I'm in grad school for social work, and this video did a better job of explaining environmental justice than a week's worth of lecture materials. Stellar work!
Hey folks, I noticed that a number of people in the comments are complaining about this episode being too US-centric. Maybe Hot Mess should make an additional video on global economic inequality... and how the same forces and processes that caused climate change, and other anthropogenic changes to ecosystems, caused much of that global inequality in the same stroke. And of course how the communities who lack resources and whose ecosystems are already degraded, destroyed, and/or restricted are the same people who will in many ways have the hardest time adapting to climate change.
Frank, I very well may do that someday, although I do not have anything approaching this channel's audience to appreciate it. Either way, my comment here was intended to offer Hot Mess an idea for how to reconcile with their audience over this perceived lack of coverage, and do the topic of climate justice even more justice.
Frank Rosser I'm afraid you thought wrong. Maybe I should have been more clear in my initial wording. When I said "folks," I meant the creators of Hot Mess.
But since you are so interested in me making videos, I also meant it when I said I might make one about this someday. Not doing it right now isn't about expense, it's about being in the middle of finals. I'm more likely to put it on my educational channel, Earth Alive, than on Naiadryade...
can we be clear about one thing? this is not about race, it's about social class. no wealthy person, of any color or race, in any country of the world, needs to worry about nuclear waste being dumped in their backyard. this is one of those "not in my neighborhood!!" types of things, like prisons and homeless shelters. the complaints stop at the bottom edge of the economic ladder. this will never change, so our only option is to lessen the amount of waste being dumped on a daily basis.....
transylvanian i hear you but your statement makes my point. "racism" has grown into a man-made monster that takes over every other conversation. if humans can't realize that they're all the same, no matter their color, then i'm done with that conversation. in addition, a lot of the most damaging effects of environmental destruction takes place in rural areas, home to a diverse collection of humans, as well as other species, with the only commonality among them being that every area's citizens are POOR. the human species as a whole caused both of the above problems, as well as many others, TOGETHER. and we will only be able to solve them when we put aside our differences and work peacefully together.
This isn't even getting into INTERNATIONAL injustice; where one major industrial power emits massive amounts of CO2, but of course, less developed countries with far less money or political power, in already hotter climates, have to deal with the consequences.
Don't really know how things work in usa, but here in croatia we don't build waste dispousal grounds near the low income community but they come to it, becouse the prices of land are lesser there, and they can afford it, so maybe look at it like that
In the US, a lot of issues like this arise because more affluent communities are more involved politically, so they move to block things from happening in _their_ neighborhoods - new homeless shelter? Immigration centers? Waste dumps? Wealthier communities organize to repel these politically. Poorer neighborhoods tend to not be as engaged, politically, so stuff happens next door that they wouldn't allow if they were paying closer attention. Lack of free time, education, etc - whatever causes it, it's not some intentional scheme of racial or gender discrimination.
Because some people don’t think there is a problem to solve, or if they do, they do it in a way that still harms certain communities over others. It has to be a just transition and that includes acknowledging wrongs that have harmed people.
One important issue: climate change is not as harmful for everyone, not everyone caused it equally, not everyone profited equally from its causes. Right?
this is a common argument used when it comes to the distribution of pollution loads. The industrial nations in europe and america caused the first major steps in climate change in the 19th and 20th century, before the consequences were known. So, less developed countries which only recently started to expand their CO²-heavy industries use this as a reason to claim the "right" to pollute, just like the more developed nations did in the past. The big issue with this is of course that nature doesn't care which countries cause pollution. Once the damage is done, everyone will be affected by it. That's why the richer nations need to step in and support growing countries in building their economy, while at the same time tying their help to climate regulations for these countries (or rather, all countries including themselves).
Could you make a video that's _not_ U.S.-centric? Especially when the subject is significantly less visible (and less impactful) on the scale of a single country.
Globally, global warming is worse for communities in the tropics. (This shouldn't be surprising.) Generally, the extreme heat is made worse by either a lack of water or high humidity, both of which tend to be exaggerated by increased temperatures. These communities are usually in Global South or "third-world" countries, which means that they are already struggling to "keep up" with the Global North or "first world". If the Global North doesn't help the Global South develop its economy in environmentally-friendly ways, they are going to struggle to develop, which will continue to hinder their ability to compete with the Global North for...well...anything important, really. Climate change is going to be another of those things that sucks for everyone and reinforces existing power structures if we don't try to avoid having it do so.
I'm not talking about absolute temperature change, I'm talking about the effects that temperature change has on local communities. (Hence "worse _for communities_ in the tropics," not "worse _in the tropics".)_ To generalize, while a community in Siberia is going to have its lifestyle disrupted by average temperatures increasing by (say) 5-10 degrees, it's not going to cause as big of an issues as another 2-3 degrees in India, where extreme summer heat is already potentially lethal.
If you think these climate change-related tragedies are terrible, you should see how much suffering will be imposed by taking the steps necessary to *stop* climate change.
Leonardo's movie Before the Flood does a great job of showing this kind of unjust climate change around the world. A large portion of India specifically is being hit really hard
Thank you very much for taking on this issue. I know it is a very difficult topic, but we need you and more like you. Richard Alley says: _We have a problem and no one is talking about it_ *Questions* I hope you talk about Ocean acidification Phytoplankton decline Dead Zones When sea ice has melted, does it add to tides since there is more water can be displaced? Take care P.S. I've been writing a French climate change blog for the last 3 years
If I understand it right, the issue is that economically disadvantaged communities are disproportionately affected by climate change due to insufficient infrastructure or lack of attention. This isn't something I ever gave much thought to, but then isn't this a result of a failure on the USA's part to improve these disadvantaged communities? The connection to climate change is pretty tangential and superficial because the problem isn't "climate change affects disadvantaged communities disproportionately", it's actually more like "these communities are disadvantaged to begin with, and that causes them to suffer worse than others in the face of climate change". I mean, this isn't a "climate change injustice" problem, it's a "class and economic injustice" problem.
You are Climate justice warriors, jk My country is an agriculture oriented country(atleast when you look at the state of employment) . Every successive year harvest is worse. Water is scarce, farmers are killing themselves and dooming their families with them. Government is chilling as usual.
I am from South Africa, and has visited Cape Town numerous times. They talk about Cape Town as if it is poor compared to the cities compared to afterward, but really it is a Capital city that brings in lots of income. It is not that it is poor, it’s just that they do not have proper measures put in place for issues like this, as this is a new challenge we are facing
Without political equally, for example the Citizens United case in the US comes to mind, there can't be any expectations of a place in the table for everybody to discuss climate change.
Hot Mess www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004 "multiple global ecosystem models suggest that CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend, followed by nitrogen deposition (9%), climate change (8%) and land cover change (LCC) (4%). CO2 fertilization effects explain most of the greening trends in the tropics." Developing nations need to pay for benefits?
And there she goes again... Do you know how plants work? You can give them as much CO2 as you want to, but if they haven't got the nutrients they need to profit from the extra CO2, there will be reached a limit, in a greenhouse you can regulate CO2 and provide with all the nutrients for an optimal production, but you can't say the same for everything outside. And this happens both to intended and unintended plants, like weeds, and will change the flow of energy and water. Also rainfall patterns will change, dry areas will become drier and wet areas will become wetter, more precipitation increases erosion of the soil and washes the nutrients away. But of course you already know this, but you need to keep pushing your agenda.
Wut? I haven't said there isn't a greening taking place, this is very well known and isn't up for discussion. What is up to discussion is whether the short-term benefits will be overridden by the long-term consequences...or is saying that changing precipitation patterns and that plant growth is limited by the available nutrients a conflicting theory ?
In the abstract of the paper you're using: "The regional effects of unexplained factors suggest that the next generation of ecosystem models will need to explore the impacts of forest demography, differences in regional management intensities for cropland and pastures, and other emerging productivity constraints such as phosphorus availability." I reiterate: "other emerging productivity constraints such as phosphorous availability".
It's kind of selective to say climate change is unjust to the poor & minorities. Climate change affects all & I don't think it has any political, social, economical, or racial preferences. It's just plain unfair to be poor / a minority / etc. You suffer all the time if you are poor & cannot escape your environment, regardless if it's 110 degrees outside or you're 7ft under water.
This is the best Hot Mess video to date. And the channel is slowly but surely becoming one of the best. PBS Digital Studios is really, really great at curating quality content, and climate justice is one of the biggest issues with which we have to deal today.
Agreed! I continue to be impressed by PBS. Of all legacy media groups, PBS is far ahead of the curve in online content. PBS Digital Studios produces *many* of the very best educational shows on RUclips, often doing so by collaborating with and creating opportunities for talented people who are already making educational videos (at perhaps a lower budget). I'd say so far Hot Mess is shaping up to be in a tier with Eons, which if you ask me is one of the most engaging, fascinating and beautiful shows on RUclips right now. (Though both of these opinions reflect my interests, so I'm probably biased.)
I sincerely have no idea as I'm not American, but didn't you say "some facts" in plural? Which are the other ones? And in case that they had that one wrong, how is this supposed to influence the validity of this video?
It might just be that land is cheaper in low income areas for things like landfills in those areas. But, that obviously doesn't apply to all the scenarios.
While this video is somewhat controversial, it's hard to dispute that climate change will affect everyone differently. A lot of the people that deny climate change, are the same people that have the resources to protect themselves from the full force of climate change.
Everyone believes in climate change but not that carbon is causing it I think all the cement and asphalt in cities and on roads has more to do with higher temperature readings than anything else there is no climate emergency just natural climate change
Something that has been a constant throughout history is the migration of people from one place to another,whether due to economic climate, violence climates, cultural climates ,or ....the actual climate. While we all love our home, wherever it is, and most of us fight to make the sacrifices we have to make to keep living where we grew up, the truth is, we also need to stay fluid enough to move where life will be better. And as the climate changes, some areas will become nicer to live while others will become worse. I mean, as the earth warms and Arizona starts roasting, Canada is gonna look pretty decent :-). Change is hard, but not always bad. This from a guy (me) who made every educational, career, and family decision to be able to live where I grew up, and still couldn't do it and am living far from family, familiarity, and fun, and....still finding wonderful things to enjoy about my new life somewhere else
Do you want to show any evidence that changing the focus of the Office of Environmental Justice to “all people” was a bad thing or are you just going to expect me to believe it? Also please don't do this, climate change is not a social issue, please don't turn it into one. This video spent 5 minutes trying to say something which is completely obvious, (that changes to the environment will have a more severe effect on areas which are less able to respond and adapt to those changes,) but doesn't do anything with that point. At the very end, there is a paragraph which baffles me: "It's easy to assume that climate change will affect us all equally, but the truth is that communities all around us may be forced to bear an unequal brunt of our changing world. If we want to change this, we have to recognize those disparities and engage with those communities. That way, as we find solutions, everyone has a seat at the table." I don't think anyone has ever assumed that climate change will affect everyone equally, such an assumption is so obviously ridiculous. Next, it proposes that 1, this is a thing which should be changed, 2, this is a thing which could be changed, and 3, changing so would somehow give "everyone a seat at the table", whatever that means. I don't think I agree that it's better for everyone to share the pain equally rather than trying to remove the pain altogether. We should focus primarily on reducing our effects climate change, then on all the injustices in the world, because if we all die of starvation because all the bees died and so most of the things we eat became almost impossible to grow because we didn't do anything about climate change, (or whatever will happen,) nobody will have the luxury to care about injustices. Yes, I am aware I may be straw-manning a bit, its never explicitly said that we should ignore climate change in favour of making sure we all have a "seat at the table", but like I said before, climate change is not a social issue, please don't make it one.
It’s a social issue because of how it has been handled - where minorities beat the brunt of the burden. To separate the two would be to deliberately make yourself ignorant to the problem at large. Also, both adaptation and mitigation efforts can be done simultaneously. Removing the pain while also preventing the pain.
Firstly, minorities don't bear the brunt of the burden, people in poorer areas with weaker infrastructure do. Someone who is a minority, but happens to be a millionaire will not bear more of a burden because they will have the ability to live in an area which is more capable of dealing with or ignoring the climate change. The reason why I say that it's not a social issue is because how it affects people has nothing to do with race or sex, it does have to do with income so in that respect it could still be considered a social issue, but the video focuses on race while equating black/minorities with low-income areas which make it feel like it's trying to manipulate me rather than convince me. "It’s a social issue because of how it has been handled - where minorities beat the brunt of the burden. To separate the two would be to deliberately make yourself ignorant to the problem at large." I don't think this makes any sense. I think climate change can and should be separated from the injustices of the world because they are both caused by different things and would be addressed using very different methods. Also removing the pain and preventing the pain are the same thing, so I will assume you mean that we could remove the pain and disperse the pain at the same time, which I agree with, but that wasn't my point. My point was that if we are prioritising between solving the root causes of climate change and helping areas most affected by climate change we should almost always focus on the former. That isn't to dismiss the effects on specific areas, but this video never addresses this problem in relation to other problems that might be more worth focusing on. The more I watch this video and read the captions the more I realise just how poorly thought out it was. If you pay close attention you may notice that it completely leaves the subject of climate change altogether at 2:46 to focus on the origins of environmental justice, which are not really relevant. (It then goes to say that "It's easy to assume that climate change will affect us all equally" which I have already said is absurd.) I'm actually shocked that I gave it any credibility at all given how it seems to have no focus or real point.
It's easy to assume if you don't know anything about climate change and just focus on global warming, I suppose, but I haven't met anyone who literally thinks that global warming / climate change will affect us all easily, just that it's a big problem for everyone.
This is why DJT has such unquestioned support from so many poor whites. Every issue needs to be made into an issue about social minorities - even the ones that affect _all_ of us, and _especially_ the poor. If you were a poor white person, of course you'd feel left out of the discussion when every discussion, no matter how universal needs to exclude you to seem socially appropriate. Lack of wealth, education, & political engagement are the problems here. We can either acknowledge how racially universal these problems are, or the western world will continue shooting itself in the foot as we needlessly divide ourselves along arbitrary lines for the sake of moral grandstanding.
I understand the desire to keep videos short, but this also forces the scope to be kept very small. I would like to see more videos delving deeper into the issues being raised and also include a global perspective along with the US centric one.
This was a good video and a good argument, but sadly, the people who need to see this the most will refuse to believe it's an issue. You're taking a pretty liberal viewpoint here; the people who need the most convincing are conservatives, by far. Both conservatives and liberals will basically only be convinced by something if it's based around their core beliefs (sad, but true). You guys should make a climate change argument centered around economics - THAT might actually make conservatives listen. BTW, I'm neither conservative nor liberal (closer to libertarian if anything) but I do strongly feel that climate change is an issue and we need to make as many people aware of it as we can.
Scotland Dobson Exactly, EXACTLY. All politicians care about is what's happening right NOW. Well climate change is happening right now, the world's oil supply is massive but diminishing, and if we don't do anything about it, the cost of everything will skyrocket (manufacturing, and literally everything else that involves oil). Inflation through the roof, economic collapse, etc. We can't afford to let this go on any longer.
Frank Rosser Sure, that may be true, but it is a big factor, and what I'm saying is it may be the only way to get far right-wing politicians to back anti-pollution efforts. And besides, we already know all sorts of stuff about environmental hazards, and we've been talking about it for decades at this point - everyone who could possibly be convinced from that method has pretty much already been convinced. It's time for new tactics.
the big problem here is that people only see black and white. this video is proof of that. they see the issue and have one reason for it that fits there agenda. but no issue is as easy as that there are multiple reasons and not talking about them all is just hurtful to the conversation. it just polarises people.
Wait. You already said that nuclear and hydroelectric alternatives would resolve global warming. So why are you changing the topic. Pleas discuss why we are not using those alternatives.
Assaf Wodeslavsky I’m sure that Hot Mess is rain by a team, and different episodes are written simultaneously. “Why We’re Not Using Renewable Power” could be the next video.
Okay, you outlined the pressing issues of socio-economic disparity pretty well. What does Climate Justice actually do for poor people and minorities? And speaking of Justice, when do we start holding big polluters accountable for their actions?
As a southern Californian I take a certain amount of comfort that residents of Malibu will be hit first and hardest. Watts and Boyle Heights won't be suffering storm surges, flooding, coastal erosion, or landslides, just heat. And maybe gentrification, if Malibu refugees move in on them. In general in the US, coastal populations are among the wealthiest, unlike, say, Bangladesh. Just saying that environmental justice may have unintended consequences if the more sophisticated inhabitants of Santa Monica and Malibu should manage to hijack the benefits stream. Nothing to be concerned about probably, that would never happen.
It comes down to political will. When you have a country led politicians that are more concerned with corporate wealth than the well being of its citizens the will to serve the interest of the people is diminished. Ultimately, it is up to people to vote for those who hold the interests of the people above the wealth and prosperity of companies.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:03 🌍 Understanding the Impact of Climate Change - Climate change affects humans worldwide, impacting different communities in various ways. - Extreme weather events and environmental disparities can make recovery more challenging for vulnerable communities. - The concept of environmental justice aims to address inequalities in environmental impacts based on race, national origin, or income. 01:21 🌆 Environmental Disparities in the U.S. - Environmental disparities exist even in countries like the United States. - Examples include dumping debris near low-income communities, inadequate evacuation options during natural disasters, and clean water shortages in Puerto Rico. - Systemic inequalities become more evident as climate change intensifies. 02:45 🏡 Impact on Vulnerable Communities - Vulnerable communities often lack resources, leading to deadly consequences during extreme heat. - Systemic inequalities, like the lack of air conditioning in public housing, will become more pronounced with rising temperatures. - Climate change exacerbates disparities within communities. 03:12 🏛️ History of Environmental Justice in the U.S. - Environmental justice efforts in the U.S. trace back to mass demonstrations in Warren County, North Carolina in 1982. - The EPA was founded in 1992 to address environmental justice, and Bill Clinton's executive order incorporated it into civil rights law. - The focus on environmental justice fluctuated under different administrations, affecting policy implementation. 04:36 🤝 Engaging with Vulnerable Communities - Climate change does not affect all communities equally, and some bear a disproportionate burden. - Engaging with vulnerable communities is essential for finding equitable solutions to climate change. - Recognizing disparities and including affected communities in decision-making processes is crucial. Made with HARPA AI
If they were going to turn the farmland near my village into a landfill then I would buy a house somewhere else. The poor people simply can't afford to do that. I'd also have a hard time selling my old house since no one wants to live near a landfill. Therefore I have to drop the price significantly. Because of this someone with a low income who can't find a decent house somewhere else can live in my old house. Suddenly the GDP in my old village drops significantly.
Justice for people is great, but what about justice to all the species we've wiped, all the forests and ecosystems we've razed, all the oceans we take a dump in, the air we've choked.
I think that often, the two are very intertwined. All across the globe there are examples of ecosystems and their land-based human communities/cultures whose demise in health and quality of life are results of the same process of colonization, resource extraction, and commodification of the Earth. When people are a part of an ecosystem, destroying that ecosystem wreaks havoc on the people as well.
Create a video regarding animal agriculture and it's affects on nature as a whole and how it contributes to green house gases more than other sectors (more than all sea, land, air transportation combined!) and how just by changing our diet we can lower our carbon footprint by up to %50 for example if we went on a plant based diet (which is healthy and sustainable anyways:) I think it's a hot mess to speak about it ! :)
I love how in depth you're going into each sub-topic of climate change. This one is especially important and often brushed to the side in the main conversation.
this video contained basically zero depth at all, at least none that I could see. If you could point me in the direction of such depth that would be great.
Even central Europe has issues, like heavy rain that caused a number of floodings in Germany. And I'm having big health issues when it's too warm :/ It's so disappointing that Trump thinks climate change is a hoax, just because he doesn't understand it.
This video is a great highlights of the history of Environmental Justice in the United States. The only link to Climate Change iirc is that the disadvantaged will be less able to respond to extreme weather events. I'd love to have seen other issues discussed and from a more global perspective. Food supply, cost of living, migrations, maybe there are other problems I'm unaware of.
Also, it was mostly about the USA. I am tired of various media that claim to have a global perspective when in fact they're applying the US-American one. And projecting their racial issues on the whole world (not saying there isn't racial discrimination elsewhere, just that it is often different and addressed differently than in the USA). Or maybe it's just the language that is exclusionary. It was developed there to speak of everyone in the USA with respect - but ended up functioning as a signal for the rest of the world that "it is not about you".
Climate change is unjust in a major way precisely because its negative aspects tend to disproportionately affect already politically and economically disadvantaged people. It all intersects and connects.
Though Climate Change will of course effect some people more than others, in the long run it will depend more on geography of where people live than their income. What you talk about here is more focused on environmental damage. Still an important issue, but you should make a distinction, especially because this channel seems to be more focused on climate change. Also if you want to get people who would not care about climate change to care telling them that groups that they don't care about much will suffer more than them is counterproductive.
Great channel, have been looking for something similar, but this exceeds my expectations. And this even though I completely disagree with this, my 2nd, episode. I am from Germany, and many here have a different view. Though I have a physics degree, I must admit I don't have detailed knowledge on nuclear power engineering, but some urgent questions haven't been addressed in this episode: 1) where do you leave the waste? We spent enormous amounts on money, and still haven't found a solution for this! All disposals are only temporal. We will be paying for nuclear waste for upcoming thousands of years and it will be an ongoing hazards for next generations (dirty bombs, etc.) 2) It's a power source with limited resources, already today we can't extract as much as we would need, it will never be sufficient to supply globally. 3.) so again people are controlling these limited ressources, using them as instrument of political power, having conflicts for them, while renewable energy is a much more decentralized source. 4) The danger created by these nuclear power stations is so high, that no insurance will cover them. So it will be covered by society, by us, which are hidden costs, not taken into account. Tchernobyl, Fukoshima, etc. the companies compensated only a small fraction of the damage. And Hi-Tec Japan showed, that even they can't contain the danger, what if more and more low-tech countries use nuclear as major source of energy? 5) covered only partially: nuclear can be used always as weapon, for terrorists, for nations, eg. current Iranian conflict.6) Altogether they are not so profitable as one might think, which is the real reason, why many nations turn their back on them. Renewable energy is the future in which investments should be made.
Environmental justice is like social justice everyone needs to stop trying to take from those who earn it thay need to get out and earn it themselves and protect there home and lives themselves that's what my job is I'm not hoping for help I'm helping my self and my family
It's good to help those in need, but including identity politics is being divisive. Everyone has their own circumstance to deal with. Educating about climate change and how to fix it is important. Talking about how it affects one group of people in broad strokes doesn't fix anything. There are so many exceptions and caveats that fall within those sweeping classifications. Strive to fix the problem and everyone benefits in their own measure.
And I'm saying there are bigger problems that when addressed, will solve these issues as a byproduct. Solving the smaller issue by itself does not get rid of the bigger problem. Stop looking through lenses and look at the big picture. As humans, we've fucked ourselves with bottom lines and big industry which are the driving influences behind poor quality residential areas, pollution etc. Should we stop making houses on poor quality land? Pay people more so they may afford better housing? - band-aid solutions for something won't stop happening unless something larger scale is done... but what do I know? I'm just some person on the internet with an opinion.
Over 100,000 hits on google scholar on environmental racism. It's been a topic for decades now. This is why videos like these are important. The justice aspect is not talked about enough in the larger conversation. scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C15&as_vis=1&q=%22environmental+justice%22&btnG=
Whenever I see the term ‘identity politics’ I mentally substitute “civil rights” or “equality under the law” and re read the sentence. Helps me understand the point of view of the poster...
My financial support will offset the climate impact of your videos in what way? please enlighten me. I do like what you are saying, but I fail to understand how my cash money offsets the climate impact of your videos, as you have just stated. great content, great concept.
Saying that all people should have the same resources to combat climate change is not equality, it is equity. Where low income communities and nations are disproportionately afforded with additional resources. Dont call one for the other, Too often i see smart people not know the difference and it makes me doubt all their information on the topic, because they cant even get the category of their premise correct. Equality is about opportunity, and equity is about outcome. one is offering a job to all persons regardless of features to select the best skilled, and the other is picking someone regardless of skill to fulfil a feature requirement. both have negative sides, maybe all women are selected because they are the most skilled(equality; seems sexist, but isnt, men not rejected based on sex), or maybe skilled women are rejected to fulfil a '# of men' criterion(equity; but is sexist, women rejected and men selected because of sex)
Best episode yet! It was very well written, and I love this host. Climate justice is such an important issue within every question about how we are to adapt to climate change.
I'm so excited to have finally found a channel on RUclips that talks about issues like this! Before taking some college courses, I had a lot of trouble finding places to learn about important environmental issues. Thank you for making this, as I think society as a whole needs to start having more conversations about the environment and environmental justice in general.
Since this isn't under human control, though, the biggest reason it will affect some people more than others is because it will affect some PLACES more than others.
(Before someone misunderstands that, I mean it's not under directed human CONTROL. I'm not one of those people denying the fact that it's CAUSED by humans.)
This video is probably the most racist I've ever seen there is a lot more than this video explains I can't believe thay took this route I've been an avid supporter for a while not to the PBS studios but if this keeps up I may not be for much longer just tell the facts cherry picking is not the way to get the message out
Consider me unsurprised: money buys things, people with more money are better off, that is the nature of money, that is how it works and why it is sought. Don't get me wrong I'm not opposed to reasonable socialism, but no amount of effort will make money ineffective at getting things, if it did then we would just shift to a different currency
According to the IPCC's reports most warming will take place above the poles and the equator which will result in less difference in high an low pressure areas on both hemispheres: so less storms, less floods, less drought, hurricanes and typhoons. Which would make perfect sense. About cyclone the IPCC claims: "Multi-decadal variability and the quality of the tropical cyclone records prior to routine satellite observations in about 1970 complicate the detection of long-term trends in tropical cyclone activity. There is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones." And about hurricanes and other weather phenomena: "There is insufficient evidence to determine whether trends exist in small scale phenomena such as tornadoes, hail, lighting, and dust storms." Please read and inform yourselves well before making a video with unfounded claims like this. Otherwise this will become just another alarmist channel with no added value void of any scientific facts or healthy discussions. I am subscribed an looking forward to a serious video about this subject.
Communities should move to better places. This is the most effective solution to the problems. We should open our gates and boarders and not subvention false standings.
I disagree with this line of reasoning. The misfortune that befalls other people is not my concern. Unless I have a reason to care about them, why should I spend my resources on them? It's better to focus on the harms that come to people directly rather than the harms that hit those they don't care about.
Hi there! I loved this video, and want to support it by leaving a comment. However, I'm aware that RUclips's comment system is heavily skewed towards promoting conflict, as well as violent and intolerant behaviour, and I am not willing to be a target. That's why I've created this "pre-recorded" comment to leave on videos I like! I strongly encourage others to do the same if they feel targeted by RUclips's media environment.
There's this thing that Hank Green started where you put a "+" reply on comments that are good and you want more people to see, to counteract the conflict problem. Communities that use it often have pretty nice comments sections, at least near the top. I hope that info helps you in your journey through the internet. Don't forget to be awesome.
I'm in grad school for social work, and this video did a better job of explaining environmental justice than a week's worth of lecture materials. Stellar work!
+
Hey folks, I noticed that a number of people in the comments are complaining about this episode being too US-centric. Maybe Hot Mess should make an additional video on global economic inequality... and how the same forces and processes that caused climate change, and other anthropogenic changes to ecosystems, caused much of that global inequality in the same stroke. And of course how the communities who lack resources and whose ecosystems are already degraded, destroyed, and/or restricted are the same people who will in many ways have the hardest time adapting to climate change.
Maybe they are still assembling material for a more global episode
I hope so, Archer!
Frank, I very well may do that someday, although I do not have anything approaching this channel's audience to appreciate it. Either way, my comment here was intended to offer Hot Mess an idea for how to reconcile with their audience over this perceived lack of coverage, and do the topic of climate justice even more justice.
Frank Rosser I'm afraid you thought wrong. Maybe I should have been more clear in my initial wording. When I said "folks," I meant the creators of Hot Mess.
But since you are so interested in me making videos, I also meant it when I said I might make one about this someday. Not doing it right now isn't about expense, it's about being in the middle of finals. I'm more likely to put it on my educational channel, Earth Alive, than on Naiadryade...
can we be clear about one thing? this is not about race, it's about social class.
no wealthy person, of any color or race, in any country of the world, needs to worry about nuclear waste being dumped in their backyard.
this is one of those "not in my neighborhood!!" types of things, like prisons and homeless shelters.
the complaints stop at the bottom edge of the economic ladder.
this will never change, so our only option is to lessen the amount of waste being dumped on a daily basis.....
transylvanian i hear you but your statement makes my point.
"racism" has grown into a man-made monster that takes over every other conversation.
if humans can't realize that they're all the same, no matter their color, then i'm done with that conversation.
in addition, a lot of the most damaging effects of environmental destruction takes place in rural areas, home to a diverse collection of humans, as well as other species, with the only commonality among them being that every area's citizens are POOR.
the human species as a whole caused both of the above problems, as well as many others, TOGETHER.
and we will only be able to solve them when we put aside our differences and work peacefully together.
This isn't even getting into INTERNATIONAL injustice; where one major industrial power emits massive amounts of CO2, but of course, less developed countries with far less money or political power, in already hotter climates, have to deal with the consequences.
I hoped this will cover global problems, but all i heard in this video was america, america, black people, america, black people, black people.
You are right.
South Africa was right there in the beginning of the video mate.
that ivy guy for 10% of the video mate
I would have liked to see a longer video that covered both inequality in the US *and* global inequality.
Don't really know how things work in usa, but here in croatia we don't build waste dispousal grounds near the low income community but they come to it, becouse the prices of land are lesser there, and they can afford it, so maybe look at it like that
This is what I thought immediately after she brought that up. It's so obvious.
Well we must all be racist for thinking this.
@@wolvenstar10 nobody said that? Also, both situations are bad in their own way and affect these communities similarly.
In the US, a lot of issues like this arise because more affluent communities are more involved politically, so they move to block things from happening in _their_ neighborhoods - new homeless shelter? Immigration centers? Waste dumps? Wealthier communities organize to repel these politically. Poorer neighborhoods tend to not be as engaged, politically, so stuff happens next door that they wouldn't allow if they were paying closer attention. Lack of free time, education, etc - whatever causes it, it's not some intentional scheme of racial or gender discrimination.
As an Australian resident, I live under the hole in our ozone layer. I can confirm we're all cooking down here.
Hey here's a thought .. Why don't we focus on solving the problem rather than assigning blame.
Because some people don’t think there is a problem to solve, or if they do, they do it in a way that still harms certain communities over others. It has to be a just transition and that includes acknowledging wrongs that have harmed people.
Climate change equals taxation
Liberals live off blaming others for their short comings.
One important issue: climate change is not as harmful for everyone, not everyone caused it equally, not everyone profited equally from its causes.
Right?
I think so
I am not sure
yeah ofc, simple logic :)
this is a common argument used when it comes to the distribution of pollution loads. The industrial nations in europe and america caused the first major steps in climate change in the 19th and 20th century, before the consequences were known. So, less developed countries which only recently started to expand their CO²-heavy industries use this as a reason to claim the "right" to pollute, just like the more developed nations did in the past.
The big issue with this is of course that nature doesn't care which countries cause pollution. Once the damage is done, everyone will be affected by it. That's why the richer nations need to step in and support growing countries in building their economy, while at the same time tying their help to climate regulations for these countries (or rather, all countries including themselves).
Common theme in most of the climate meetings.
Could you make a video that's _not_ U.S.-centric? Especially when the subject is significantly less visible (and less impactful) on the scale of a single country.
Globally, global warming is worse for communities in the tropics. (This shouldn't be surprising.) Generally, the extreme heat is made worse by either a lack of water or high humidity, both of which tend to be exaggerated by increased temperatures.
These communities are usually in Global South or "third-world" countries, which means that they are already struggling to "keep up" with the Global North or "first world". If the Global North doesn't help the Global South develop its economy in environmentally-friendly ways, they are going to struggle to develop, which will continue to hinder their ability to compete with the Global North for...well...anything important, really.
Climate change is going to be another of those things that sucks for everyone and reinforces existing power structures if we don't try to avoid having it do so.
I'm not talking about absolute temperature change, I'm talking about the effects that temperature change has on local communities. (Hence "worse _for communities_ in the tropics," not "worse _in the tropics".)_ To generalize, while a community in Siberia is going to have its lifestyle disrupted by average temperatures increasing by (say) 5-10 degrees, it's not going to cause as big of an issues as another 2-3 degrees in India, where extreme summer heat is already potentially lethal.
If you think these climate change-related tragedies are terrible, you should see how much suffering will be imposed by taking the steps necessary to *stop* climate change.
Leonardo's movie Before the Flood does a great job of showing this kind of unjust climate change around the world. A large portion of India specifically is being hit really hard
Thanks I'll watch it
Just watched it-great-thanks for the tip
Thank you very much for taking on this issue. I know it is a very difficult topic, but we need you and more like you.
Richard Alley says: _We have a problem and no one is talking about it_
*Questions* I hope you talk about
Ocean acidification
Phytoplankton decline
Dead Zones
When sea ice has melted, does it add to tides since there is more water can be displaced?
Take care
P.S. I've been writing a French climate change blog for the last 3 years
If I understand it right, the issue is that economically disadvantaged communities are disproportionately affected by climate change due to insufficient infrastructure or lack of attention. This isn't something I ever gave much thought to, but then isn't this a result of a failure on the USA's part to improve these disadvantaged communities? The connection to climate change is pretty tangential and superficial because the problem isn't "climate change affects disadvantaged communities disproportionately", it's actually more like "these communities are disadvantaged to begin with, and that causes them to suffer worse than others in the face of climate change". I mean, this isn't a "climate change injustice" problem, it's a "class and economic injustice" problem.
You are Climate justice warriors, jk
My country is an agriculture oriented country(atleast when you look at the state of employment) .
Every successive year harvest is worse.
Water is scarce, farmers are killing themselves and dooming their families with them.
Government is chilling as usual.
Snek Wrek
I bet statistics show otherwise. Unless you're from Venezuela or any other places with corrupt government.
+
I am from South Africa, and has visited Cape Town numerous times. They talk about Cape Town as if it is poor compared to the cities compared to afterward, but really it is a Capital city that brings in lots of income. It is not that it is poor, it’s just that they do not have proper measures put in place for issues like this, as this is a new challenge we are facing
Without political equally, for example the Citizens United case in the US comes to mind, there can't be any expectations of a place in the table for everybody to discuss climate change.
Finally. An episode that doesn't pretend like politics don't exist.
Climate change affects some people more than others, and that’s a problem. Environmental justice aims to solve that.
Hot Mess
www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004
"multiple global ecosystem models suggest that CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend, followed by nitrogen deposition (9%), climate change (8%) and land cover change (LCC) (4%). CO2 fertilization effects explain most of the greening trends in the tropics."
Developing nations need to pay for benefits?
And there she goes again...
Do you know how plants work? You can give them as much CO2 as you want to, but if they haven't got the nutrients they need to profit from the extra CO2, there will be reached a limit, in a greenhouse you can regulate CO2 and provide with all the nutrients for an optimal production, but you can't say the same for everything outside. And this happens both to intended and unintended plants, like weeds, and will change the flow of energy and water.
Also rainfall patterns will change, dry areas will become drier and wet areas will become wetter, more precipitation increases erosion of the soil and washes the nutrients away.
But of course you already know this, but you need to keep pushing your agenda.
Silent Witness
I provided empirical evidence, you are speculating based on self-serving mutually contradicting theories.
Wut? I haven't said there isn't a greening taking place, this is very well known and isn't up for discussion. What is up to discussion is whether the short-term benefits will be overridden by the long-term consequences...or is saying that changing precipitation patterns and that plant growth is limited by the available nutrients a conflicting theory ?
In the abstract of the paper you're using:
"The regional effects of unexplained factors suggest that the next generation of ecosystem models will need to explore the impacts of forest demography, differences in regional management intensities for cropland and pastures, and other emerging productivity constraints such as phosphorus availability."
I reiterate: "other emerging productivity constraints such as phosphorous availability".
I'm not a paranoid person but this is the only channel where I'm not notified of new videos. Hmm.
It's kind of selective to say climate change is unjust to the poor & minorities. Climate change affects all & I don't think it has any political, social, economical, or racial preferences. It's just plain unfair to be poor / a minority / etc. You suffer all the time if you are poor & cannot escape your environment, regardless if it's 110 degrees outside or you're 7ft under water.
This is the best Hot Mess video to date. And the channel is slowly but surely becoming one of the best. PBS Digital Studios is really, really great at curating quality content, and climate justice is one of the biggest issues with which we have to deal today.
You are very nice, thank you
Agreed! I continue to be impressed by PBS. Of all legacy media groups, PBS is far ahead of the curve in online content. PBS Digital Studios produces *many* of the very best educational shows on RUclips, often doing so by collaborating with and creating opportunities for talented people who are already making educational videos (at perhaps a lower budget).
I'd say so far Hot Mess is shaping up to be in a tier with Eons, which if you ask me is one of the most engaging, fascinating and beautiful shows on RUclips right now. (Though both of these opinions reflect my interests, so I'm probably biased.)
Would you mind pointing them out?
Come on smart guy, point them out.
I sincerely have no idea as I'm not American, but didn't you say "some facts" in plural? Which are the other ones? And in case that they had that one wrong, how is this supposed to influence the validity of this video?
It might just be that land is cheaper in low income areas for things like landfills in those areas. But, that obviously doesn't apply to all the scenarios.
While this video is somewhat controversial, it's hard to dispute that climate change will affect everyone differently. A lot of the people that deny climate change, are the same people that have the resources to protect themselves from the full force of climate change.
MrFindX they won't if revolution breaks out as well as war.
It's really sad when the simple truth is considered controversial.
Everyone believes in climate change but not that carbon is causing it I think all the cement and asphalt in cities and on roads has more to do with higher temperature readings than anything else there is no climate emergency just natural climate change
Something that has been a constant throughout history is the migration of people from one place to another,whether due to economic climate, violence climates, cultural climates ,or ....the actual climate. While we all love our home, wherever it is, and most of us fight to make the sacrifices we have to make to keep living where we grew up, the truth is, we also need to stay fluid enough to move where life will be better. And as the climate changes, some areas will become nicer to live while others will become worse.
I mean, as the earth warms and Arizona starts roasting, Canada is gonna look pretty decent :-). Change is hard, but not always bad. This from a guy (me) who made every educational, career, and family decision to be able to live where I grew up, and still couldn't do it and am living far from family, familiarity, and fun, and....still finding wonderful things to enjoy about my new life somewhere else
I think Puerto Rico had plenty of money to address the issues, but the people in charge stole it.
So you can take them off this list.
Watching this in Cape Town, South Africa
This channel would seem to be appropriately titled "Hot Mess".
Climate change is about humans, not people. Justice is not an important issue when it comes to the topic of survival.
Do you want to show any evidence that changing the focus of the Office of Environmental Justice to “all people” was a bad thing or are you just going to expect me to believe it?
Also please don't do this, climate change is not a social issue, please don't turn it into one.
This video spent 5 minutes trying to say something which is completely obvious, (that changes to the environment will have a more severe effect on areas which are less able to respond and adapt to those changes,) but doesn't do anything with that point.
At the very end, there is a paragraph which baffles me:
"It's easy to assume that climate change will affect us all equally, but the truth is that communities all around us may be forced to bear an unequal brunt of our changing world. If we want to change this, we have to recognize those disparities and engage with those communities. That way, as we find solutions, everyone has a seat at the table."
I don't think anyone has ever assumed that climate change will affect everyone equally, such an assumption is so obviously ridiculous. Next, it proposes that 1, this is a thing which should be changed, 2, this is a thing which could be changed, and 3, changing so would somehow give "everyone a seat at the table", whatever that means.
I don't think I agree that it's better for everyone to share the pain equally rather than trying to remove the pain altogether. We should focus primarily on reducing our effects climate change, then on all the injustices in the world, because if we all die of starvation because all the bees died and so most of the things we eat became almost impossible to grow because we didn't do anything about climate change, (or whatever will happen,) nobody will have the luxury to care about injustices.
Yes, I am aware I may be straw-manning a bit, its never explicitly said that we should ignore climate change in favour of making sure we all have a "seat at the table", but like I said before, climate change is not a social issue, please don't make it one.
Scotland Dobson ok, I wasn’t sure, that was just a heavily exaggerated scenario to make a point.
It’s a social issue because of how it has been handled - where minorities beat the brunt of the burden. To separate the two would be to deliberately make yourself ignorant to the problem at large. Also, both adaptation and mitigation efforts can be done simultaneously. Removing the pain while also preventing the pain.
Firstly, minorities don't bear the brunt of the burden, people in poorer areas with weaker infrastructure do. Someone who is a minority, but happens to be a millionaire will not bear more of a burden because they will have the ability to live in an area which is more capable of dealing with or ignoring the climate change.
The reason why I say that it's not a social issue is because how it affects people has nothing to do with race or sex, it does have to do with income so in that respect it could still be considered a social issue, but the video focuses on race while equating black/minorities with low-income areas which make it feel like it's trying to manipulate me rather than convince me.
"It’s a social issue because of how it has been handled - where minorities beat the brunt of the burden. To separate the two would be to deliberately make yourself ignorant to the problem at large." I don't think this makes any sense. I think climate change can and should be separated from the injustices of the world because they are both caused by different things and would be addressed using very different methods.
Also removing the pain and preventing the pain are the same thing, so I will assume you mean that we could remove the pain and disperse the pain at the same time, which I agree with, but that wasn't my point. My point was that if we are prioritising between solving the root causes of climate change and helping areas most affected by climate change we should almost always focus on the former. That isn't to dismiss the effects on specific areas, but this video never addresses this problem in relation to other problems that might be more worth focusing on.
The more I watch this video and read the captions the more I realise just how poorly thought out it was. If you pay close attention you may notice that it completely leaves the subject of climate change altogether at 2:46 to focus on the origins of environmental justice, which are not really relevant. (It then goes to say that "It's easy to assume that climate change will affect us all equally" which I have already said is absurd.) I'm actually shocked that I gave it any credibility at all given how it seems to have no focus or real point.
It's easy to assume if you don't know anything about climate change and just focus on global warming, I suppose, but I haven't met anyone who literally thinks that global warming / climate change will affect us all easily, just that it's a big problem for everyone.
This is why DJT has such unquestioned support from so many poor whites. Every issue needs to be made into an issue about social minorities - even the ones that affect _all_ of us, and _especially_ the poor. If you were a poor white person, of course you'd feel left out of the discussion when every discussion, no matter how universal needs to exclude you to seem socially appropriate.
Lack of wealth, education, & political engagement are the problems here. We can either acknowledge how racially universal these problems are, or the western world will continue shooting itself in the foot as we needlessly divide ourselves along arbitrary lines for the sake of moral grandstanding.
I understand the desire to keep videos short, but this also forces the scope to be kept very small. I would like to see more videos delving deeper into the issues being raised and also include a global perspective along with the US centric one.
No Day Zero for us in Cape Town as we cut down our water consumption by 60% within 3 years and the rains are here 💙
This was a good video and a good argument, but sadly, the people who need to see this the most will refuse to believe it's an issue. You're taking a pretty liberal viewpoint here; the people who need the most convincing are conservatives, by far. Both conservatives and liberals will basically only be convinced by something if it's based around their core beliefs (sad, but true). You guys should make a climate change argument centered around economics - THAT might actually make conservatives listen.
BTW, I'm neither conservative nor liberal (closer to libertarian if anything) but I do strongly feel that climate change is an issue and we need to make as many people aware of it as we can.
When we all die of violent climate change no more value would be possible to be produced for shareholders.
Scotland Dobson Exactly, EXACTLY. All politicians care about is what's happening right NOW. Well climate change is happening right now, the world's oil supply is massive but diminishing, and if we don't do anything about it, the cost of everything will skyrocket (manufacturing, and literally everything else that involves oil). Inflation through the roof, economic collapse, etc. We can't afford to let this go on any longer.
Frank Rosser
Sure, that may be true, but it is a big factor, and what I'm saying is it may be the only way to get far right-wing politicians to back anti-pollution efforts. And besides, we already know all sorts of stuff about environmental hazards, and we've been talking about it for decades at this point - everyone who could possibly be convinced from that method has pretty much already been convinced. It's time for new tactics.
the big problem here is that people only see black and white. this video is proof of that. they see the issue and have one reason for it that fits there agenda. but no issue is as easy as that there are multiple reasons and not talking about them all is just hurtful to the conversation. it just polarises people.
+
When a science video doesn't use the metric system...
Wait. You already said that nuclear and hydroelectric alternatives would resolve global warming. So why are you changing the topic. Pleas discuss why we are not using those alternatives.
Assaf Wodeslavsky I’m sure that Hot Mess is rain by a team, and different episodes are written simultaneously. “Why We’re Not Using Renewable Power” could be the next video.
Okay, you outlined the pressing issues of socio-economic disparity pretty well. What does Climate Justice actually do for poor people and minorities?
And speaking of Justice, when do we start holding big polluters accountable for their actions?
As a southern Californian I take a certain amount of comfort that residents of Malibu will be hit first and hardest. Watts and Boyle Heights won't be suffering storm surges, flooding, coastal erosion, or landslides, just heat. And maybe gentrification, if Malibu refugees move in on them. In general in the US, coastal populations are among the wealthiest, unlike, say, Bangladesh. Just saying that environmental justice may have unintended consequences if the more sophisticated inhabitants of Santa Monica and Malibu should manage to hijack the benefits stream. Nothing to be concerned about probably, that would never happen.
All these people were warned weeks in advance, and decided they could rough a hurricane.. They didn't leave. Darwinism.
It comes down to political will. When you have a country led politicians that are more concerned with corporate wealth than the well being of its citizens the will to serve the interest of the people is diminished.
Ultimately, it is up to people to vote for those who hold the interests of the people above the wealth and prosperity of companies.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:03 🌍 Understanding the Impact of Climate Change
- Climate change affects humans worldwide, impacting different communities in various ways.
- Extreme weather events and environmental disparities can make recovery more challenging for vulnerable communities.
- The concept of environmental justice aims to address inequalities in environmental impacts based on race, national origin, or income.
01:21 🌆 Environmental Disparities in the U.S.
- Environmental disparities exist even in countries like the United States.
- Examples include dumping debris near low-income communities, inadequate evacuation options during natural disasters, and clean water shortages in Puerto Rico.
- Systemic inequalities become more evident as climate change intensifies.
02:45 🏡 Impact on Vulnerable Communities
- Vulnerable communities often lack resources, leading to deadly consequences during extreme heat.
- Systemic inequalities, like the lack of air conditioning in public housing, will become more pronounced with rising temperatures.
- Climate change exacerbates disparities within communities.
03:12 🏛️ History of Environmental Justice in the U.S.
- Environmental justice efforts in the U.S. trace back to mass demonstrations in Warren County, North Carolina in 1982.
- The EPA was founded in 1992 to address environmental justice, and Bill Clinton's executive order incorporated it into civil rights law.
- The focus on environmental justice fluctuated under different administrations, affecting policy implementation.
04:36 🤝 Engaging with Vulnerable Communities
- Climate change does not affect all communities equally, and some bear a disproportionate burden.
- Engaging with vulnerable communities is essential for finding equitable solutions to climate change.
- Recognizing disparities and including affected communities in decision-making processes is crucial.
Made with HARPA AI
Now all rich people are by no means bad people but to someone on one extreme of wealth "somewhere far away" might often be the other extreme.
Let's not let the ignorant trolls take over this comments section! The dislike ratio is pretty good right now.
If they were going to turn the farmland near my village into a landfill then I would buy a house somewhere else. The poor people simply can't afford to do that. I'd also have a hard time selling my old house since no one wants to live near a landfill. Therefore I have to drop the price significantly. Because of this someone with a low income who can't find a decent house somewhere else can live in my old house. Suddenly the GDP in my old village drops significantly.
When SCIENTOLOGY advertises on your channel.
It should be a BIG clue.
you have evidence and reasoning but you have no claim
Justice for people is great, but what about justice to all the species we've wiped, all the forests and ecosystems we've razed, all the oceans we take a dump in, the air we've choked.
I think that often, the two are very intertwined. All across the globe there are examples of ecosystems and their land-based human communities/cultures whose demise in health and quality of life are results of the same process of colonization, resource extraction, and commodification of the Earth. When people are a part of an ecosystem, destroying that ecosystem wreaks havoc on the people as well.
Create a video regarding animal agriculture and it's affects on nature as a whole and how it contributes to green house gases more than other sectors (more than all sea, land, air transportation combined!) and how just by changing our diet we can lower our carbon footprint by up to %50 for example if we went on a plant based diet (which is healthy and sustainable anyways:)
I think it's a hot mess to speak about it ! :)
The video just said it's hard to know if climate change is causing hurricanes. Very scientific
Lol we'll just pretend this has nothing to do with government enforcing quotas and making poor decisions. Historical Univision activate!
I love how in depth you're going into each sub-topic of climate change. This one is especially important and often brushed to the side in the main conversation.
this video contained basically zero depth at all, at least none that I could see. If you could point me in the direction of such depth that would be great.
Even central Europe has issues, like heavy rain that caused a number of floodings in Germany. And I'm having big health issues when it's too warm :/ It's so disappointing that Trump thinks climate change is a hoax, just because he doesn't understand it.
This video is a great highlights of the history of Environmental Justice in the United States. The only link to Climate Change iirc is that the disadvantaged will be less able to respond to extreme weather events. I'd love to have seen other issues discussed and from a more global perspective. Food supply, cost of living, migrations, maybe there are other problems I'm unaware of.
Are you guys going to cover the effect of animal agriculture on climate change? Hope so
I came here for climate change science, not US racial political agenda.
Winnie Blue The title is "why climate change is unjust"...it wasn't going to be a video in the science of climate change.
This episode was supposed to be about climate change is unjust, but I feel like it was more about race and politics.
justsomeguy thank for correcting me. I’m very stupid sometimes.
Also, it was mostly about the USA. I am tired of various media that claim to have a global perspective when in fact they're applying the US-American one. And projecting their racial issues on the whole world (not saying there isn't racial discrimination elsewhere, just that it is often different and addressed differently than in the USA). Or maybe it's just the language that is exclusionary. It was developed there to speak of everyone in the USA with respect - but ended up functioning as a signal for the rest of the world that "it is not about you".
Climate change is unjust in a major way precisely because its negative aspects tend to disproportionately affect already politically and economically disadvantaged people.
It all intersects and connects.
+Frank Rosser Like what?
Climate change is political.
Though Climate Change will of course effect some people more than others, in the long run it will depend more on geography of where people live than their income. What you talk about here is more focused on environmental damage. Still an important issue, but you should make a distinction, especially because this channel seems to be more focused on climate change. Also if you want to get people who would not care about climate change to care telling them that groups that they don't care about much will suffer more than them is counterproductive.
I love this
Awh Yeah 🙌! Saw *It's Okay To Be Smart* comment on *Smart Everyday* and now *Hot Mess* uploads...
....today is a good day.
You have to have a viable alternative to current energy otherwise there will be no change in behavior
Great channel, have been looking for something similar, but this exceeds my expectations. And this even though I completely disagree with this, my 2nd, episode. I am from Germany, and many here have a different view. Though I have a physics degree, I must admit I don't have detailed knowledge on nuclear power engineering, but some urgent questions haven't been addressed in this episode: 1) where do you leave the waste? We spent enormous amounts on money, and still haven't found a solution for this! All disposals are only temporal. We will be paying for nuclear waste for upcoming thousands of years and it will be an ongoing hazards for next generations (dirty bombs, etc.) 2) It's a power source with limited resources, already today we can't extract as much as we would need, it will never be sufficient to supply globally. 3.) so again people are controlling these limited ressources, using them as instrument of political power, having conflicts for them, while renewable energy is a much more decentralized source. 4) The danger created by these nuclear power stations is so high, that no insurance will cover them. So it will be covered by society, by us, which are hidden costs, not taken into account. Tchernobyl, Fukoshima, etc. the companies compensated only a small fraction of the damage. And Hi-Tec Japan showed, that even they can't contain the danger, what if more and more low-tech countries use nuclear as major source of energy? 5) covered only partially: nuclear can be used always as weapon, for terrorists, for nations, eg. current Iranian conflict.6) Altogether they are not so profitable as one might think, which is the real reason, why many nations turn their back on them. Renewable energy is the future in which investments should be made.
WOW
Environmental justice is like social justice everyone needs to stop trying to take from those who earn it thay need to get out and earn it themselves and protect there home and lives themselves that's what my job is I'm not hoping for help I'm helping my self and my family
Good video, though a little disappointing that this series turns out to be (once more) very US-centric. I had hoped for a more international resource.
Kiev, Ukraine at 4:35
It was surprising to see my own city so randomly, haha.
It's good to help those in need, but including identity politics is being divisive. Everyone has their own circumstance to deal with. Educating about climate change and how to fix it is important. Talking about how it affects one group of people in broad strokes doesn't fix anything. There are so many exceptions and caveats that fall within those sweeping classifications. Strive to fix the problem and everyone benefits in their own measure.
Environmental racism is very much a thing, especially in the US. That are many many academic articles on the subject and must be discussed.
environmental justice, environmental racism, do we need to give the earth its own gender too? smh
And I'm saying there are bigger problems that when addressed, will solve these issues as a byproduct. Solving the smaller issue by itself does not get rid of the bigger problem. Stop looking through lenses and look at the big picture. As humans, we've fucked ourselves with bottom lines and big industry which are the driving influences behind poor quality residential areas, pollution etc. Should we stop making houses on poor quality land? Pay people more so they may afford better housing? - band-aid solutions for something won't stop happening unless something larger scale is done... but what do I know? I'm just some person on the internet with an opinion.
Over 100,000 hits on google scholar on environmental racism. It's been a topic for decades now. This is why videos like these are important. The justice aspect is not talked about enough in the larger conversation.
scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C15&as_vis=1&q=%22environmental+justice%22&btnG=
Whenever I see the term ‘identity politics’ I mentally substitute “civil rights” or “equality under the law” and re read the sentence. Helps me understand the point of view of the poster...
Thank you!
My financial support will offset the climate impact of your videos in what way? please enlighten me. I do like what you are saying, but I fail to understand how my cash money offsets the climate impact of your videos, as you have just stated. great content, great concept.
Miami was affected by Irma, not Maria.
Saying that all people should have the same resources to combat climate change is not equality, it is equity. Where low income communities and nations are disproportionately afforded with additional resources. Dont call one for the other, Too often i see smart people not know the difference and it makes me doubt all their information on the topic, because they cant even get the category of their premise correct.
Equality is about opportunity, and equity is about outcome. one is offering a job to all persons regardless of features to select the best skilled, and the other is picking someone regardless of skill to fulfil a feature requirement. both have negative sides, maybe all women are selected because they are the most skilled(equality; seems sexist, but isnt, men not rejected based on sex), or maybe skilled women are rejected to fulfil a '# of men' criterion(equity; but is sexist, women rejected and men selected because of sex)
I believe in justice and equality for all people, for its the only way for progress and prosperity
Naw, science and technology is the only way forward for progress
cool, but what does this have to do with it
Well we need both in my opinion.....
But how can those progress when a vast swathes of the population remain uneducated and poor, while those that have the money do nothing?
Best episode yet! It was very well written, and I love this host. Climate justice is such an important issue within every question about how we are to adapt to climate change.
I'm so excited to have finally found a channel on RUclips that talks about issues like this! Before taking some college courses, I had a lot of trouble finding places to learn about important environmental issues. Thank you for making this, as I think society as a whole needs to start having more conversations about the environment and environmental justice in general.
How much heat do you guys without air conditioner have at night in your home :)
At June 19 i have 28 °C or 82.4 °F
Since this isn't under human control, though, the biggest reason it will affect some people more than others is because it will affect some PLACES more than others.
(Before someone misunderstands that, I mean it's not under directed human CONTROL. I'm not one of those people denying the fact that it's CAUSED by humans.)
Shine Hamptomian!
Wow. Incredible video! Keep up the good work, i'm getting into the subject now!
+
This video is probably the most racist I've ever seen there is a lot more than this video explains I can't believe thay took this route I've been an avid supporter for a while not to the PBS studios but if this keeps up I may not be for much longer just tell the facts cherry picking is not the way to get the message out
Fantastic video guys!
Consider me unsurprised: money buys things, people with more money are better off, that is the nature of money, that is how it works and why it is sought. Don't get me wrong I'm not opposed to reasonable socialism, but no amount of effort will make money ineffective at getting things, if it did then we would just shift to a different currency
Very US-centric video, but a good video nevertheless.
According to the IPCC's reports most warming will take place above the poles and the equator which will result in less difference in high an low pressure areas on both hemispheres: so less storms, less floods, less drought, hurricanes and typhoons. Which would make perfect sense.
About cyclone the IPCC claims: "Multi-decadal variability and the quality of the tropical cyclone records prior to routine satellite observations in about 1970 complicate the detection of long-term trends in tropical cyclone activity. There is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones."
And about hurricanes and other weather phenomena: "There is insufficient evidence to determine whether trends exist in small scale phenomena such as tornadoes, hail, lighting, and dust storms."
Please read and inform yourselves well before making a video with unfounded claims like this. Otherwise this will become just another alarmist channel with no added value void of any scientific facts or healthy discussions. I am subscribed an looking forward to a serious video about this subject.
That is depressing.
😔
Maybe you could steal PBS Space Time's idea of a journal club and comment some breakthrough papers on the Climate Change field, too!
Nice video
❤️
Woohoo! I saw Kyiv=)
I don't care about outsiders (foreigners, stupid, poor, &c.). I care only about my local community - as should we all.
Wow new information
Safe from justin y.
Click that bell people!
Yay I am one of first person!
I love this channel
6th
Communities should move to better places. This is the most effective solution to the problems. We should open our gates and boarders and not subvention false standings.
I disagree with this line of reasoning. The misfortune that befalls other people is not my concern. Unless I have a reason to care about them, why should I spend my resources on them?
It's better to focus on the harms that come to people directly rather than the harms that hit those they don't care about.
+
Hi there! I loved this video, and want to support it by leaving a comment. However, I'm aware that RUclips's comment system is heavily skewed towards promoting conflict, as well as violent and intolerant behaviour, and I am not willing to be a target. That's why I've created this "pre-recorded" comment to leave on videos I like! I strongly encourage others to do the same if they feel targeted by RUclips's media environment.
There's this thing that Hank Green started where you put a "+" reply on comments that are good and you want more people to see, to counteract the conflict problem. Communities that use it often have pretty nice comments sections, at least near the top. I hope that info helps you in your journey through the internet. Don't forget to be awesome.
+
+
+
+
Way to politize even this issue. Everything is racist right?
Maybe they're politicizing it because it is political. And this is racist as well. And they never said "everything" was racist.
Why in every YT video with black person I hear about race? This is ridiculous :(