Extreme weather events are making the news more and more often, everything from droughts to floods. Climate change also affects us in other ways: shifting shorelines, declining agricultural productivity, food supply chains, water availability and population health. And whether you believe humans are the cause or not, it looks like our way of life is going to have to change. Depending on where you live the impacts of the climate crisis will be felt very differently. Can we adapt? Or are these trends reversible? Join our hosts Amien Essif and Staci Bivens for the chance to put your questions to our guests.
Subscribe:
For more news go to:
Follow DW on social media:
►Facebook:
►Twitter:
►Instagram: For videos in German visit:
source
The meASUREments of the "climate change" scam will bring the famine as desired to reduce the NUMBers!
HAarp is being used to manipulate the weather!
Color blind people can't see red….
it's 103 here and supposed to be 106 this weekend 😪
Population decrease is a real viable solution or validation for war on a scale not seen ever before?
I thought climate change is due to the core of Earth becoming hotter.
The research on Global Warming did Not start twenty to forty years ago! Some scientists started thinking that it was coming as long as the 1060’s. It really started in 1979 and it was a Huge Research Project done by Exxon. Then Exxon spent the following years including Now, on How to Lie about it and Convince the rest of the world that they were being honest.🇺🇸
Exxon’s Greed. Along with many many other Big Corporations and their greed, combined. Not to mention our governments being paid off! We are already losing so many animals. They are slowly dying off. Now it is starting to seriously affect people. Those greedy people should be fined and forced to help pay for the huge changes that we are going to have to make. They knew this was going to happen but they decided to Lie.🇺🇸
I am a Republican but I totally believe that we are experiencing a Huge Global Warming. Our planet will be destroyed by mankind if we don’t change our behaviors. We Must Save Our Planet. Think about our future generations. They don’t deserve this poor example of how to live on Planet Earth 🌍.
I live in Norway. This summer is just rain Every day. Well we can be greatful. 🙏
I want to touch on a point made at 1:59:26 regarding "green growth". There is actually extensive research on this topic, and all of them – so far – have basically shown that complete decoupling is not possible. What that means, it is not possible to decouple a country's GDP from the emissions and resources it uses in a sufficient way to limit global warming to 1.5°C or even just 2°C. The meta analysis on the literate regarding this topic is called 'Is Green Growth Possible?' by Hickel et al. (2019). There is in fact only a few countries that have for short periods of time achieved relative decoupling. Relative decoupling means that resource usage still growths but at a lower rate than the GDP, and absolute decoupling means that we use fewer resources while the GDP continues to grow.
The literature that has shown that it is possible has made widely unrealistic assumptions about the increases in efficiency and the amount of growth we would limit the global GDP to in order to achieve these goals. None of them have shown how such gains in efficiency would be possible, and there are simple physical limitations for every process dictating how efficient it can be. For example, there will never, ever exist a solar panel that turns more than 68.7% of the photons from our sun into electricity. That's simply a hard limit determined by thermodynamic effects.
The issue with this fundamental limit on the efficiency of process is that at some point we are going to hit this limit, and at that point when we continue to grow our economy, we have to use more resources. This is by far the most compelling reason why absolute decoupling on a global scale is simply not possible, and this gives rise to the idea of 'degrowth' and 'circular economies'.
I can highly recommend to Mr. Niranjan to check out the aforementioned report. The DOI is 10.1080/13563467.2019.1598964. It is unfortunately – like most great science – behind a pay-wall so I recommend to use SciHub.
I love this but the lady has a bit of crazy eyes and it hella scares me lol
there is a link between greenhouse gas emissions in the Atmosphere , specially carbon dioxide, by burning fossil fuels, such as petroleum products and coal and charcoal, in one hand, and climate change; which is characterized by global atmospheric temperature rise, heat weave, flooding and drought in other regions, in other hand. people who denied this fact is like denying human demographic explosion in our Earth planet since the industrial revolution in the 18 CENTURY ! isn't it? what we need now is a global and worldwide revolutions in culture, economy, politics and international law; otherwise we will soon sink in dust?…
How has climate science become "left wing" in the UK?
I don't know if there are many "ignorants" left in the world claiming there is no such as human caused climate crisis… but I would like to invite all of them to book holidays in Italy or Spain next month, my collegues there suffer from temperatures that are abnormal and no drop of rain is falling, and collegues of 50 years old tell me "es una puta locura ese tiempo" .. that is my advice, do it, go there, enjoy the heat, talk to locals (if you speak any other language than HillyBily-english) and get back home less ignorant than you were
On the heels of the hottest summer the Northern Hemisphere has ever seen, U.N. researchers digging through the climate record have reported a chilling discovery: On Dec. 22, 1991, a remote weather station atop the Greenland ice sheet recorded a temperature of minus 93.3 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 69.6 degrees Celsius) — the coldest temperature ever recorded in the Northern Hemisphere.
The frigid new record, announced Wednesday (Sept. 23) in a statement from the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization (WMO), shivers past the previous record of minus 90.4 F (minus 67.8 C) set in two different towns in the Siberian Arctic, first in 1892 and the other in 1933. For comparison, all three of those extreme lows sneak past the average temperature on Mars, which is roughly minus 81 F (minus 63 C), according to NASA.
Solar Panel production requires toxic material production and creates toxic waste. They both require high maintenance and will only provide 20% of presently required power no matter how much some may wish otherwise. I knew someone who worked at a U.S. solar panel company and that is the fact of it. Windmills are plain awful if you actually care about the environment. Both require huge function fields and long and very expensive transmission lines. Solar panels kill birds by the hundreds of thousands in some regions. We have about a dozen companies in the U.S. developing Molten Salt Thorium Reactors. A few are ready to go into production but the DOE policy will only permit the far mess efficient and dangerous Light Water Uranium Reactor. Support Republican Senator Tom Tubeville’s S.4242, Molten Salt Thorium Security Act of 2022! The best solution for the future of power in the U.S, Europe, and worldwide is the installation of Molten Salt Reactors, thorium looks best, but a number of fuels are being developed with some ready to go now. We know that for example nuclear waste from Light Water Reactors can be burned in the far more efficient MSRs leaving virtually no residual waste. The U.S. company Flibe Energy has designed one that will produce carbon-free replacements for diesel fuel. Elysium Energy has developed one that will burn waste from Light Water Uranium Reactors exclusively. MSRs can be sued for cheap desalinization plants which are needed NOW. Solar and wind will never be able to deal with the crisis we now face. The technology was developed in the 1960s in the U.S. at Oakridge Nuclear Facility. They had one running for 35 years trouble-free until lack of interest defunded it. ThorCon is building one that will set on a ship for Indonesia right now because the DOE will not shift gears. CHINA copied the plans developed at the Oakridge National Labs from 1967 to 1975 after U.S. NASA Astrophysicist Kirk Sorensen discovered them hidden at Orakride and published them online in 2008. China has 700 scientists working on them. FYI – The Light Water Uranium Reactors were favored because they provided fissile material for nuclear weapons more readily. Heavy Water Molten Salt Reactors are safer than the Light Water Uranium type because the molten salt provides both the heat and cooling factors. If there is an event, it would cause the molten salt to drop in temperature and the plant shuts down automatically. There can be no meltdown. They are 97% efficient compared to the 3% efficiency of Light Water Reactors, so they can actually burn the nuclear waste of those types. They produce so much cheap electricity that projects like decarbonizing oceans and desalinization can be done simultaneously. They don't depend upon water for cooling so they can be built anywhere. They don't require a huge conducting system of massive cables from a wind or solar field because they can be built on present coal or light water locations at or near the source of use. Also, science has developed hydrogen fuel cells that can use iron instead of platinum, making fuel cells for cars and homes feasible. The solutions are here. All that is needed is for politicians to notice and unite to make what could be the quickest transition in the direction that solves the problem and would take the world into a better future.
The climate is always changing. Generally you have the four seasons: Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter. Additionally you have: hurricane season, monsoon season, dry season, wet/rainy season, and windy season. When one record seasons, then you will find cycles: 7 years cycles, 21 years cycles, 40 years cycles, and 100 years cycles. Therefore, these climate alarmists are just blowing "hot air". In 1978 my NY Professor almost turn me into a Greta. My area was supposed to be under water by 2000 or 2005. This is 2022. The rock my Great Grand Father fished on is still above sea leavel. Big Al G….. is making Millions. It is sad that intelligent people can be so dishonest. Wild fires get out of control by poor forest management. Floods occur in cycles, and is compounded by poor drainage systems, and poor town layout, with laxity in engineering. I rest my case. Stop the Global Warming Deception. And Stop the Alarmism.
Climate intervention operations have been in full swing for the past 30 plus years. It has had the opposite desired effect, mostly because the real agenda is quite the opposite. This is about power to top government officials, President Johnson back in 1962 that he who controls the weather controls the world.
For the past two decades, much of the hysteria about global warming — later re-labeled “climate change” — has been based on the so-called “hockey stick” graph produced by Michael Mann. The graph, shown below, has been used by the IPCC, the media and governments to push global warming hysteria to the point of mass mental illness, where Democrat presidential candidates claim humanity only has 12 years remaining before a climate apocalypse will somehow destroy the planet.
But the hockey stick graph is a fraud. A man-made computer software algorithm generated it, and the algorithm is rigged to produce a hockey stick shape no matter what data were entered. Like everything else found in the rigged world of “climate science,” the hockey stick graph was a fraud the day it was generated.
Michael Mann didn’t like being called a fraud by his critics, so he sued them for defamation. And late last week, one of those lawsuits was concluded by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, which threw out Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball. But there’s more. According to
This is a really insightful video, not only to the topic itself but to DW‘s journalism and journalists as well. It was really enjoyable listening to.
Stop saying the Earth will be destroyed. It will not. The question for ppl to ponder is whether or not human civilization will crash & burn. I'm a geologist & I know the Earth's climate & atmosphere have gone through profound changes over time. We R actually in an Interglacial warming period. HOWEVER, anthropogenic induced warming is HERE, it is REAL & one thing is 4 sure, It is only going to get worse😌
near abilene, tx we got 10" of rain this year. no way we can grow wheat with that. if it stays that low, west texas is all done as a wheat growing area. 40k square miles.
You know you could just edit out the pointless 6 minute lead in.
It's weather not climate. We have left the sixth warming phase, and are into the sixth cooling phase. The Winters will get rapidly much colder.
Arround 2025 expect some big volcanic eruptions, possibly a 7+.
I was really glad to see you cover this issue – well done to the team for a great episode! I just wanted to draw out a few things that I found particularly interesting and inspiring – something I personally need when talking about the climate crisis (and I assume others too :))! Maybe these will also be of use to people who'd like a quick overview of some of the discussion points. All of them are actually in/relating to answers from Paul Hawken who was such a great guest. Time codes are approximate.
Around 50:00 – the media need to emphasize the opportunities for everyday people and organisations and companies to take action to reduce greenhouse emissions and our collective negative impact on the planet. e.g. a large university changing food providers could have an impact in itself on emissions and exert pressure on major organisations to clean up their acts. It's important to remember we have more power than we realize. Look at your own sphere of influence… What action can you take?
1:04:30 – The human brain isn't wired for future existential threats. And the majority of people globally are concerned with surviving current existential threats, like not having enough food or water. The media should show how (e.g.) regeneration and a transition to renewable energies can help with solving these immediate issues and make people's lives better both NOW and in the future.
1:07:27 – "There's no such thing as carbon dioxide pollution – it's actually food for living systems. It's what every living system eats whether directly or indirectly whether its a tree or grassland or farmland. So we want to look at it in a more holistic way". There's multiple ways of doing this, e.g.
1:09:00 – (Partly quoting, partly paraphrasing:) There are 5 billion acres of degraded land out there and if we restore it we bring back carbon, water, biodiversity, livelihood, pollinators. Regeneration is what opens up possibility for people around the world in terms of having meaningful work that gives people a sense of purpose, dignity, meaning… The climate movement needs to open up even bigger (…) so more people can see the opportunity"
1:13:00 Let's acknowledge that we all use fossil fuels, and let's get off of them.
1:37:00 The ways in which the climate crisis is described by the media, using war or sporting terms, means that we 'other' nature and turn the climate issue into an 'us' versus 'them' issue. I very much agree with this point…This 'othering' exacerbates the disconnect between humans and the rest of nature. The disconnect is further revealed by the focus of the vast majority of climate stories – e.g. coverage of heatwaves and floods overwhelmingly looking at the impact on humans, but not the devastating consequences felt by other parts of nature, like animals and plants. If the media can connect the dots and reframe the issue so that it's normal to reference all parts of life on earth and their interconnection, that could be really help us actually do something positive about global warming and other existential threats like biodiversity loss. Like Paul Hawken says: "The problem isn't the climate, the problem is us."
1:41:00 Discussion of the ongoing problem of the fossil fuel industry and big-business owned media spreading doubt about climate change. What's also very noticeable is:
– that some news contributors mention the term climate change, but attribute it to natural causes rather than human behavior, or they don't mention the causes and solutions at all.
– the 24/7 news cycle plus the desire to satisfy algorithms on social media present significant challenges for the media. It means it's much more likely that heatwaves, droughts, floods and other extreme weather events are treated in isolation rather than connecting the dots and pointing to systemic causes like humanity's (growing) dependence on fossil fuels.
– the habit of sensationalizing news stories for clicks, as touched on by the speakers, means that the stories are also often framed in dramatic, scary terms. Over and over again viewers receive terrifying end-of-the-world messaging and it's paralyzing. Solutions are out there. There is still time. The media needs to urgently turn its focus towards more constructive, solutions-based coverage, showing what can be done about global warming from the bottom-up (from an individual level upwards) as well as at a corporate and governmental level. Appealing to our selfish side can also empower us. e.g. let's look at the opportunities here. There are ways that people's lives can improve, and the planet can become a better home for all.
We should explain by saying carbon 13 from burning fossil fuels, is increasing faster than any time before. Then share the current weather forecast. Because it is the speed of change that is accelerating due to humans. We should also be talking about Methane and diseases escaping from permafrost. So, we can become prepared through increased vaccine production and solar-powered cooling centers. We also should facilitate mass migrations to areas where wind and solar power work best, like America.
Climate change is normal it is meant to change, how do you stop the volcano from erupting? so the volcano is the cause of climate change too. Earth will still be here, we go we are here on a short journey, God created this universe and God will sustain it
there is no climate crisis so yea.
I think PBS news in America does good job reporting climate change but they have 60 minutes of reporting five days a week and 20 minutes on weekends. The main news channels like ABC. CBS. NBC only allow 30 minutes of national news. They report on wars. economy. sports. weather. Commercials taken up 30% of these programs. Climate has a hard time competing. My Sons learned about climate change in public school but they don’t care anything about enough to change any behavior.
Now the reporting shows that many more people get their news streaming online which means they have choices of how news they want to watch and which category they want watch. For myself I watch a lot of news since I’m retired and I watch DW now so I can hear more about the World and Climate.
The show a map and its ALL RED .. i freeze the picture check a few and it's 1 degree ? over my life i seen much worse?
There was no internet back then… Question how many people die of hunger? more poverty ?
The biggest idea I am trying to express is tunneling aqueducts from the coast, in this case the west coast of the USA inland to feed combination geothermal power and sea water desalination plants. The idea seems to be so big that no one has considered it possible but I believe it is not only possible but it is necessary. For over a century the fossil water contained in aquifers has been pumped out to feed agriculture, industry and municipal water needs. The natural water cycle cant refill fossil water deposits that were filled 10,000 years ago when the glaciers melted after the last ice age. Without refilling these aquifers there is not much of a future for the region of the United states. As a result ground levels in some areas of the San Joaquin Valley have subsided by more than 30 feet. Similar fossil water depletion is happening in other regions all around the world. TBM and tunneling technology has matured and further developments in the industry are poised to speed up the tunneling process and it's these tunnels that are the only way to move large volumes of water from the ocean inland. The water is moved inland to areas where it can be desalinated in geothermal plants producing clean water and power. In many cases the water will recharge surface reservoirs where it will be used first to make more hydro power before being released into rivers and canal systems. It's very important however to not stop tunneling at these first stops but to continue several legs until the water has traveled from the ocean under mountain ranges to interior states. Along the way water will flow down grade through tunnels and rise in geothermal loops to fill mountain top pumped hydro batteries several times before eventually recharging several major aquifers. What I am proposing is essentially reversing the flow of the Colorado River Compact. Bringing water from the coast of California first to mountaintop reservoirs then to the deserts of Nevada and Arizona and on to Utah, New Mexico, Colorado and Wyoming. This big idea looks past any individual city or states problems and looks at the whole and by using first principles identifies the actual problem and only solution.
Thank you for your time, I would like the opportunity to explain in further detail and answer any questions.
A better future is possible
thank you for this
Have we crossed the point of no return in terms of damaging the planet? There is no such point. We need to trust that our thought, which is our greatest quality, can change nature. We only need to understand the direction to which we should aim our thoughts. What should we think about? What condition or state should we aspire to and ask for?
In order to save our planet, we should think about positive human connections. That is, how can we, in our connections, keep nature safe? How can we all together protect our world? If we truly wish to better our planet, then we should see people holding a concern for how to positively connect everywhere that we look.
It has nothing to do with recycling or other activities that we commonly associate with as being sustainable. If we come closer to and consider each other, that we will reach an entirely organic, perfectly connected and round state, then the negative forces will disappear from the world.
We need to understand that if we start thinking better about each other, then the planet will recover from all harm, because our thoughts are the strongest force in nature. Likewise, our negative thoughts about each other are entirely to blame for damaging the planet. That is why the more we recycle and invest in energies and activities that we commonly think of as being sustainable, the worse our planet becomes. Nothing will work to benefit us until we reach a state where our attitude changes toward each other for the better to protect and improve our planet.
"Science is Not a belief system, it is evidentiary."
None of these speakers, activists, are talking about the real issue, the real problem ! The number of Homo Sapiens on the planet, the carrying capacity of the Earth? With all the Green politics in Germany, Europe generally it will mean nothing when the population of Africa accelaerates and all wanting a Western lifestyle. Well they did get to the population factor eventually, but solutions?