Now on bbc news, its hardtalk. Shaun ley interviews environmentalist professor tim flannery. Welcome to heart talk, i am shaun ley. Time is running out. If we dont act fast and radically it will become too late to limit the effects of Global Warming. Its a sort of thing you hear from of Global Warming. Its a sort of thing you hearfrom campaigners trying to wake up the world. Tim flannery isnt like that. The australian scientist is an optimist and absolutely convinced, he says, that we can shift from a carbon emitting to a carbon absorbing economy. Hope for mankind orjust so much hot air . Tim flannery, welcome to hardtalk. Weve seen this year, certainly in europe, some the most extraordinary temperatures and weather events with experienced in some parts of western europe, a second in only a matter of a month. Belgium and the netherlands and germany recording the highest ever temperatures. Globally, the Un World Meteorological Organisation says the last four years have been the hottest known to man but the un secretary general says the paradox is that as things are getting worse on the ground, political will seems to be fading. Why . I think that there is big problems in our political system. Weve seen a rise of populists who are very policy light and very nationalist heavy. And for some reason, they are winning elections. I personally dont understand it. I think at this moment we need strong leadership to deal with these issues. Instead we seem to be getting the weakest leadership would seen for decades. Been writing about this subject for i6 been writing about this subject for 16 years. Is you attitude changed . Yes, it has. I watch the science and i see it getting worse and worse and predictions coming true and time running out so for me, every year it just gets tougher. When you say time sta rts just gets tougher. When you say time starts to run out, what do you mean, can you quantify . I chaired the Copenhagen Climate Council back in 2009 when we were hoping for a global agreement. That was just about the last time we could have achieved a good outcomejust about the last time we could have achieved a good outcome just by cutting emissions. Today, we know we have to do to very difficult things at once if we want to achieve that same end and that is to cut those emissions hard and fast and to draw very large volumes of Greenhouse Gas out of the atmosphere. If we fail to do that, 20 years from now, even that option will be off the table and then i dont know where we go for solutions. Youve said that youve kind of slightly given up trying to persuade every climate sceptic youve needed to change their mindsa sceptic youve needed to change their minds a new focus on in particular working with business to try and get them to create the changes. One of the reasons you helped found the Copenhagen Climate Council. Some are concerned, though, especially those who regard themselves as environmentalists is that the growth in our economies is one of the problems standing on the way of tackling Climate Change. In a sense, business is geared up for Something Different and its not complimentary with the ambition you wa nt to complimentary with the ambition you want to achieve in mitigating the effect of Global Warming. Want to achieve in mitigating the effect of Global Warminglj want to achieve in mitigating the effect of Global Warming. I dont believe thats true. I measure success believe thats true. I measure success by the gigaton. Last year, oui success by the gigaton. Last year, our emissions went up by 1. 7 . We added 3. 5 ppm of co2 to the atmosphere, the highest on record over the last 12 months and that is failure for me. If the economy does 01 failure for me. If the economy does or doesnt grow, im not looking at that, im looking at a different set of diggers. You say you are looking ata of diggers. You say you are looking at a different set but doesnt want inform the other . Advisors to the Trump Administration on energy and climate said in katowice in poland, we strongly believe no country should have to sacrifice their Economic Prosperity or Energy Security in pursuit of environmental sustainability. That is the direct clash between nationalism, the National Self interest, making America Great again, it could be heavyin America Great again, it could be heavy in a any other country in the wider interests of the Global Economy and the global environment. That is just wrong. What we need actually is a whole new energy sector. We need a whole new sector to draw co2 down out of the sphere and we need to transform every industrial process that we are in charge of. That will mean growth. You see yourself its wrong but you are writing on the Copenhagen Climate Council website when it was set up, every revolution, from oil to renewables, profits have increased. Thats the way the world is. Yes and thats what i believe. To hold that back and say it is going to destroy our economy. Even if that growth is contributing to the problems. If you grow the old economy, you will destroy the climate. If we grow a new clean economy and in the next 30 years ago from carbon emitting to a carbon absorbing economy, we will grow the economy and hopefully head off the worst of the climate crisis. Between 1980 and 2000 according to the intergovernmental science policy plus hormone biodiversity and Ecosystem Services back in may this year which published its report under the it is of the un, 100 million hectares of Tropical Forest we re million hectares of Tropical Forest were lost mainly in cattle ranch in south american, Palm Oil Plantations in Southeast Asia contributed to the decline. International trade has increased since 1970 to feed, clothe and give energy to this burgeoning row world, forests have been cleared especially in tropical asia. Isnt that tension part of the problem . You may have this desirable ambition for a Global Economy but we start with the one weve got and we are trying to deal with the effects of Climate Change. The reality is in this world we will need to use the existing economy to build a new one. Every time you build a wind turbine manufacturer solar panel, youre going to use dirty energy. The cost of the transition will be a growth in this dirty old economy. In terms of food, a new tour particularly about cattle grazing in the destruction of rainforests, that is truly the old economy and the reason thatis truly the old economy and the reason that is growing as it is is because we are not exacting a carbon price on undesirable practices. We need to make those changes. The Carbon Market hasnt worked. No, it hasnt worked. It must work in future. That gas that is sitting over our heads driving this exceptionally hot summer day in europe and driving heatwaves around the world, that gas is not going anywhere unless we get it out. A quarter of it will sit there effectively forever by human standards unless we draw down. The only way of drawing it down is by exacting a carbon price. And is the technology there to do what you want to do at this stage or are we still developing the technology . To do at this stage or are we still developing the technology7m to do at this stage or are we still developing the technology . Is a great question. No one can say what technologies will work at the guitar and scale. We have small industries, groups like Carbon Engineering make biofuels out of atmospheric co2. Maybe some forestry, maybe, what i am keen on his seaweed farming. We consider solutions in embryo there but it will be sometime before we know which of those are going to be effective, Cost Effective and effective, Cost Effective and effective in drawing down. Its difficult to appreciate the point youre making about this technology. You went through this when you are for the argument for Geothermal Power as a way of Generating Energy without the price of adding to the emissions and the money was spent and invested in a mine, that mine collapsed because of an explosion and the investment was lost. Thats right and if i could say there, the thing that i was wrong about and a lot of the world didnt see was the power of the manufacturing process to drive power of the manufacturing process to d rive costs power of the manufacturing process to drive costs out of reduction and so to drive costs out of reduction and so solar and wind, which are both the new fracturing based new Energy Solutions are really killed Everything Else including geothermal so Everything Else including geothermal so my little superannuation nest egg was u nfortu nately lost so my little superannuation nest egg was unfortunately lost through that. It hasnt got you off thinking there are solutions that we just have to be prepared, perhaps to invest in lots of things simultaneously to see what works. Noone can see the future. We know what the outcome is that we cant see the pathway. This is part of the problem, isnt it . We have had it expressed was certain extent sceptically have had it expressed was certain extent sce ptically by have had it expressed was certain extent sceptically by one British Government minister who said people in this country have given up on experts, they dont trust them. Its a global problem and impart its the dire warnings never quite comes to pass as they are supposed to pass an inner thats good news but it somewhat discredits the people have issued those warnings. Somewhat discredits the people have issued those warningslj somewhat discredits the people have issued those warnings. I would just save people down to the dire warnings, look at what is happening around you today. Heatwave records being broken across the world. In australia, were looking at having the hottest winter in south eastern australia on record. Here in europe, youve broken numerous records. The warnings are coming true. What we need is action. We need to see this transition of the economy, really start gathering pace in the next few yea rs, start gathering pace in the next few years, otherwise we will miss the chance. Why isnt that action forthcoming then . Why is there a mismatch between what the public says it accept and i think the lowry, very respected survey, the lowry, very respected survey, the lowry poll found 60 of people say Global Warming is a serious and pressing oblong, we should take steps now but when it came to the federal election in 2019, the voters comprehensively rejected the oppositions labor Party Proposal which was to tackle it by reducing emissions by 45 cents by 2030. It lost badly. Its primary vote was down at a time when it was expected to win. The winning governments primary vote was down to, to be fair but this is part of the trend where we are seeing government or potential Prime Minister is putting themselves forward without effective policy and this is dangerous. What i dont understand and perhaps you can help us because you run the countrys climate organisation, the federal Government Organisation until it was abolished by the Abbott Government because it was sceptical about the arguments for man made Climate Change. Why is it that voters can say on the one hand we think something must be done, yes, it will affect us but devote the opposite way . The reason for that in my view is that we are not ringing the whole community along with us. What we are saying is, we want change, people in the cities, those aware of the issues want change and yet you coalminers out there in the regions, you will have to look after yourself in future. We havent had governments come in with comprehensive structural adjustment policies up was seen in germany. In germany, the transition has been pretty flawless and not a single coalmine has lost theirjob. In australia, we havent had that sense of social responsibility just brought people along. Social responsibility is one thing but its easy to have when you are not bearing the cost. One of the economic models that looked at the proposal from the Opposition Labor Party in the run up to the federal election in this spring suggested the cost would be about 181 million us, 167,000 jobs. Its the cost would be about 181 million us, 167,000jobs. Its not the cost would be about 181 million us, 167,000 jobs. Its not really surprising, people who work in those industries look at those warnings and say of course, i care about the planet, my children and grandchildren but right now, i care about having food on the table, paying the bills and mortgage and if somebody else, not mine to sacrifice myjob, properly. Somebody else, not mine to sacrifice my job, properly. Ive somebody else, not mine to sacrifice myjob, properly. Ive seen somebody else, not mine to sacrifice my job, properly. Ive seen this firsthand, ive met coalminers have said to me, im working in a coal mine, igot said to me, im working in a coal mine, i got two children, am i doing the right thing . Of course, i say the right thing . Of course, i say the first responsibility is to put it on the table for your family and thats why we as a society need to move Forward Together with this and create new industries and its not as if this is difficult in queensland. You could see, i work with groups who want to do innovative a marvellous new things in these areas. Hitting Government Support to do it is really tough and i dont understand that. Isnt part of the problem is it doesnt matter if australia gets its house in order, or europe for that matter . The statistics suggest half the Greenhouse Gas emissions come from three countries, india, the United States and china to the rest of the world can do it and that is not going to change. Argument isjust because i see things being done wrong, i will do wrong things as well and that makes for a great world. That is totally wrong. We all need to do a bit otherwise how do people have confidence that we all will act. Every country needs to do its proportion. 193 countries, you are right, most of the emissions come from three but why should those three disproportionate burden . Surely this is a collective issue. They should share the disproportionate burden because they are generating most of it. They should bear the proportion that relates to their contribution to the problem. And their contribution is the biggest. Labour its large, yes but that doesnt mean australia should do nothing. Where the 15th largest emitter capita, we are a largest emitter capita, we are a large emitter if you look at it in that way and we need to do whats right. I mentioned gutterres at the start of this interview. I want to hear about how were going to stop increasing emissions 2020 and dramatically reduce emissions to reach net zero by mid century. We had the Outgoing BritishPrime Minister making a promise much the same. May said we will hit net zero emissions by 2050. It is easy to say these things, they are predictions, and it is hard to deliver on them. It is, and the delivery will be down to industry. You recently saw Andrew Mckenzie from bhp say this is a crisis and we need emergency action. I have lived through 20 years of Climate Action where we have not moved the dial a centimetre. We are still headed towards catastrophe. We need something new. So if i was the Prime Minister of this country what i would be doing is getting all the industries together, saying i am watching you all, you are all scared to move first because you dont want to move first because you dont want to lose your advantage. How will we move together collectively . Give me your pledges so that i can take them to the un and show that we are actually going to lead. Because when Companies Make pledges, particularly short term ones, they tend to stand by them. And what about governments . There are some interesting remarks from a member of chinas National Expert panel on Climate Change last summer where he said china is the number one emitter of Greenhouse Gases, we hold our hands up, so china will take more action internationally to combat Climate Change. He then said china had already reduced emissions intensity relative to gdp by 44 , which is quite handy because he promised to get it down by 45 by next year. So he set a study suggest it is very likely we can achieve this target before 2025, in other words, peak absolute Greenhouse Gas emissions by 2030, we can do it five years earlier. These are political statement. Do you believe them . Look, from china i am encouraged by them. The big issue for china, as i understand that the moment, is