Paleontologist over the last couple of decades we often started looking backwards in time. One by one we are becoming forward facing individuals, thinking about what they have learned about the past and how it informs the future. Thats the thrust of the recent Strategic Plan we have put out for the Museum Published a couple weeks ago, Natural History of the time if he was there isnt that how we and gym about the Natural World from all our study of the last couple hundred years and played up forward. We are sitting on this incredible moment in human history, been around for 200,000 years and plans on this generation to watch the population curve go to the sky and watch all of the impacts of that Large Population play out around the comments. A lot of us are used to think about what happened 70 million nurses who are now what about the next 70 . Interesting. One of my guiding lights is this guy tim flannery from australia to ive been following for 25 years. Issue of South Australia. I never met him when i was illustrated by these the kind of scientist the rights amazing books, very accessible, insightful books. The book he published in 1994 called the future eaters, about how people are eating their future. He gives the example of the invasion of australia about 45,000 years ago by a group of people that made it onto the continent and ate their way through the continent. We saw this happen again in new zealand in the year 1200, and the consumption of most of the father, people go places and eat their own future. Kinfauna. Our actions are so profound were making our own weather which is something very few of us, any of us can see that before the 70s. This idea that humans can change the climate is a remarkable thing. He continues to write books, is written about 20 books or more. These a prolific writer in many ways and one of my favorites, theres appreciation, Something Like the harvard australian Scholar Program and to extract some for austria and plunk them in massachusetts for you. This happened to tim. He was the scholar and erode the most insightful book about north america after one north america after one year but it really annoyed me because heres a guy who visited for a year and brought his outside perspective dont north america. His story started 70 million years ago and it makes the premise north america is a continent of immigrants. Not just and the last couple hundred years but in the last tens of millions of years. North america is a room with three doors, adore to south america, adore to asia, and earlier a door to eurasia across what was then a more narrowed north atlantic Northern Canada through greenland over what would become iceland into scandinavia. These three doors are opened and animals and plants migrate into north america and have their fate made out to the north america. The eternal frontier published in 2002, definitely worth your checking out. His actions do not go unnoticed in his own country and he was given great acclaim and has won many awards. He was named australian of the and 2007. We dont have what you call ausa of the year award at all. Tim is not necessary to paleontologist. Hes a memo just the studies of mammals of a different australian islands and studies animals that of an isolated by various forces and evolve into these amazing different groups of mammals. A long history of somebody whos interested in paleontology. Eventually and 2011 he was given a postindustrial in government on the australian Climate Change commission, one of the chief commissioners of the australian governments attempt to tackle Climate Change on the continent and the countries of australia. He was in that position for two years and the incoming government had to change in mind and sacked him, which means fired in english. In five days he was able to crowd source and ultimate venue which is to think of the australian Climate Change commission, the ostrow Climate Council in which he became the chief counselor. He lost a week buddies back at it now. His latest book is called atmosphere of hope, its really about the third way to take another challenge of Climate Change. I would like tim flannery to the podium and let them give you a introduction to book and then we will have a conversation and then take questions from the audience. We are being filled so when you, to make your questions please come to the aisle and speak into the microphone. So tim flannery, please welcome him. [applause] well, until for that wonderful introduction. Thank you all for being here this evening in these great institutions. I love museums. I was a Museum Director for seven years and i know how important these institutions are. This is where we have stored our record of how weve got to where we are today. I think museums are just going to play an ever more Important Role in terms of our understanding of our role on planet earth. What i wanted to speak about this evening was did a brief overview of where we are at in terms of Climate Change science, what might happen in paris at the meeting, a big climate meeting, and then going to discuss some of the new options that have developed just in the last months really that i think will be important for our future. I guess the place where in the moment in terms of Climate Change is not a very good one. For the last decade the emission of Greenhouse Gases has been tracking the worst Case Scenarios since the ipc scientists and economists and others thought might eventually. So its been right at the outside edge of possibility up on the bad side of things. And that has left a legacy. Last year just as an example humanity immediate about 40 gigatons of carbon dioxide. Most of it coming from the burning of fossil fuels. Its a mindbending volume of co2, to try to understand buddhism grasp how big it is that it is worth doing a thought experiment. Lets imagine we are tasked with drawing onetenth of that city out of the atmosphere through planting trees. Trees are going to a great way to capture city from the atmosphere. The power source is free. Photosynthesis as a sufficient process and trees are really not a lot more congealed to carbon dioxide. Lets imagine thats the task were given. Have become very which you need to plant to take in onetenth of the annual emissions of co2 . It turns out you need to plant an area around the size of australia. Its all a bit smaller than the contiguous 48 states of the u. S. A. On average over a 50 year. You would draw out just for gigatons as you do. In doing that you would change earths ostrow has a lot of grasp services that help reflect sunlight into space. To replace those with a tree canopy, you would end up warming the earth even though you pulled out some carbon dioxide. We have put huge volume of co2 into the atmosphere since the beginning of the industrial revolution, much in the last 30 to 40 years. So much easier to that lets imagine we all welcome tonight, dont get in our cars and drive because that would burn fossil fuels. You have tiger solar panels jalandhar like to even if we could do that we would still have been of co2 in the atmosphere to increase Public Interest to 1. 5 degrees celsius the next few decades, save at around 2050. We know we will not be able to do that. We will keep burning fossil fuels for two decades. That means it is extremely unlikely we can avoid more than two degrees of warming because the carbon budget is so tiny the remaining carbon budget to avoid to decrease the burning fossil fuels at current rates for example, will reach that limit by 2028. We are in a difficult position to i should just it would the world look like . One thing you wont see us of the Great Barrier reef. It simply cannot survive 1. 5 degrees of warming according to the scientists who study it. Thats good news for me. Ive of the Great Barrier reef. Its an integral part of my countrys heritage i know its already doomed. Theres not much we can do about it. So where were are we at this very moment . It turns out a couple of things have happened quite recently that allow us to begin to imagine were getting off that worstcase trajectory scenario violate the we are all over of Climate Change do. Wherever i go and talk to people i meet people for no Climate Change as i really. Its not like 10 years ago when they had to do a presentation with graphics and big Scientific Data to convince people about Climate Change. They now know it as an experience and thats important because that Community Support or understanding can lead to Political Support that can lead to the change that we need. Second cause of optimism for me is a report from the International Energy agency, the iaea is not known for its reviews are things, conservative group. They produced a report earlier in the year that really astonished me. What they said was effectively that Global Economic growth had finally decoupled from emissions growth or the growth of emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. And that the emissions from the burning of fossil fuels had stalled in 2014. And missioncentric and needed to grow a pretty much every year. Something new was happening. We think part of the reason that happened was theres been a strong appetite of wind and solar technologies. Investing in renewable has outpaced investment in fossil fuels for the last three years running. Something is changing. The second thing that happened is the efforts of individual people like you and me, billions of people around the world doing Little Things like changing their light bulbs or cycling to work for canceling the house, that all add up to a drop in demand for energy. So the big oil demand, peak coal demand has eased back as well. So between renewables and actions of individuals in cities and others come and i should just say, retrofitting cities is a 2 trillion a year industry. We are starting to see i hope that i can only hope because we will not know for a few years that weve passed the peak emissions year much earlier than anyone would have dared hope. If thats the case we are in a good position to start cutting definitions hard and fast. I think paris will help. We know the trajectory we are on for Greenhouse Gas emissions will land about four degrees awarded by the end of the century. Paris and the pledge will alter that so we will be aiming more likely at about two points of a degrees of warming. Its not enough but its good, good start. We know we want to stay down below two degrees so how are we going to do that. I started thinking about the drawdown from the co2 when i met Richard Branson in 2007. He invited me to his island home in the British Virgin islands your we started talking about the problem. Richard expressed skepticism humans but act fast enough to reduce emissions. He just thought it wasnt going to happen. He thought what he could do was offer a prize to help Foster Technologies that have the potential to draw one gigatons of carbon out of the atmosphere every year. One gigatons its about 3. 7 gigatons of carbon dioxide. We started this thing called love virgin challenge. I sit on the judging panel. Its a 25 millionpound prize for technologies that can achieve peace. Weve had over 11,000 entries so far and it opened my eyes to work the possibility that exist to drop co2 out of the atmosphere all of them small scale relative to what you hardd to do a gigatons to do but to give potential. Theres two main streams in what they call the third Way Technology, the technologies that can take co2 out of the atmosphere. One is biological, trees are a great example. You can also take plant matter and make things with it. Partied at the other fossil fuels industry, kimes would make the things we need directly from trees. That i think another option for drug co2 out of the atmosphere. The third option is a tank plant manner or form waste, mineralized it, buried in so and the carbon will stay there for a very long time. All of those technologies is sort of smallscale but in 2013 they only made 1000 tons global. Thats a long way from a gigatons. The approaches are there at least. When you go to the ocean and looking oceans you see something quite different from the olympic the land area is putting a big burden on already. One opportunity concerned seaweed farming. Theres a proposal just make published last year this is wicked cover 9 of the worlds oceans and seaweed farms with the drug equivalent of all current emissions out of the atmosphere on an annual basis as well as provide enough fish and reuters defeat of the population of 10 billion. High protein every year. I thought that sounded fantastic but then i started thinking, how big is 9 of the worlds oceans . Its about 4. 5 times the area of australia. Second i thought the seaweed is great. It grows faster than landbased plants but what would we do with all that seaweed . Once youve got youve got to turn it into something useful and then get the co2 out of it and put it somewhere. Turns out there are some options. I digester bio digester. If you have floating seaweed farms, put it down into shallow sediments and because of the overlying water the co2 stays in a stable state, not trying to skate like co2 is when its put in a landbased box. Album when you think about it its the ocean floor that is the ultimate repository for all the excess co2. It precipitates out. That takes many, many thousands of years. There is a whole other extreme in the third Way Technology is medical basically the chemical strength. Sounds terrible but as to what a good thing i can think for it. That covers a huge range of technologies from carbon negative concrete, concrete that absorbs co2. It takes no co2 to make. Concretes are about 5 responsible for the 5 of global emissions of co2 currently. So dealing with them in that way is a very high potential in my view. That are also rocks in the earths crust which absorbs co2. These rocks are formed at midocean regions by the duke it mind for various purposes. Theres a company in the netherlands that takes these rocks can price them up and puts them in working paint and those people carbon negative growth pains. Absorbs co2 into the roof. There are proposals to use these rocks at the big scale on beaches pixley but the sand grains on beaches, let them whether and they will absorb co2. One of the problems with of the problems with that approach is of course it takes fossil fuels to grind them up. Im a big proponent of a windmill with a hammer. Five or six gigatons of rocks ground up, capture about the gigabit of carbon. At the far end of the option of the possibilities theres been an excitinexciting technology. I felt in my hand a little mobile phone cover, plastic but which was made from Atmospheric Co2. Currently its the most expensive mobile phone cover in the known universe. You will not want to go and buy one but the technology exists to let us do that now. Too much ago an extraordinary breakthrough was announced. The company said that they could make carbon nano fibers directed from Atmospheric Co2 at a fraction of the cost of current production methods. That is an extra big thing. Carbon nano virus will be a big part of the future. They are lighter and stronger than just about any other substance we have. At the moment we use and manufacture. As they get cheaper they will start competing head on with steel and those are both heavy in matters of co2. Imagine taking the co2 entering into a solution that competes with other problems. Theres a lot of power in these technologies. That are all a long way from scale of the moment. Some of them are desktop, some of them are demonstration stage. Others are early industry stage. Until i will buy but there wasnt a name for these technologies to let us think of them as a whole. I think there will be a huge part of our future. They have to be. Co2 is going to get out of the atmosphere unless we use them. This is a great opportunity. We will need a number of new tools to do that but i think its important we do. I think by 2050 these technologies might give us the capacity to be drawing about 40 of current emissions out of the atmosphere every year. Thats not counting some of the things like seaweed farming, take a conservative you just across the portfolio. When i think of 2050 i sometimes run into a problem. Its a lack of imagination. The only way i will come to terms with this is play a trick on myself and say why dont you imagine youre living in 1915 instead of 2015 and are trying to imagine 1915 instead 2050. It be that its amazing what you see. 1915 in washington with the horsedrawn are on the street. You would have a very, very rudimentary electricity grid providing lighting and not a lot else. There would be a war going on in europe that spot with cavalry. There are no tanks on the battlefield. The first biplanes are nothing disregard that, just for shipping. The generals are saying arguably as good as the horses . Its a different world. Does not a single economist state in the whole world. The whole messy look at to understand what you were was colorcoded to represent the great european empires that have been there for centuries. 35 years later that looks like an antique. Theres nuclear power, jet aircraft, half the world pretty much living under communism. The horse is retreating from his last refuge, probably in world minnesota but its a different world. 35 years on. The one certainty we have is that the rate of change in the 20 has increased over that of the 20th. When we think about 2050 we had to give space for our imaginations in order to foster the vision and the enterprise we need to solve the problems that we know are going to be there for our children and their children. Thank you very much. [applause] how did you to where you are i started off being a very poor student in some ways. I went to a Catholic Boys School and i wasnt all that happy to was one of the oldest how schools can run with a strap. I didnt do very well in math or language that could and do a science degree which is what i really wanted to do. Instead i went to do ancient history degree. I really loved history. I learned how to use primary sources and documents and i love writing. I love reading and writing. Is going to be a teacher but i remember fighting a group of 15yearolds and they didnt have the guts to do that. At that time and australia there was not enough challenges. I was told go to california. They are so desperate for jobs as they might even take you. Why dont you go and see what this at the university . I went and i was accepted as a student. Had to do some catchup courses in math and geology. From there i went on and got into the paleontology. I got a job at the Austin Museum as a curator of mammals and is the best job i ever had. I sometimes wonder why i ever left it. From there i went on and had the stamp at harvard, came back, became a Museum Director, started working with governments on some local issues, environmental issues, climate related issues. I was at the beginning, the shift away from Pure Research to what i do know. I still try to do Pure Research. Ill go back to the sullivans next year chasing some rats. When did the climate issue become significant to . I had known this 90s it was an issue but i would focus on my research. You know what its like when youre focused on your research and you tend to read the literature of that area and nothing much else. It was nagging away at me. Ive seen things. I was working as a field biologist. I coul guess you could find was advancing. In 211999 i went to a conference in japan with a most extraordinary man called professor schneider from stanford university, a statistician who has worked on Climate Change will longtime. In one lecture he changed my life. He just laid it out in a way that was so compelling i couldnt turn away. I couldnt look the other way. I knew i had to do something. I was a Museum Director at the time working in government and i realized no one understood issue. Even i didnt understand it probably. I started reading all the back issues of science and nature come looking for the climate articles and to get a handle on what this thing was. This was in advance. I realized i had to write something that i took all those scientific papers answer provided and came up with the widow makers. I havent been able to get out of it since. What do you think we can expect in paris in december . I think we know reasonably well what we will get. I should just say i was pretty deeply involved in the copenhagen meeting i saw that until the. I was chairing the copenhagen Climate Council. There were flaws in the system to things are different interest. Weve got a bottomup approach which is the brainchild of president obama. I remember when he met with the leaders of five of the countries in copenhagen. Things are going to continue. He took a one page to them and said can we at least agree of his . The one page so lets go back, look at where reagan cut emissions, consistent with her own economy and pledge those together at some future meeting. Thats where we are now. What we will get we can already see. Thats our success. Those unequivocal unilateral pledges that will get us on a path. China and u. S. Are leaving on the. We need a few things for to happen. We need to find the poorest countries on plan to allow them to survive and adapt to whats going to be a change. And we need a short review period. Out the vote the process is such that countries make a pledge now for 2020 and then its all out by 2030. Thats 15 years, too long. We need to have threeyear review period so as technology changes, as governance change countries can become more ambitious. I think its a big job to do. As i think about climate i think about it in two parts, sort of 1. 0 as the direct impact of humans on the planet whether its overharvesting, and 2. 0, the and directed impacts. Im always curious about when climate 2. 0 overtakes 1. 0. To have an opinion . Do you think about it that way to . I do. Im going to go out, ill talk about some signs that highly speculative because ive never published it. I think the only impact when 2. 0 overtook 1. 0 my debate about 40,000 years ago or even earlier in the Northern Hemisphere as the great herds of mega fauna started to finish. This is a hypothesis that hasnt been tested. What i think that happened was that those kept the tundra federal open environment so they ate a lot of the vegetation and the wasnt a big accumulation at the time. Every summer there was soil that would be better, one early in the plants would grow and then they would be eating out again. I think you got these big players which have a lot of carbon in them and if you look back at the warm spikes that follows the cooling, theres about 20 parts per million of co2 that are missing from that spike that were there in previous into glacial period. I wonder if that 24 permit or so didnt disappear into the tundra and permafrost and also into the oceans. These are grasslands and the high north . Thats right. This is a naked hypothesis but i think the impacts maven a bit of them would even think of. Conventionally today. Tell me a little bit about the role of unions but in discussing climate in australia when you were Museum Director. Museums have been completely central with our understanding of climate, Climate Change impacts on biodiversity. The studies around the world, probably the best example is a from australia but from the u. S. I think it was an analogy is working in california early in the 20th century who did some very extensive surveys on mountain ranges. They have been able to see in the last 10 or 20 years, weve been able to see this decision now things have changed. Mammals have moved hundreds of meters upslope her mother were. Thats just one small example but i think as we go on and look at the broad impact as a whole rather than just Climate Change, what we find is we have an archive in museum selections with an unparalleled level of detail about what was actually happening. Everything from shrinking genetic pools to heavy toxic metals, heavy metals update through to changing say to that was a atmosphere, which was kind of a renowned but probably no nt in might as much of it might. Things we havent thought of it. I think well see an interesting history written through the records we have stimulated in museums today. The museums of us can become oddly in a Pretty Healthy state . I know youre wrecking of a tough job but i tell you what come in southwestern i had a bloody toug tough job. Can they tell you why . Because of that will museum in South Australia was very typical. Its based on the old british museum, so both ethnographic stuff and Natural History stuff. Everything right in there. Its sitting in a nicely city, its nearest neighbor is 600 kilometers away with a population of 1 million. Thats your tax base to support that museum. Can you imagine supporting a place like d. C. If washington only had 1 million taxpayers. Really tough job. The only way we survive, we got the premier drunk occasionally so the pledge more money than we would reminded in the morning about it. It was bloody hard work. Most specialty gyms are in a tight position. They struggle. For me keeping research alive was the key. We had to keep research alive. The exhibitions we could get other people to pay for the theres always sponsored by the hard work as you are probably fine as well is just keeping the road from falling over you, your research capacity. Heres the thing. Museums are very much tools of the 19th century. Most of the 19th century tools have been long since replaced by technologies. Being beholders of these collections, never can go back and get them again. The experts the wrap themselves around those collections come and get the challenge of keeping this entitys up and running in a world that is technologically being disrupted at tremendous rates as a nursing challenge. There were two issues. [inaudible] civilizations impact on museums. Museums can be part of a solution. You have to figure out to keep the museums in good health to become part of the toolkit for the 21st century. And the money thats required is actually being a. I remember when i was a director of the museum when i first arrived we had the minister for transport was also responsible for the recent to some haphazard basis of government. I said look i really want the money to hire five new researchers, keeping going and i will get some money and universities so we can make joint employment. She was a very lovely minister at the time and she went away and came back and ive got a solution. We are building a new runway at the airport. I will shorten it by one meter and the money i will say though that we will give you. Which is fantastic but you showed me how small, how hard it was to get the money. I think people dont appreciate museums. Museums and summers are the own worst enemies. When i first went to that museum i went and asked some of the curators if the they give a pubc talk and what did it. There was one who had been studying an obscure beetle for 60 years. I went down to the Research Office and said would you give a Public Lecture . He kind of rushed off like a cockroach in the light. Terrifying to do. It was hard sometimes to make change spirit changing some a little bit. One of the challenges of talk about Climate Change is sort of this sheer numbers of the game, i get a of carbon which is visible. Measure the future in one or two degrees of warming or gigatons of carbon. Have you found any other metaphors or techniques that have traction with people who dont already know what a gigatons of carbon is . The only way ive been able to make sense myself is, what would it take to get a gigatons out at a gigatons of carbon is about for a gigatons of co2. Roughly the analogy for australia is a good one. But the imagination, its hard to imagine the when i talk to people sometimes is all you need to know about a gigatons of carbon is that at mr. Carvin compares the volume of atmospheric carbon which is of significance in terms of function, supplanting those trees will change your climate and change the face of australia, having a gigatons in the atmosphere registers. Its big enough to register in the system. So interestingly enough this third way approach which is twopart, biological and chemical, is a mimic of the planet. The biology and the jealous of the planet. These are natural processes that ties seemed to him longtime friends. Youre in charge of presenting this idea of how to speed this process of using technology. Thats right. When i started at along with and what else was quite confused about these proposals because we called many of them geoengineering. Geoengineering covered, listed cover a wide range of possibilities from putting software into the stratosphere to planting trees. That didnt make sense to me because proposals like putting sulfur into the stratosphere, they are a bandaid solution. They mask the problem. The trouble is people look at them through such a. They constitute the secon secone of efforts what is to reduce emissions. The second option if you find thaitis the soldier into the se. At the moment china has four Research Teams look into jew engineering proposals. The terrifying themes that shape, a wealthy individual into an effective plan. They are instantly affected. But they are highly dangerous. If china does put sulfur into the stratosphere and theres nothing to stop them from doing it because theres no global treaty regulating any of this, 1. 4 billion people in south asia will have their monsoon rains the fact about that. I think the second alternative is really dangerous. So i tried in the book to separate at all from the third way which has its disadvantages that its very slow. It takes 20 to 30 years developing industry to that sort of skill. In the 70s to generate electricity thousands of times the cost of electricity from burning coal. After four years of her hard work and our indian development. Its going to be the same with these technologies. So they are slow. The virtue is that they do strengthen the system to self regulate. Its almost the definition of a third Way Technology. If it strengthens the system, or mimics it in some and helps it, that is the third Way Technology. I think we did have that definition clear in our mind. The reason i wrote this book was to set the definition of because if you look now, they dont could distinguish between the two approaches and they are different. The second and third ways. These are things that literally pulls you out of the atmosphere and sequestered some way . Thats it exactly. You might sequestered as fiber or plastic or as co2 in the shallow sediments of the ocean. Or the antarctic. Now if anyone would like to ask a question, theres a microphone there. Can you go to the microphone . Your question will be recorded and heard by everyone in the room. Thank you very much. Task force is also involved for small island state issue of Climate Change. We went there to learn for the. The following questions. First, what is your evaluation of the impact of moving from a chemical fertilizer to natural fertilizer provided technology and we can get the fertilizer the scale of Small Farmers . Second question, given the growth of urbanization particularly and china, what is the impact of dividing by two the consumption of energy for airconditioning, impact on Climate Change . And third question is the impact of the salinization on a smaller scale than we have today, big plans the same technologies emerge . Would those three applications benefit from the money which most of the countries seem to commit now . Is there any policy to go that way and what did you think should be done, education, promotion . Thank you. Thank you for the question. In terms of the substitution of natural fertilizers versus chemical fertilizers from many of our fertilizers at the moment are made from fossil fuels and our possibilities of manufacturing them directly from Atmospheric Co to from other sources. Those soda technologies are being held back at the moment because fossil fuels are cheap and abundant in all the plans that does it is already, its paid off so they can produce stuff very cheaply. The one way for what i can see what that is introducing a price on carbon to if you price carbon into that equation even give a competitive advantage for the more natural fertilizers which i think is a good thing because we are not contributing fossil fuels. The second thing you asked about i think was airconditioning and urbanization. That represents both a threat and an opportunity. So we see very Strong Organization globally but particularly and places like china and india that contract of Carbon Emissions because people are getting access to electricity that they have not had in the past. Theres an opportunity because as we build cities can put in a lot of efficiency. As i said, working with the city to make a more efficient is a 2 trillion a year industry at the moment, one of the Biggest Industries on the planet. If we focus our money on those solutions, im confident we can rein in emissions. I think were seeing the beginning of that with the iaea figures i talk about. The third issue of the race was one of the salinization using renewable energy. Thats something we are saying right now. We have an entity called Clean Energy Finance corporation. Its a 10 billion bank really that coinvests with other lending institutions to reduce emissions. One of the things thats been funded is the largest tomato farm in the Southern Hemisphere which is run early, solar panels. It does all of its eating habits cooling, all from solar. Its incredibly efficient. So that we think is the begin in australia at least of smallscale link to some of which would be extremely helpful to a country short on water. The whole world changes the way it looks if you can do that. Thank you so much for coming and speaking with us today. When you got the lecture that it was so compelling, you couldnt turn away, thats exactly how i felt when i read the weather makers so thank you so much for that. What im interested in is were going to need these Carbon Sequestration technologies. Has been Research Done on a quickly we can use them . If we slam on the brakes and put in reverse t too quickly and suk out 100 parts per million in a year, will that be detrimental just as much as putting more carbon into the atmosphere . Thats a really good question, and we havent got to that level of sophistication yet with this project. Theres one project where the question has been asked and it concerns the sequestration of dioxide as snow in antarctica but it turns out that antarctica, the surface in the average temperature is about mind is minus 57 degrees. Sometimes the temperature drops down to minus 90. So it does rain snow but the snow warms because the stuff is embedded. In a particular technology if you had about half of the installed wind capacity germany has you could be pulling out by choosing big children boxes, chill of the air by using wind power. You could pull it out about the get a of carbon a year. But scientists that did the study did ask what would happen if co2 concentrations over the antarctic dropped precipitously . Would that cause problems . They came up with a do that this was Modular Technology and if there was a problem we could simply slow down a bit. We could cut off some of that into a solid happen. I think its an excellent question, and we are just at the very early days of this. I dont think we will need real answers to the question for centuries it was because i get it done in such a massive amount. We are starting with almost nothing today. I just want to say im a dual view as australian citizens i really appreciate everything you are doing down there. My question is on tipping point. You mention with the Paris Agreement with everything thats been pledged were looking at about two points seven degrees. We need to get down to queue. I guess theres potential for ratcheting up those targets as well. You also talk about pizza that has been sequestered through the theory with alaska coming out of the last ice age. We know permafrost is starting to him no and methane is being released from there. You talk about with your third way to our lot of these technologies you still say our 20, 30 years off in the future. I was wondering whats the current state of the science in terms of tipping points and uncertainty, and how much does it need to factor into where we go from here . Thats such a great question. But i just begin by saying this institution is at the forefront of Global Research in one of those questions. Scott is in the audience. Hes been studying this exact issue of wayne in the past have we seen these tipping points breached and seemed very, very fast warming. I tried to cover this in my latest book and i look at three issues. When was the gulf stream, slowing down of the gulf stream. 11 the amazonian rainforest and the third was the release of plant rates. I guess my great concern is the release of test i talk in a book about some Ominous Development in that area. Theres been some mass release of methane from the arctic sea base thats been detected by Research Vessels there. Thats the methane that is underwater . Because c. Levels are higher than the past the arctic sea covers permafrost areas which are still frozen. So its the permafrost under the water which is releasing this methane. On planning theres been a couple of crisis develop which seem to have been formed by a release of plant rates at about 100 meters in the permafrost. There are ominous signs, early signs of change, but global methane there was a dip of in 2005, 2006 were methane emissions or concentration did decrease slightly but then returned to climb. I agree its a risk but how do we measure that . The only way we can manage it is to make sure we reduce the warming. The more we reduce the warming the les expos we are to that risk. So i hope that is some sort of an answer. One follow. Has there been anything in terms of the uncertainty on the timing of any of these events or is it still just completely kind of a crap shoot in terms of whether and when tipping points my poker . The science around the gulf stream collapse, even in 2005, and they were saying the chances are only about 5 a century. Act hasnt changed much. For the amazonian rain forest collapse we are now and have a certain position we were then in 2000 by the early global models suggest that there might be a rabbit die off of the whole amazon rainforest if temperatures increased and it would be a release of carbon as a result. Nude models suggest that demopublican a situation of all the big impacts in eastern amazonian advocacy they already in parts of brazil, the western amazonian may be more significant. The other side is a discrepancy the early data should be taken seriously. So it is more uncertainty. For the plant rates stuff the modeling is a difficult. In the arctic just one sector that, yes, its warming. Warming. Theres more co2 in the atmosphere but that also promotes plant growth on the tundra which acts as an insulating layer to that country. Its quite a complicated situation theres probably other researchers who have a much better handle on it than i do but my reasoning is still a high level of uncertainty. Good evening and thank you so much for your presentation to us in writing the book. I look forward to reading it. I visited australia for the first time a few years ago and found it to be a wonderful, beautiful country with people who are fun and engaging and very interesting to be around as well. But my question has to do with what you are talking about in terms of geoengineering. And it led me to think that when we think about the stratosphere at our atmosphere really, we are thinking about something thats it. There are no boundaries. Its like a common inheritance to all of us. Do we need to begin to think about treaties that take in the entire global perspective in how it affects not only one but all . Something all share jointly. And a president might be the ozone issue. There may be other president s. I dont know but is that an area imaginatively anyway as well as practically we need to begin to think about in terms of addressing Climate Change . Look, it certainly is in my view. Just talk about where were at with at the moment. The u. N. Convention on biodiversity issued effectively advancing we shouldnt be doing any ocean fertilization extremist because of the danger i just agree. That was back in about 2003 i think that was. Since then theres been a number of quite significant ocean initiatives. Some by small communities which about a spectacularly large impact. At the same time thats been happening, theres been a series of talks called the london protocol talks which been going on for 15 years trying to broker some sort of treaty with the beginnings of a treaty to deal with stratospheric ozone injection. For example, or what they call modification. Technologies that get between us and the sun somehow. That hasnt been anywhere but earlier this year a really great thing happened in this country. Combined academies of science and engineers produce report on geoengineering which is what of the most thorough pieces of work ive ever read. It lays the foundation for an approach to a global treaty. Its authoritative. Its impeccable. If the u. S. President got behind that incentives are combined academies report on this, could would initiate discussions to safeguard ourselves by means of a treaty from unilateral action . I think the time is right for that to happen but it does have become from the president of the u. S. In my view, the academy report provides a Supreme Court but you need some at that level to push it. They give for the research. I will look it up. Just to say also the im a member of the Safe Alliance for climate solutions, which is working in Northern Virginia at the local level to find solutions related to this because we think the local level is essential to addressing the issues. But what we are finding is that these groups are really becoming quite active in this now and, of course, pope francis encyclical has been a major help to the. I take opened out, that there so many different voices joining now and working imaginatively and hopefully with one another, and that this will provide impetus as well for finding solutions and working together and even at the local level. So thank you. Thank you. Next in line. Things for a really interesting topic im an economist and when i think about Technology One of the things i worry about is javon paradox, the issue as technology and prices get cheaper we sometimes use more of things rather than less of things. So to me that speaks for need for Public Policy to go along with technology. My question is in discussions with investors and engineers, inventors, folks who are thinking about the technological solution how much awareness and knowledge discussion is there about the need to have the technology and the policy that can manage rather than be in opposition . The question was about i guess talking to at a crucial look at these two technologies whether they are aware of the need for regulation i guess or some government policy at least which makes sure they dont lead to more consumption. Look, i think in the experience of talking with these people for doing recognizes its really early gains were were taking the most tiny infant steps at the moment in this direction. So those issues of regulation i agree with you havent really come up yet. Could i say they will probably be more important in some areas than others. At the moment possible technologies that take a solution, take a problem of co2 entered into a solution, i dont know whether you can have too much of that stuff. Maybe in 30 years time there will be different but at the moment im not sure. Could i just mention, the range of Technology Approach is astonishing just one month ago a group of south korean researchers announced that they discovered a means of activating huge coffee grains to capture atmospheric music this interruption, 100 cups a day. But its just astonishing that someone had done that to me. Its an approach i never thought of. We are at such an early stage. Its like its like when it was a million possibilities. We knew a couple would win but we did know which ones. Thats how it feels at the moment of the third way approach i appreciate what youre saying but i think its probably too early yet to have answers there. What is being done in the level of a paris meeting to make sure the investments that Bring Clean Energy to subsaharan africa, at the moment unfortunately not much is being done at that high level but quite a lot of change within africa its self and i would come with a number of groups in south africa and monitor the other things that are going on. Here is a real recognition in africana and india. The only way people are going to get this of the tricity at reasonable prices is if we resort to distributed Generation Models and this is very much like mobile phones. We dont have a Network Across africa but everyone has a mobile phone and to do their banking for example or whatever else, we think electricity will be the sign but we need smallscale generation units with their they console with battery or solar with some other storage mechanism and wind power, as part of the distributed agreement so you have groups of people, we think that can happen. There are companies and governments giving this serious thought at the moment. Probably not as much as happening at the highest level that it should but i think it is a critical question. Unless we solve that question we are going to be no way we can deprive people of the opportunity for cheap power and electricity. But we have to do it in a way that lowers emissions. Thank you. My name is melanie. I work at the Climate Change mitigation theme. Two simple questions. Animal lives i cant consumption of meat, what are people saying about it, how to change, one of the Biggest Challenges is human behavioral change, how are people addressing that and second question, do you have faith in the entire caucus system . My grandfather used to say we waste hours and take minutes and feel like i covered the negotiations in a as a journalist and wonder if we are running in circles and chasing our tail . Can i start with beef . I am no expert on the livestock part, but my general understanding of meat production is first of all, it is a large part of the ecosystem and there were a lot of room here in the past so in north america you had 16 million buffalo producing Greenhouse Gases but also eating grass. At some level livestock production is sustainable. The people sp to suggest at half of current production levels he would have a sustainable livestock industry. So maybe it is part of the solution. Also efficiency gains happening all the time but the Clean Energy Finance corp. Is financing a lot of initiatives, into energy. The cop process. I spent 3 years of my life chair schenk the copenhagen club, the most difficult work i have ever done, it was so hard but it was great. That biggest meeting of business dealing with carbonation in copenhagen where the top 15 was held, a bit of a trial run for the whole thing and that was how we came up with some great stuff but everything fell apart so badly. One of the problems was the magnificent center, 15,000 people no problems in copenhagen, we had 40,000 people there. All the guys from the third world, and have to walk about a mile and stand in the snow, so that is 24 hours to brokerage deal, it was something we know very anticipated but was probably a big factor in that it didnt go so fast. I think the cop process is really hard. I hope parents it should be the last one. One thing that i hear brought up often in the context of the conversation and Climate Changes the issue of access to water. I have often heard comparison that it may soon be like oil in terms of its value and potential to spark conflict. I wonder what you make of those claims and what your forecast is on that issue . The issue about water access ability to water in the future, no doubt climate systems are changing and we see the impact in places like subsaharan africa, already substantially affect peoples lives, people dont have access to the technology, and australia we see big impact from water, lack of water availability. I think personally it is a big concern. In places like california, water regulation, that needs to change and the governor recognizes people hopefully will come to the view, there are some technological fixes, it is great to use the pressure generated directly to disseminate water. It is a big change in the future but i am not entirely focused in terms of thinking about water and climate in the future. Two people, the last two questions and questions are answered. Next question. I love the weathermakers, an excellent book but i dont think the average person in the United States read it. I have to raise the issue of politics, most of the people in this country dont even believe in evolution. How are they going to come to grips with Climate Change to say nothing of all the republican candidates for president . I know australia has had a bit of a turn politically, how are we going to deal with the political issue so we can get to all these wonderful Technical Solutions that obviously are waiting to happen . If i knew the answer to that question i could sleep well at night. It is a really tough one. I can only talk from personal experience. In my country, australia is a country of 23 Million People so smaller than the u. S. And fairly homogeneous. What we found is to the Climate Commission and Climate Council we have been able to reach a lot of people, for a couple years, i go into australia to talk about Climate Change. Of course there are skeptics in the audience who walkout but a lot of people were interested and were open to understanding and the constituencies using social media and the carbon counsel looking at a premium dollar budget, we have three times more staff than we had and australians care about this issue, not all australians but a lot of them do. We have been able to slow a change the dialogue around Climate Change. We took a turn to the right in australia two years ago, we had a coup in australia, five in two years. Americans dont understand what it democratic coup is that the parliamentary system can do it. He is more progressive on Climate Change and wheat think there is a way forward so working with the middle, reasonable people who are open to discussion, a true dialogue about the issue and that is what the Climate Council tries to do, is slowing and tedious. It takes a long time to get anywhere so i dont think theres any shortcomings. It will be hard work and that is going to be slower but i have faith we will get there in the end. Final question . Hypothetically, if we were to find a cheap way to harvest co2 from the atmosphere and make profit from it, a lot of people get into when and how long in this hypothetical scenario would it be to take a Significant Impact on Global Warming . Depends on how fast you could do it. If you want to reduce Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide by one part per million you need to take 18 bigot tons of ceo to out of the atmosphere. That is a staggeringly large amount and we are now about 120 parts per million compared to the preindustrial level. To get back where we were in 1800, if people could do that, make a profit from it, i honestly can see that that would give us atmospherics you to shortage. Maybe in 50 years it would look different but at the moment we are so far over, any little bit can get out will be a help. Paint you for coming in by tonight and helping. [applause] i will slipped hims microphone off. Thanks so much for coming. [inaudible conversations] this weekend on booktv, afterwards, senator cory booker discusses his career in Public Office and weighs in on political issues. The hunt for indicted balkan war criminals. Amelia and provide the history of the religious right. Also this weekend we look at the life of senator ted kennedy, a history of assassination attempts and threats on the president , the beginnings and current stage of the field of psychiatry. Booktv visit screen fills to talk to local authors and tour the city at literary sites. For complete television schedule, booktv. Org. Booktv, 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors, television for serious readers. Here is a look at the current bestselling nonfiction books according to the los angeles times. Topping the list that is a look at the current nonfiction best sellers according to los angeles times. Many of these authors have or will be appearing on booktv. You can watch the on our web site booktv. Org. To me it is home. The place where we come to see who we really are. And not someone else that reflection of who we are. A place of knowledge. It is the repository
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.