptions feed. I used to listen to music on road trips, but now it's playing RethinkX and Mr Seba on repeat. The consistent reminder of the fundamentals of a brighter, cleaner, more prosperous, and fulfilling future is often needed, and always refreshing. Might have to get an EV sooner so I can afford to drive more. ;) Thanks for all you and the team do. We're listening, and we value it immensely.
Interesting you say that about EVs Joel. I used to drive very little- since investing in an EV I drive all the time and love it! Plug it into solar energy at home, drive, repeat!
My partner is proposing that our local progressive groups read Brighter and organize discussions around its key points. It's a paradigm shift. even for those of us who have successfully advocated for adoption of solar on economic grounds. That moralizing theme always creeps in. We're entering an era where clean energy is solely about a clean planet and a healthier life for all who share it. Wow!!! Thanks to Adam and Tony and all the others who have worked to make it happen. Thanks to Elon and J.B. and Joe Justice and Sandy Munro and Al Gore and thousands of others.
This is an excellent explanation of the mischaracterization of why environmental issues occur. Romanticizing and blaming these issues on a select few, while also denigrating our chance to "fix" these issues, is not helpful; technology improves society to the point where there is no other practical solution. Thanks for the excellent analysis, Adam!
I really wonder why my comment was deleted or is not shown. I respectfully showed the duality of technology as a practical solution and the political side of being used to create fear in the minds of people of world wide nations to use it to gain power. While I agree that only theoretical technological solution can solve the environmental issue, so in the same way the political side has to be taken in this process, otherwise the pure technological side will suffer many backlashes and everything will be delayed. Being positive here is very important and I think we have good reasons to be very optimistic in the practical side. But we have to take care that we fix or include the political and with that the society of every nation. That is the duality of the solution of the future.
In my opinion solving and repairing isn't expensive. The destruction is to cheap. Take 3M and Gore Tex Pfas issues we have now. Just of many problems that could have been prevented to escalate.
This series is convincing, your reasoning and explanations are believable, accurate and accessible , exactly what I needed to see around the dark wall of pessimism that has jailed my mind and paralyzed me. Thank you .
The books and videos rethinking transportation would benefit from an updated version with current status. The content is great but way too early. What if you give it an update in 2024 or maybe more appropriate is 2025 with new costs, more accurate robotaxi data etc. maybe it just needs a short paper. Include Aramco’s 2 ipo’s, bo sales of expensive assets, how oil companies are selling expensive how toyota is doubling down on gas engines all reminders of the items mentioned in the book and videos.
There is a saying you will sometimes encounter, often attributed to Einstein, correctly or not BTSOOM, that we cannot solve our problems with the same kind of thinking that created those problems. There is some truth to this, but there's also a huge, obvious logical flaw. You cannot do ANYTHING NEW with a virtual certainty of having unintended consequences. Here's another quote, from Samuel Johnson: "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome." Yet unintended consequences are put forth, over and over, as an argument against adopting new technology. It's important to call BS on this wherever it arises.
Hi, Adam. I appreciate your efforts. But in this case (episode #6) I think you are wasting your time. You are talking to a bunch of idiots who cannot think straight about technology. They personally depend on it, totally, (just as we all do), and they could not begin to describe a world without it, and yet they intone rubbish like "technology will not save us", even though it is the only thing that ever has, and the only thing that is right now, and probably the only thing that ever can, save us. I say: forget these people. They are idiots. Just my opinion.
I largely agree with you. The only difference between your burning house analogy and the earths eco-system is that a house can't rebuild itself, but the ecosystem does have regenerative qualities. If we were to just stop all consumption (theoretically) the earth would recover and stabilize the climate over time. Keep up the great work!
We already have climate solutions that are orders of magnitude cheaper than climate destruction. The reason we don’t “choose” them isn’t because they are expensive, it’s because energy is privately held and the price of climate destruction doesn’t show up in the price tag of the commodity. But when consumers own the supply we cannot socialize the cost of climate destruction- it is our tab to pay. So why would we choose the more expensive option? We wouldnt. All other non carbon emitting solutions would be orders of magnitude cheaper if energy was socialized. And why wouldnt we socialize energy when human life is impossible without it? This isn’t a technological problem. This is a capitalist problem.
Unfortunately CO2 continues to grow even with renewables so until we have an economic way to remove it we are still heading over the cliff of extreme climate impacts. Technology only works if it is profitable and currently is the net producer of CO2
while technology is important i think that the political and social aspects are as important in the end technology is just power to change the environment, there needs to be a will to use it, and use it 'correctly' (which of course is a contentious issue) I feel some activists use reductive language towards technological solutions not only because of the reasons you listed but because they act a magic bullets which fix the problem but not the social and political (and so on) systems which actually caused the problem you don't only want to treat the symptoms you also want to cure the source (of course if you can't do so treating the symptoms is usually enough) social and technological solutions work synergistically: needing less social will because technology makes the sacrifices needed to solve the problem lesser, needing less advanced technological solutions because people want to recover the planet even at a cost to their way of life hope I got my point across (I've been a little scatter brained, as you can probably see) still enjoy your videos even if I don't entirely agree with them, since they make me think more deeply about these issues
Technology (ie wind, solar, battery) is the solution, but reducing our impact by being less wasteful, using less fossil fuels will help too. Let's do both! My family is currently reprioritizing our budget away from things that are bad(gas cars, all inclusivee trips) for environment towards things that are good (tesla, solar panels, organic food). I'm much happier too.
Excellent point and my thought as well. I think solving the climate issue will be accelerated if we not only focus on technology but also come to terms with our the role of our individual consumption. Shaming and blaming may not be the way but acknowledging we can do more seems relevant to me just the same.
Thanks Adam, Humans are great at solving technical problems and terrible at solving ideological ones. Your point about romanticizing and then moralizing is spot on. C+O2 develops technical/biological solutions for taking Carbon from the atmosphere and storing it in the soil. This is a really exciting time and I believe you are on the money. Cheers
“Capitalism can be a tremendous force for good, but it can also be terribly destructive without stringent regulation.” The same can be said of Slavery. Slavery generated incredible wealth that still circulates within the economy which benefits everyone today, including people of color. So shall we bring Slavery back? And when are the enslaved free? When you pay them $10/hr? $50/hour? Enslaved laborers are free when they own and control the product of their labor, which employees do not. Slavery abolition is incomplete. All employment is oppression if and until workers and consumers democratically control what we collectively create. Anything less is tyranny. Or as my employer said to me when I complained, “This isn’t a democracy!” No amount of regulation changes that injustice.
Technology isn’t good or evil. Technology is power. The evil is our failure to democratically own and control power - technology. If we could vote on whether to eliminate fossil fuels and build a climate safe solution we would! But we can’t. Because the technology of for profit energy production is privately controlled.
This is the best explanation of the situation by far. I've been thinking the same for decades, but never could express it this well.
Permaculture farming does pull CO2 from the air and locks it in the soil. Not just machines but the understanding the ways of Nature which if encouraged will lead to a stable world.
Yes true - complex problem, complex solution.
Sounds like new ways of doing the same old thing.
Thank you very much! Excellent explanation on what is holding us back. Oil companies work for sure did a good job turning us against each others instead of doing the right thing.
If you read this comment this is what you can do:
- work in the solar or wind or battery or EV industry
- install solar on your roof or balkony
- learn more about these technologies and talk about them
It took me years, but i now feel that i have a real impact. Working on MW Solar projects and helping dozens of people going solar, heatpumps, EV's.
I totally agree that we not just have to reduce the emissions but restore the lower CO2 levels. But the video is lacking an explanation on how to do that. Sure, abstinence isn't something that motivates many people. But buying a lot of things doesn't work either and also doesn't take CO2 out of the atmosphere. The technical solutions don't work well enough. The most effective ways are reforestation and rehydrating marshland while on the same time stop the destruction of them. At least as far as I know. But primarily we have to stop burning fossil fuels.
Hi, Adam! I love how deeply you and your team have thought about these climate problems and the technological solutions that we have at our disposal. I’m also very impressed by your ability to clearly communicate these complex concepts with both realism and optimism.
I would love to have you on to my podcast for one or more long form discussions to dive deeper into these concepts and to promote your book.
Thanks for keeping up reason and facts. Rare currencies in this world.....yet so vitally important.
A verbal 'Ooo!' when I refreshed my subscriptions feed.
I used to listen to music on road trips, but now it's playing RethinkX and Mr Seba on repeat. The consistent reminder of the fundamentals of a brighter, cleaner, more prosperous, and fulfilling future is often needed, and always refreshing.
Might have to get an EV sooner so I can afford to drive more. ;)
Thanks for all you and the team do. We're listening, and we value it immensely.
Interesting you say that about EVs Joel. I used to drive very little- since investing in an EV I drive all the time and love it! Plug it into solar energy at home, drive, repeat!
My partner is proposing that our local progressive groups read Brighter and organize discussions around its key points. It's a paradigm shift. even for those of us who have successfully advocated for adoption of solar on economic grounds. That moralizing theme always creeps in. We're entering an era where clean energy is solely about a clean planet and a healthier life for all who share it. Wow!!! Thanks to Adam and Tony and all the others who have worked to make it happen. Thanks to Elon and J.B. and Joe Justice and Sandy Munro and Al Gore and thousands of others.
This is an excellent explanation of the mischaracterization of why environmental issues occur.
Romanticizing and blaming these issues on a select few, while also denigrating our chance to "fix" these issues, is not helpful; technology improves society to the point where there is no other practical solution.
Thanks for the excellent analysis, Adam!
I really wonder why my comment was deleted or is not shown. I respectfully showed the duality of technology as a practical solution and the political side of being used to create fear in the minds of people of world wide nations to use it to gain power. While I agree that only theoretical technological solution can solve the environmental issue, so in the same way the political side has to be taken in this process, otherwise the pure technological side will suffer many backlashes and everything will be delayed. Being positive here is very important and I think we have good reasons to be very optimistic in the practical side. But we have to take care that we fix or include the political and with that the society of every nation. That is the duality of the solution of the future.
theoretical technological = practical , technological
I have an issue with one point: Likening the Earth to a house is a poor analogy. Houses don’t have self-correcting mechanisms like the Earth.
It is always a treat to wake up and find a new video from you, Adam. Thank you.
Excellent show... EVery technology is a double edged sword. I completely concur.
In my opinion solving and repairing isn't expensive. The destruction is to cheap.
Take 3M and Gore Tex Pfas issues we have now. Just of many problems that could have been prevented to escalate.
Just tell yourself this lie the next time the "technology" in your hand glitches out and has to reboot.
This series is convincing, your reasoning and explanations are believable, accurate and accessible , exactly what I needed to see around the dark wall of pessimism that has jailed my mind and paralyzed me. Thank you .
Thank you
The books and videos rethinking transportation would benefit from an updated version with current status. The content is great but way too early. What if you give it an update in 2024 or maybe more appropriate is 2025 with new costs, more accurate robotaxi data etc. maybe it just needs a short paper. Include Aramco’s 2 ipo’s, bo sales of expensive assets, how oil companies are selling expensive how toyota is doubling down on gas engines all reminders of the items mentioned in the book and videos.
There is a saying you will sometimes encounter, often attributed to Einstein, correctly or not BTSOOM, that we cannot solve our problems with the same kind of thinking that created those problems. There is some truth to this, but there's also a huge, obvious logical flaw. You cannot do ANYTHING NEW with a virtual certainty of having unintended consequences. Here's another quote, from Samuel Johnson: "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome." Yet unintended consequences are put forth, over and over, as an argument against adopting new technology. It's important to call BS on this wherever it arises.
Hi, Adam. I appreciate your efforts. But in this case (episode #6) I think you are wasting your time. You are talking to a bunch of idiots who cannot think straight about technology. They personally depend on it, totally, (just as we all do), and they could not begin to describe a world without it, and yet they intone rubbish like "technology will not save us", even though it is the only thing that ever has, and the only thing that is right now, and probably the only thing that ever can, save us. I say: forget these people. They are idiots. Just my opinion.
I largely agree with you. The only difference between your burning house analogy and the earths eco-system is that a house can't rebuild itself, but the ecosystem does have regenerative qualities. If we were to just stop all consumption (theoretically) the earth would recover and stabilize the climate over time. Keep up the great work!
We already have climate solutions that are orders of magnitude cheaper than climate destruction. The reason we don’t “choose” them isn’t because they are expensive, it’s because energy is privately held and the price of climate destruction doesn’t show up in the price tag of the commodity. But when consumers own the supply we cannot socialize the cost of climate destruction- it is our tab to pay. So why would we choose the more expensive option? We wouldnt. All other non carbon emitting solutions would be orders of magnitude cheaper if energy was socialized. And why wouldnt we socialize energy when human life is impossible without it? This isn’t a technological problem. This is a capitalist problem.
Unfortunately CO2 continues to grow even with renewables so until we have an economic way to remove it we are still heading over the cliff of extreme climate impacts. Technology only works if it is profitable and currently is the net producer of CO2
while technology is important i think that the political and social aspects are as important
in the end technology is just power to change the environment, there needs to be a will to use it, and use it 'correctly' (which of course is a contentious issue)
I feel some activists use reductive language towards technological solutions not only because of the reasons you listed but because they act a magic bullets which fix the problem but not the social and political (and so on) systems which actually caused the problem
you don't only want to treat the symptoms you also want to cure the source (of course if you can't do so treating the symptoms is usually enough)
social and technological solutions work synergistically: needing less social will because technology makes the sacrifices needed to solve the problem lesser, needing less advanced technological solutions because people want to recover the planet even at a cost to their way of life
hope I got my point across (I've been a little scatter brained, as you can probably see) still enjoy your videos even if I don't entirely agree with them, since they make me think more deeply about these issues
Technology (ie wind, solar, battery) is the solution, but reducing our impact by being less wasteful, using less fossil fuels will help too. Let's do both! My family is currently reprioritizing our budget away from things that are bad(gas cars, all inclusivee trips) for environment towards things that are good (tesla, solar panels, organic food). I'm much happier too.
Excellent point and my thought as well. I think solving the climate issue will be accelerated if we not only focus on technology but also come to terms with our the role of our individual consumption. Shaming and blaming may not be the way but acknowledging we can do more seems relevant to me just the same.
@hdevrede indeed. Shaming and blaming is too harsh, but some polite conversational informing will go a long way.
Political not practical to jump in feet first. Escalator pitch needs work.
Thanks Adam, Humans are great at solving technical problems and terrible at solving ideological ones. Your point about romanticizing and then moralizing is spot on. C+O2 develops technical/biological solutions for taking Carbon from the atmosphere and storing it in the soil. This is a really exciting time and I believe you are on the money. Cheers
Thank you so much for sharing this important insight!
Thanks
Thank you.
Awesome!
“Capitalism can be a tremendous force for good, but it can also be terribly destructive without stringent regulation.” The same can be said of Slavery. Slavery generated incredible wealth that still circulates within the economy which benefits everyone today, including people of color. So shall we bring Slavery back? And when are the enslaved free? When you pay them $10/hr? $50/hour? Enslaved laborers are free when they own and control the product of their labor, which employees do not. Slavery abolition is incomplete. All employment is oppression if and until workers and consumers democratically control what we collectively create. Anything less is tyranny. Or as my employer said to me when I complained, “This isn’t a democracy!” No amount of regulation changes that injustice.
Technology isn’t good or evil. Technology is power. The evil is our failure to democratically own and control power - technology. If we could vote on whether to eliminate fossil fuels and build a climate safe solution we would! But we can’t. Because the technology of for profit energy production is privately controlled.
Technology is only one piece of the puzzle. Justice must also be addressed. Maybe speak to Technology Justice.