I am in my fifties and have always been an environmentalist since I can remember. I am a Chemist now. I became re-energized to change my life (to help the climate) in 2004 when I heard how SONOR was hurting whales and watching the "Six Degrees could change the World" 2006 movie. I hope the next generation can have a bigger impact than my generation did but, yes, I have to keep doing my part. For example, I have a huge milkweed garden for pollinators and Monarch butterflies.
3 questions: Do you have kids? What does the company you work for does? Which bank do you keep money and your pension? Unless you really honestly answer those questions you didn't do nothing for the climate.
Thank you for genuine balance. What has changed? Older activists had only the science, current activists have obvious climatic impacts on weather. It's hard to deny the reality of increased extreme events.
yes, so lets stop denying them! Better still, lets CONTINUE to do all the little things we can (or BIG things too!) - a 1980s film called 'Orinoco Flow told the story of how just a few drops and a few drops and a few more drops came together - and eventually, with a mighty roar, became a dynamic force of a river which smashed through the hated mighty dam that threatened the local environment. All started by one young indiginous boy.
I'm similar in age to you Joe. I grew up with Kids Save The Earth club and the environmental advocacy campaigns of the 80s and 90s. I grew up with Bill Nye and really bad Saturday morning cartoons showing the effects of industrial pollution. And I am *that* person in my group of friends who always has their own water bottle/cup/straw/take away container/cutlery. And I am *that* person who will talk about environmental issues at the drop of a hat, and feels zero shame about it. I write science-y songs and perform them unapologetically to anyone in earshot. But I'm so damn tired of this still being a fight. It's difficult to see people of my generation who grew up with all the knowledge at their disposal, who still don't care. It's frustrating and exhausting to know that all the little things I can do over a lifetime aren't even a drop in the bucket. It's disheartening living in a place (Saskatchewan) that is actively seeking to do more oil and gas extraction when we are the sunniest and windiest province in Canada, in prime position to be a national leader in renewable energy. It's even more disheartening that our provincial government is so secure in its power base that they can act without concern for the opposition. I do what I do because it's important to me, but I can't help but feel pretty helpless in the grand scheme of things.
As a fellow Canadian in the same age group I get how you feel. I know it is tough, and exhausting just know that as a mentally ill person often struck by the inability to act I appreciate everything you and people like you do for me.
We are with you buddy. Keep doing what you are doing. The only way we change people is by action and leading by example. I know its hard especially with the way USA is going with regards to climate but we just have to hold on and believe in it. Humans came alive on the better side many times before and this wont be any different. Cheers!
It dose make me happy there’s still people in this world that don’t believe in conspiracies and are willing to stop climate change so we have a great future :)
Gen X voice - My middle school science teacher warned us about 'global warming'. And I'm scientifically literate enough to know it's not about 'saving the earth'. It's really about 'save the inhabitants of earth'. I think if we started framing the problem as more of a threat to the people, we might be able to make more headway. But that's my opinion.
HebaruSan Many surely are, but there are others that really don’t see the problem, because they think we destroy our own economy and our wealth because of climate change when it really is about saving it on the long run. Maybe with a different wording they would see the problem.
@@HebaruSan -This is true, but they're being very short sighted. As in, less than 5 to 10 years. Once they reealize how their shortsightedness is killing their children, grandchildren, and so on, they might be interested in the long term financial gains of investing in sustainability.
There's one problem with that plan. I'm increasingly convinced that a whole lot of people older than you don't actually care what happens to people younger than you after they're gone.
Unfortunately by the time the young ones are a majority it'll be too late to prevent major harm and reverse course. We need everyone right now or it will be too late.
@Adam Labus You are wrong. Steve Kay and me, we rely on the climate science. We will get a temperature drop of 0.5 degrees til 2030. I know you and your fellow alarmists don't like that because it doesn't fit your narrative. However nature does that and you have to learn nature don't care what you want. It follows its own rules, that you obviously ignore.
Humanity still doesn't understand that these small amount of people will never reach critical mass, because EVERYBODY has to join in internationally. That means borders have to disappear. Nations have to either disappear or cooperate. Even if everybody in the USA goes carbon neutral or carbon negative, there is the rest of the world that won't make a difference. Look at the EU. I live here now and realize that by recycling, all I am doing is shipping plastics and other "recycleables" to Africa and Southeast Asia, where I am originally from. I stopped recycling to keep the trash in Europe. USA did it with China before that. Nothing that USA nor the EU does makes a difference except for creating waste for other nations. "Leaders" are a minority, people in "westernized" nations have a voice and freedom and money to choose alternatives. In Europe, people really don't care and they still use diesel motors despite the NOx. IKEA uses 1% of all timber! ONE COMPANY! To build cheap, disposable furniture! I honestly think that if EU or the USA wants to keep using Africa for electronic wastes and Asia for plastic wastes, they should PAY them and set up recycling infrastructure. Or keep it in your own backyard and create your own infrastructure so "we" don't have to deal with the western philosophies of wanting the newest iPhone every year.
Going carbon neutral is easy. People who work and live in the "western" cities can use bikes. Small CC motorcycles and mopeds create less traffic. Manufacturers are still not going hybrid or full electric. Stop burning coal or do "clean" coal powerplants. Forget Nikola Tesla and his "miraculous" contribution where power plants are allowed. Do the Edison way and have each house power their own by renewable DC power. That was the original plan anyways. There are so many things wrong that can be "righted" by simple switches. LED lighting. Bicycles. Weekly instead of daily deliveries. Do we need things ASAP? For some reason, the world worked before. When I order things from the other side of the world, it still takes 1.5 months. A camel can do the same trip in the same time a container ship burning tons of diesel fuel does. This topic makes me so angry, because the solutions are so simple, yet people are WAY too selfish to give up some modern comforts. Malaysians used to use wooden houses with a simple airflow architecture to keep ourselves cool. Then European colonization "bricked" everything. Then you have hot buildings that need to be A/C-ed. Stupid pointless downward spiral. I'm not blaming Europeans for the troubles they caused. I am just saying that in historical exploitation of the world, they ended up leaving their trash behind. Clean up your own messes!
The reason for putting the pressure on young people is that you don't stay young for long. So if you convince people that only the youth can save the world then, when those young people grow, they'll stop trying. It's a great system for perpetuating the problem.
Climate change started for me in the 60s, when working for personality Mike Walsh at Radio 2SM, when we ran a radio campaign against Plastics! No beginning is too small, you dont know what the next stepping stone will be?
You only talked about old and young. Where is the big middle? Btw did you hear of the Egyptian historian *Ibn Khaldun* (fourteenth Century AD)? He suggested that generations run in a cycle of four different types. The 1st generation is revolutionary and brings about significant change, followed by a generation of order and stability. The 3rd generation focuses on pragmatism and comfort, while the 4th generation is one of inquiry and cynicism. This pattern isn't set in stone, but it can be seen how each generation is influenced and responds to the one that came before it. It also depends on the culture and topic of the generations. Only because they are born in the same place and time doesn't mean they can't be of a different culture in different positions in the circle.
I am 17 y/o, and will be getting my bachelor's in Climate Change Science in 4 1/2 years. I will do everything I can to make a positive difference on the world.
Unfortunately almost all governments only care about ruling over taking money is all they care about. Which is why I think that we need a strong leader to look towards. Not just any person but someone who can prove to be a strong leader
Yes. Unfortunately the corporate billionaires control the media & they largely "select" the candidates available to the people to vote for, & thereafter they largely control the successful politicians who do their bidding for financial reward. Individual idealism is largely looked upon as a weakness, & thus tends to be exploited by the more pragmatic & hard nosed decision makers who have the power to ignore & discredit ideas which don't match their agenda.
@@mikeharrington5593 you see you need to have power or how should I say this you should have true strength that comes from the heart not just physical or having nuclear power. Power isn't evil never has been, it's the intentions of man that's been dangerous from the start. So that's why at least to the point where I can get I wanna have enough strength to at least protect my loved ones like my friends. I'll risk my life for them any day. Not to mention enjoy it
in my opinion, people only pollute because its cheaper. if carbon footprint was a mandatory part of the cost (like tax) but for breathable air. i think people would be a lot more eco-friendly. doesn't need to be all at once, just a sliding scale that increases over the next 50 years or so. getting that law passed at a global scale is a whole different issue, but i believe the concept is sound. age - 24 (I'm probably not seeing the full picture, thoughts? opinions?)
I love the earth as it is, and climate change is bad for us. However, restricting fossil fuel use in the US will increase it elsewhere unless everyone agrees and takes responsibility for their own offenses. It's the tragedy of the commons, and the more that governments track, trace, and regulate, the more our planet suffers. This movement needs to come from the lowest level up to the top. Everyone needs to make better choices. Boba tea? Blaming Republicans for climate change when they're trying to hold China accountable? These things don't help. Buy less gas and electricity.
I don't really agree what he said about older people not caring about the environment more we're just not so reactionary as Great Thunberg. Don't disguise subjectivity as objectivity
I think young people do have a special responsibility to push climate action. As a person gets older, they get a full-time job. They get married and have a family. They get used to the way things are and stop feeling urgency about change. Young people aren't encumbered by all those distractions. When I was younger, I used to care about things. I had passion in my ambitions. I'm 51 years old now and have been beaten down by life. I still care about things in an intellectual way, but the passion is gone.
As much as I agree with climate change, the youth of today rarely have any workable solutions which take into consideration the wealth of issues fixing climate change has. Imo we don’t need more people shouting, we need well thought out, economically stable ideas.
From what I see the youth is more on going out there and protesting, spreading information while the slightly older generations are the ones who already know how to push the society towards a more sustainable future. With that said, yes there are bad apples in every generation
The youth has good ideas. The street is just not the place to enumerate your “12-point plan” (so to speak). If they didn’t go into the streets, they wouldn’t get any media attention. Without the attention, no one is going to listen to their detailed plan. Is their plan perfect? Probably not. But no one is letting them have a set at the table to discuss the fine details of it, where it’s strong and where it’s weak. So they shout in the street to try to get enough attention to eventually get a seat at the table.
@@qwerty_and_azerty I don't personally believe this is true. I myself am a "youth" (mid 20s), and I find that people are definitely willing to discuss the problems that arise, but most protestors my age don't have solutions. My sister in law, a protestor, put it well "You try to understand the root cause of a problem, we just see problems and protest that they need fixing". It's like... Great! Tell us something we don't know. Protesting that there is a problem is great and all, but if you bring no real solutions to the table nothing is going to change. It's like Greta's speech "people are suffering, people are dying, you've ruined my life and my future" - Great! Not only is this likely hyperbolic. It's also not like "ok, what do we need still need fossil fuels for, which industries don't need fossil fuels, how much energy generation do we need, how much is that going to cost, how do we scale that with the lowering cost of renewable energy, when are the deadlines/ETAs... etc. etc.". Their current strategy seems to me like "There is no plan, there is no compromising, it is the end of the world, how dare you do this to us." Quite honestly, to me it just feels like a bunch of babies crying for their parents to fix the difficult problems. It's not very useful to anyone.
Sancarn People like Greta aren’t there to propose policy, they are there to get attention. In a way, yes, they are whining to their parents to fix the problem- because their parents are the politicians who can fix the problem, and the kids are too young to get elected. If Greta went up there and talked about fossil fuel numbers and dates, deadlines, and estimates, she would have gotten exactly ZERO attention from it and you wouldn’t even know her name. For one concrete example that is heading in the right direction (though I’ll admit it’s not a complete solution), see The Green New Deal proposed in the US. It’s sponsored by AOC, who became a congressperson in her late 20s. Sure, she’s a bit older, but not much. That thing got attention because it’s an actual bill proposed in Congress. If Greta had made her speech about the policy details of that deal, no one would have listened. I’m pretty sure Greta has some good policy ideas, but no one cares to hear them precisely because of her age.
@@qwerty_and_azerty As I've said elsewhere already, I disagree that politicians can fix the problem... Leaving it up to politicians is will leave policies which have fatal flaws and are technically impossible. I also disagree that young people can't make an impact on policy. If young people organised and made a central open source policy infrastructure and then fought for that specifically they'd definitely get a lot of media attention! Of course a call to emotion is always required, but don't call to emotion and propose no viable solution... The green new deal is a decent start, although indeed it looks like many claims are totally unrealistic. But that's the sort of thing they should be driving for.
Yeah, he kind of sounded like a global warming denier there. They love to talk about Rachel Carson as a way to discredit today's climate scientists. (Yes, bizarre).
I am a late boomer and we did care about paper pollution (litter), air pollution and nuclear war (as you said). Nuclear war has not gone away but folks think it has. We also cared about the population explosion which did happen and no one cares because there is enough food to eat. Humans are literally "locusts" on the Earth (7.8 billion humans, less than 1/2 billion cats, less than 1 billion dogs). When I was a kid, we called this the "Greenhouse" effect or "Greenhouse Gases" instead of climate change. We also worried about the hole in the Ozone layer.
@@dianewallace6064 The population explosion has been disproven. Population will (not might - will) level out at 11 billion people unless something changes. See "Don't Panic: The Truth about Population" on Curiosity Stream.
Right? It's ok to only have 1 representative of a demographic if that demographic is 80% on one side -- as was the case with the youth here. But the title can't claim to "explain" how different generations talk about it if no kind of talking is actually presented or analyzed. Only 50% of people over 55 years old care and yet they only had one person there - a lifelong activist - and she said the same thing as the youth activist. No kind of analysis of why old people don't care in such staggering numbers was presented at all.
@@Yutani_Crayven Its the green washing of positive thinking. The facts are that majority of boomers position on climate change is abhorrent and backwards. They don't care, because they won't be affected by the consequences. Give me american dream and fetch the bill to those jobless youngsters.
I think the efforts of environmental activists are too scattered (and weak). The strategy used by the tobacco companies is the same one being used by the oil companies and others. Sow doubt and confusion, take charge of the public debate. fight everything in court, be the big money behind politics. Is there any doubt that smoking is harmful and people die from it (and besides it makes them stink). That battle has not only been lost, but new smokers sign up every day. The battle for the environment is much more complex and the money behind destroying it is bigger than big tobacco. I haven't lost hope, but in the battle for hearts and minds a new SUV trumps the collapse of an ICE sheet.
Exactly there is far too little coordination at this point only drastic action is going to be able to really advert the worst ramifications that haven't already passed the point of no return. There needs to be a sweeping restructuring of power which requires a major organized response. The governments in charge are largely owned by these corporate giants which is the largest source of the problem as they have all the money and resources at their disposal which they have focused entirely on keeping their status quo through disinformation. The biggest problem with getting a proper movement in place is that there are a lot of selfish shortsighted people in power since human hierarchical structure tends to empower these individuals enabling them to gain and abuse even more power. Logically and ethically I can't think of any effective ways to avoid things from getting even worse at least as long as human psychology is allowed to play a dominant role in decision making. I don't know the solution aside from there will not be a single solution.
What does my generation has to add? "The future is ashes, lets party today." In my youth this was the gist of the conversation. It doesn't matter what we do, nobody is listing anyway. We are doomed and nothing is gonna save us. So I myself just decided to try to not be part of the problem as far as I personally can and try not to be too doomstruck. Looking forward to braking the cycle, but so far - nothing, still doomed.
I agree we are doomed but as Scott Wallace-Wells says we can try to reduce total temperature rise. I hope we can avoid a Venus 250 degrees F scenario. Within 200 years the atmosphere will be too oxygen poor to support large mammals due to permafrost methane thaw. Thanks for posting your comment. It helps to know what young folks are thinking of climate change.
I still don't understand how we went from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change", as it were I always understood climate to be the broader aspect of the weather whereas "Global Warming" is indicative of the actual issue of the climate getting warmer. I have always seen calling Global Warming as "Climate Change" as tiptoeing for no real good reason. Largely because the Climate was always going to change, but the speed at which it is warming is the fault of Governments, Companies, and Humans alike. It baffles me that people still curtail to the sensitivity of people that would call you an "alarmist" when your house is on fire.
Global warming is causing the climate to change. Climate is more than just temperature: it is wind, precipitation, ocean currents, etc. Warming causes these patterns to change, and these changes will have much greater impact on humanity than just the temperature rise alone. Hence, climate change is the preferred term because it captures the full scope of what we are dealing with.
Because warm water currents like the Gulf Stream (there is also a warm Alaska, Norwegian, and Brazilian stream) will stop due to desalination of ocean water caused by fresh water from melting ice. This stop of warm water streams will cause land temperatures in the northern USA, Alaska, Europe and southern South America to fall. [See the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" (2004)] Since Scientist don't know how falling and rising temps will manifest on land, they had to change the name from "global warming" to "climate change".
The simple answer is: We didn't. The term "climate change" was used in science paper is early 60ties long before the global warming. Also climate change and global warming mean two completely different things. It's only deniers that love getting into the "sudden change" of global warming into climate change buzzword. Just don't play the word games with them. We don't have time for it.
Adults expecting (their) children to take care of them (e.g. solve the climate crisis) is a classic role reversal that's a hallmark of our society. Elisabeth Young-Bruehl examined this phenomenon in depth in her book _Childism._ Worth a read.
Good - keep doing what you are doing. We all can make a difference. As a Chemist, I fear that within 200 years the atmosphere will be too oxygen poor to support large mammals due to permafrost methane thaw. Stephen Hawking feared that Earth will become 250 degrees like Venus due to runaway effects prior to "tech"ing our way out of it.
70% young vs. 56% old is less of a difference than I expected. Could really be that some older people have given up since they've seen how the world works and how those in power have done so little to fix the problems.
@@Yutani_Crayven In that case you might have a lot of older people who aren't worried, because they assume they'll be dead by the time its boot connects with our groins.
Are grandparents who were born when climate change started actually know more than we do because they remember the days when news reports of a heating climate
I gave this video a like mainly not because of what it said, but because of a whole bunch of ridiculous things it did not say, which I hear over and over.
30 years ago, when I was a teenager, we/I knew about climate change. Did we do enough about it? No. So we gotta get up off our arses and stop just talking about it! We - adults - need to act on climate change. Now! Otherwise coming generations will hate us for what we've done - with good reason.
all of the energy in fossil fuels and in life´s carbon bonds (like say in wood) mean that life has generally had cooling effect on the planet, 'terraforming' it, right? like all the sun's energy used up in animal locomotion would have otherwise been absorbed by the planet as heat, yeah?
Well.. I think you vote whit your money so buying plastic or something that is linked with climate changes is like pointing your finger to others and saying they are the problem but instead you are also contributing to the problem..
just because she isn’t perfect doesn’t make her message less true (ad hominem) and secondly: it is not easy in this time where EVERYTHING is packed in plastic to live completely without it and without anything that has a climate impact. We can change, but the transition of each individual takes some time. At least she tries and advocates appropriate actions, which is better than buying plastic and not even care, because latter won’t change anything. But maybe she should have worded it differently, to make the message clearer
'voting with your money' is such a bs argument. Money is not a ballot paper and economy is not elections. People have virtually no choice when it comes to how majority of products are made or packaged. The whole idea of 'carbon footprint' as consumer responsibility was invented by BP and we all are in some kind of Stockholm syndrome taking the blame for what corporations are doing. Manufacturers should bear the environmental costs of their industry. Hoping that collective mass change in consumer behaviour will save us is just another form of green washing.
Because she was filming in the hallway of her college/university, not at home. Wearing a mask in public is a good idea, and may even be mandatory at her school.
when i was young we had the 'give a hoot, don't pollute' owl and the native crying over litter. both became jokes. environmentalism doesn't work because people don't want to give up the comforts they've become accustomed to. don't blame the corporations for your poor choices, like the plastic cup. are corporations responsible for most environmental destruction? of course, but those companies are kept in business by the individual consumers who can't live without a bunch of useless toys and knickknacks. only when enough people decide to turn their backs on consumerism and overconsumption will anything start to change. respecting the earth is a lifestyle choice, not a cause to believe in. 🌎💕
Environmental responsibility doesn't mean giving up creature comforts. That's a propagandist lie, and an obvious lie. Just look at the old East Germany, an environmental disaster, vs West Germany. Which was more polluted, and which was more comfortable?
I get the logic behind that, but there's an issue I see with it: advertising is a way companies affect what we want or don't want. Lobbying and political support affect the way our political leaders talk and what they talk about. Mass media has a huge impact on our public discourse. Every company has the motivation to influence our desires, and many of them have the means. Not to say people have zero influence. And you're probably right that if we could get everyone (or enough people and enough wealthy people in particular) to live better lifestyles we could probably solve the problem. It's just that many corporations will be very opposed to this change, and put a lot of money and effort against it.
I am in my fifties and have always been an environmentalist since I can remember. I am a Chemist now. I became re-energized to change my life (to help the climate) in 2004 when I heard how SONOR was hurting whales and watching the "Six Degrees could change the World" 2006 movie. I hope the next generation can have a bigger impact than my generation did but, yes, I have to keep doing my part. For example, I have a huge milkweed garden for pollinators and Monarch butterflies.
3 questions:
Do you have kids?
What does the company you work for does?
Which bank do you keep money and your pension?
Unless you really honestly answer those questions you didn't do nothing for the climate.
Thank you for genuine balance. What has changed? Older activists had only the science, current activists have obvious climatic impacts on weather. It's hard to deny the reality of increased extreme events.
yes, so lets stop denying them! Better still, lets CONTINUE to do all the little things we can (or BIG things too!) - a 1980s film called 'Orinoco Flow told the story of how just a few drops and a few drops and a few more drops came together - and eventually, with a mighty roar, became a dynamic force of a river which smashed through the hated mighty dam that threatened the local environment. All started by one young indiginous boy.
I'm similar in age to you Joe. I grew up with Kids Save The Earth club and the environmental advocacy campaigns of the 80s and 90s. I grew up with Bill Nye and really bad Saturday morning cartoons showing the effects of industrial pollution. And I am *that* person in my group of friends who always has their own water bottle/cup/straw/take away container/cutlery. And I am *that* person who will talk about environmental issues at the drop of a hat, and feels zero shame about it. I write science-y songs and perform them unapologetically to anyone in earshot.
But I'm so damn tired of this still being a fight. It's difficult to see people of my generation who grew up with all the knowledge at their disposal, who still don't care. It's frustrating and exhausting to know that all the little things I can do over a lifetime aren't even a drop in the bucket. It's disheartening living in a place (Saskatchewan) that is actively seeking to do more oil and gas extraction when we are the sunniest and windiest province in Canada, in prime position to be a national leader in renewable energy. It's even more disheartening that our provincial government is so secure in its power base that they can act without concern for the opposition.
I do what I do because it's important to me, but I can't help but feel pretty helpless in the grand scheme of things.
As a fellow Canadian in the same age group I get how you feel.
I know it is tough, and exhausting just know that as a mentally ill person often struck by the inability to act I appreciate everything you and people like you do for me.
We are with you buddy. Keep doing what you are doing. The only way we change people is by action and leading by example. I know its hard especially with the way USA is going with regards to climate but we just have to hold on and believe in it. Humans came alive on the better side many times before and this wont be any different. Cheers!
It dose make me happy there’s still people in this world that don’t believe in conspiracies and are willing to stop climate change so we have a great future :)
Gen X voice - My middle school science teacher warned us about 'global warming'. And I'm scientifically literate enough to know it's not about 'saving the earth'. It's really about 'save the inhabitants of earth'. I think if we started framing the problem as more of a threat to the people, we might be able to make more headway. But that's my opinion.
The right communication is definitely important
Nah, the people opposed to doing something aren't confused by the messaging. They don't want to lose money.
HebaruSan Many surely are, but there are others that really don’t see the problem, because they think we destroy our own economy and our wealth because of climate change when it really is about saving it on the long run. Maybe with a different wording they would see the problem.
@@HebaruSan -This is true, but they're being very short sighted. As in, less than 5 to 10 years. Once they reealize how their shortsightedness is killing their children, grandchildren, and so on, they might be interested in the long term financial gains of investing in sustainability.
There's one problem with that plan.
I'm increasingly convinced that a whole lot of people older than you don't actually care what happens to people younger than you after they're gone.
With Climate Change, I am really encouraged by the young folks. It seems they get it better.
Unfortunately by the time the young ones are a majority it'll be too late to prevent major harm and reverse course. We need everyone right now or it will be too late.
@Giacomo Campanelli
Troll!
@Adam Labus
You are wrong. Steve Kay and me, we rely on the climate science.
We will get a temperature drop of 0.5 degrees til 2030.
I know you and your fellow alarmists don't like that because it doesn't fit your narrative.
However nature does that and you have to learn nature don't care what you want. It follows its own rules, that you obviously ignore.
@Rolf Jander
Ok. Go ahead! Prove me wrong.
@@hrishikraj9689
Study climate science. But don't confound the nonsense the alarmists are peddling around, with the actual climate science.
Humanity still doesn't understand that these small amount of people will never reach critical mass, because EVERYBODY has to join in internationally. That means borders have to disappear. Nations have to either disappear or cooperate. Even if everybody in the USA goes carbon neutral or carbon negative, there is the rest of the world that won't make a difference. Look at the EU. I live here now and realize that by recycling, all I am doing is shipping plastics and other "recycleables" to Africa and Southeast Asia, where I am originally from. I stopped recycling to keep the trash in Europe. USA did it with China before that. Nothing that USA nor the EU does makes a difference except for creating waste for other nations. "Leaders" are a minority, people in "westernized" nations have a voice and freedom and money to choose alternatives. In Europe, people really don't care and they still use diesel motors despite the NOx. IKEA uses 1% of all timber! ONE COMPANY! To build cheap, disposable furniture! I honestly think that if EU or the USA wants to keep using Africa for electronic wastes and Asia for plastic wastes, they should PAY them and set up recycling infrastructure. Or keep it in your own backyard and create your own infrastructure so "we" don't have to deal with the western philosophies of wanting the newest iPhone every year.
Going carbon neutral is easy. People who work and live in the "western" cities can use bikes. Small CC motorcycles and mopeds create less traffic. Manufacturers are still not going hybrid or full electric. Stop burning coal or do "clean" coal powerplants. Forget Nikola Tesla and his "miraculous" contribution where power plants are allowed. Do the Edison way and have each house power their own by renewable DC power. That was the original plan anyways. There are so many things wrong that can be "righted" by simple switches. LED lighting. Bicycles. Weekly instead of daily deliveries. Do we need things ASAP? For some reason, the world worked before. When I order things from the other side of the world, it still takes 1.5 months. A camel can do the same trip in the same time a container ship burning tons of diesel fuel does.
This topic makes me so angry, because the solutions are so simple, yet people are WAY too selfish to give up some modern comforts. Malaysians used to use wooden houses with a simple airflow architecture to keep ourselves cool. Then European colonization "bricked" everything. Then you have hot buildings that need to be A/C-ed. Stupid pointless downward spiral.
I'm not blaming Europeans for the troubles they caused. I am just saying that in historical exploitation of the world, they ended up leaving their trash behind. Clean up your own messes!
@@yeopazman Agreed
The reason for putting the pressure on young people is that you don't stay young for long. So if you convince people that only the youth can save the world then, when those young people grow, they'll stop trying. It's a great system for perpetuating the problem.
That’s a great insight! Thanks for sharing.
Climate change started for me in the 60s, when working for personality Mike Walsh at Radio 2SM, when we ran a radio campaign against Plastics! No beginning is too small, you dont know what the next stepping stone will be?
May wanna double check that pie chart for 70% ;)
You only talked about old and young. Where is the big middle?
Btw did you hear of the Egyptian historian *Ibn Khaldun* (fourteenth Century AD)? He suggested that generations run in a cycle of four different types. The 1st generation is revolutionary and brings about significant change, followed by a generation of order and stability. The 3rd generation focuses on pragmatism and comfort, while the 4th generation is one of inquiry and cynicism. This pattern isn't set in stone, but it can be seen how each generation is influenced and responds to the one that came before it. It also depends on the culture and topic of the generations. Only because they are born in the same place and time doesn't mean they can't be of a different culture in different positions in the circle.
Thank you
I am 17 y/o, and will be getting my bachelor's in Climate Change Science in 4 1/2 years. I will do everything I can to make a positive difference on the world.
Great video! We need to act ASAP! Question to Joe Hanson and the team: are you, guys vegan?
Unfortunately almost all governments only care about ruling over taking money is all they care about. Which is why I think that we need a strong leader to look towards. Not just any person but someone who can prove to be a strong leader
Yes. Unfortunately the corporate billionaires control the media & they largely "select" the candidates available to the people to vote for, & thereafter they largely control the successful politicians who do their bidding for financial reward. Individual idealism is largely looked upon as a weakness, & thus tends to be exploited by the more pragmatic & hard nosed decision makers who have the power to ignore & discredit ideas which don't match their agenda.
@@mikeharrington5593 you see you need to have power or how should I say this you should have true strength that comes from the heart not just physical or having nuclear power. Power isn't evil never has been, it's the intentions of man that's been dangerous from the start. So that's why at least to the point where I can get I wanna have enough strength to at least protect my loved ones like my friends. I'll risk my life for them any day. Not to mention enjoy it
Help us, Obi-Boomer Kenobi. You're our only hope.
TartTooth Hello There
in my opinion, people only pollute because its cheaper. if carbon footprint was a mandatory part of the cost (like tax) but for breathable air. i think people would be a lot more eco-friendly.
doesn't need to be all at once, just a sliding scale that increases over the next 50 years or so.
getting that law passed at a global scale is a whole different issue, but i believe the concept is sound.
age - 24
(I'm probably not seeing the full picture, thoughts? opinions?)
I love the earth as it is, and climate change is bad for us. However, restricting fossil fuel use in the US will increase it elsewhere unless everyone agrees and takes responsibility for their own offenses. It's the tragedy of the commons, and the more that governments track, trace, and regulate, the more our planet suffers. This movement needs to come from the lowest level up to the top. Everyone needs to make better choices. Boba tea? Blaming Republicans for climate change when they're trying to hold China accountable? These things don't help. Buy less gas and electricity.
I don't really agree what he said about older people not caring about the environment more we're just not so reactionary as Great Thunberg. Don't disguise subjectivity as objectivity
The Paw Patrol generation. If you care more and think hard enough, problem solved.
New vid!
I think young people do have a special responsibility to push climate action. As a person gets older, they get a full-time job. They get married and have a family. They get used to the way things are and stop feeling urgency about change. Young people aren't encumbered by all those distractions. When I was younger, I used to care about things. I had passion in my ambitions. I'm 51 years old now and have been beaten down by life. I still care about things in an intellectual way, but the passion is gone.
Take your mask OFF. You're videochatting!? ??
As much as I agree with climate change, the youth of today rarely have any workable solutions which take into consideration the wealth of issues fixing climate change has. Imo we don’t need more people shouting, we need well thought out, economically stable ideas.
From what I see the youth is more on going out there and protesting, spreading information while the slightly older generations are the ones who already know how to push the society towards a more sustainable future. With that said, yes there are bad apples in every generation
The youth has good ideas. The street is just not the place to enumerate your “12-point plan” (so to speak). If they didn’t go into the streets, they wouldn’t get any media attention. Without the attention, no one is going to listen to their detailed plan. Is their plan perfect? Probably not. But no one is letting them have a set at the table to discuss the fine details of it, where it’s strong and where it’s weak. So they shout in the street to try to get enough attention to eventually get a seat at the table.
@@qwerty_and_azerty I don't personally believe this is true. I myself am a "youth" (mid 20s), and I find that people are definitely willing to discuss the problems that arise, but most protestors my age don't have solutions. My sister in law, a protestor, put it well "You try to understand the root cause of a problem, we just see problems and protest that they need fixing". It's like... Great! Tell us something we don't know. Protesting that there is a problem is great and all, but if you bring no real solutions to the table nothing is going to change.
It's like Greta's speech "people are suffering, people are dying, you've ruined my life and my future" - Great! Not only is this likely hyperbolic. It's also not like "ok, what do we need still need fossil fuels for, which industries don't need fossil fuels, how much energy generation do we need, how much is that going to cost, how do we scale that with the lowering cost of renewable energy, when are the deadlines/ETAs... etc. etc.". Their current strategy seems to me like "There is no plan, there is no compromising, it is the end of the world, how dare you do this to us."
Quite honestly, to me it just feels like a bunch of babies crying for their parents to fix the difficult problems. It's not very useful to anyone.
Sancarn People like Greta aren’t there to propose policy, they are there to get attention. In a way, yes, they are whining to their parents to fix the problem- because their parents are the politicians who can fix the problem, and the kids are too young to get elected.
If Greta went up there and talked about fossil fuel numbers and dates, deadlines, and estimates, she would have gotten exactly ZERO attention from it and you wouldn’t even know her name.
For one concrete example that is heading in the right direction (though I’ll admit it’s not a complete solution), see The Green New Deal proposed in the US. It’s sponsored by AOC, who became a congressperson in her late 20s. Sure, she’s a bit older, but not much. That thing got attention because it’s an actual bill proposed in Congress. If Greta had made her speech about the policy details of that deal, no one would have listened. I’m pretty sure Greta has some good policy ideas, but no one cares to hear them precisely because of her age.
@@qwerty_and_azerty As I've said elsewhere already, I disagree that politicians can fix the problem... Leaving it up to politicians is will leave policies which have fatal flaws and are technically impossible. I also disagree that young people can't make an impact on policy. If young people organised and made a central open source policy infrastructure and then fought for that specifically they'd definitely get a lot of media attention! Of course a call to emotion is always required, but don't call to emotion and propose no viable solution...
The green new deal is a decent start, although indeed it looks like many claims are totally unrealistic. But that's the sort of thing they should be driving for.
+1 for the algorithm
This video misrepresented the eco movement of the boomers. They didn't rly protest climate change back then, but air pollution and nuclear weapons.
Yeah, he kind of sounded like a global warming denier there. They love to talk about Rachel Carson as a way to discredit today's climate scientists. (Yes, bizarre).
@@David-di5bo Rachel Carson? Care to extrapolate please?
I am a late boomer and we did care about paper pollution (litter), air pollution and nuclear war (as you said). Nuclear war has not gone away but folks think it has. We also cared about the population explosion which did happen and no one cares because there is enough food to eat. Humans are literally "locusts" on the Earth (7.8 billion humans, less than 1/2 billion cats, less than 1 billion dogs). When I was a kid, we called this the "Greenhouse" effect or "Greenhouse Gases" instead of climate change. We also worried about the hole in the Ozone layer.
@@cedrickulacz8468 She raised awareness about DDT which caused raptor eggs to be thin and not viable.
@@dianewallace6064 The population explosion has been disproven. Population will (not might - will) level out at 11 billion people unless something changes. See "Don't Panic: The Truth about Population" on Curiosity Stream.
It doesn't seem like anything of substance was said here.
Right? It's ok to only have 1 representative of a demographic if that demographic is 80% on one side -- as was the case with the youth here. But the title can't claim to "explain" how different generations talk about it if no kind of talking is actually presented or analyzed. Only 50% of people over 55 years old care and yet they only had one person there - a lifelong activist - and she said the same thing as the youth activist. No kind of analysis of why old people don't care in such staggering numbers was presented at all.
@@Yutani_Crayven Its the green washing of positive thinking. The facts are that majority of boomers position on climate change is abhorrent and backwards. They don't care, because they won't be affected by the consequences. Give me american dream and fetch the bill to those jobless youngsters.
Whats more to say of substance that has not been said? "Where are we going and why are we in a hand basket?"
I think the efforts of environmental activists are too scattered (and weak). The strategy used by the tobacco companies is the same one being used by the oil companies and others. Sow doubt and confusion, take charge of the public debate. fight everything in court, be the big money behind politics. Is there any doubt that smoking is harmful and people die from it (and besides it makes them stink). That battle has not only been lost, but new smokers sign up every day. The battle for the environment is much more complex and the money behind destroying it is bigger than big tobacco. I haven't lost hope, but in the battle for hearts and minds a new SUV trumps the collapse of an ICE sheet.
Exactly there is far too little coordination at this point only drastic action is going to be able to really advert the worst ramifications that haven't already passed the point of no return. There needs to be a sweeping restructuring of power which requires a major organized response. The governments in charge are largely owned by these corporate giants which is the largest source of the problem as they have all the money and resources at their disposal which they have focused entirely on keeping their status quo through disinformation. The biggest problem with getting a proper movement in place is that there are a lot of selfish shortsighted people in power since human hierarchical structure tends to empower these individuals enabling them to gain and abuse even more power.
Logically and ethically I can't think of any effective ways to avoid things from getting even worse at least as long as human psychology is allowed to play a dominant role in decision making. I don't know the solution aside from there will not be a single solution.
What does my generation has to add?
"The future is ashes, lets party today."
In my youth this was the gist of the conversation. It doesn't matter what we do, nobody is listing anyway. We are doomed and nothing is gonna save us.
So I myself just decided to try to not be part of the problem as far as I personally can and try not to be too doomstruck.
Looking forward to braking the cycle, but so far - nothing, still doomed.
At least you try ☺️
I agree we are doomed but as Scott Wallace-Wells says we can try to reduce total temperature rise. I hope we can avoid a Venus 250 degrees F scenario. Within 200 years the atmosphere will be too oxygen poor to support large mammals due to permafrost methane thaw. Thanks for posting your comment. It helps to know what young folks are thinking of climate change.
I still don't understand how we went from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change", as it were I always understood climate to be the broader aspect of the weather whereas "Global Warming" is indicative of the actual issue of the climate getting warmer. I have always seen calling Global Warming as "Climate Change" as tiptoeing for no real good reason.
Largely because the Climate was always going to change, but the speed at which it is warming is the fault of Governments, Companies, and Humans alike. It baffles me that people still curtail to the sensitivity of people that would call you an "alarmist" when your house is on fire.
Global warming is causing the climate to change. Climate is more than just temperature: it is wind, precipitation, ocean currents, etc. Warming causes these patterns to change, and these changes will have much greater impact on humanity than just the temperature rise alone. Hence, climate change is the preferred term because it captures the full scope of what we are dealing with.
Because warm water currents like the Gulf Stream (there is also a warm Alaska, Norwegian, and Brazilian stream) will stop due to desalination of ocean water caused by fresh water from melting ice. This stop of warm water streams will cause land temperatures in the northern USA, Alaska, Europe and southern South America to fall. [See the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" (2004)] Since Scientist don't know how falling and rising temps will manifest on land, they had to change the name from "global warming" to "climate change".
The simple answer is: We didn't. The term "climate change" was used in science paper is early 60ties long before the global warming. Also climate change and global warming mean two completely different things. It's only deniers that love getting into the "sudden change" of global warming into climate change buzzword. Just don't play the word games with them. We don't have time for it.
8:04 "[The fossil fuel industry] trying to get us to blow out our little matches while they're taking a blow torch to everything..." Great quote!
Adults expecting (their) children to take care of them (e.g. solve the climate crisis) is a classic role reversal that's a hallmark of our society. Elisabeth Young-Bruehl examined this phenomenon in depth in her book _Childism._ Worth a read.
Great video and insight!
I'm 19 and a member of the Sunrise Movement, trying to do what I can to make a difference.
Good - keep doing what you are doing. We all can make a difference. As a Chemist, I fear that within 200 years the atmosphere will be too oxygen poor to support large mammals due to permafrost methane thaw. Stephen Hawking feared that Earth will become 250 degrees like Venus due to runaway effects prior to "tech"ing our way out of it.
70% young vs. 56% old is less of a difference than I expected. Could really be that some older people have given up since they've seen how the world works and how those in power have done so little to fix the problems.
No. The phrasing was about being worried about climage change. Giving up doesn't fit that at all.
@@Yutani_Crayven In that case you might have a lot of older people who aren't worried, because they assume they'll be dead by the time its boot connects with our groins.
The youth will not save you with so many Gen Z quiet quitting they soon going to quiet quitting fighting climate change.
Unleash the peaceful beast!!!✊😁
Are grandparents who were born when climate change started actually know more than we do because they remember the days when news reports of a heating climate
Humans are too dumb to save themselves. Let the doubters go to florida
I gave this video a like mainly not because of what it said, but because of a whole bunch of ridiculous things it did not say, which I hear over and over.
Brilliant video
30 years ago, when I was a teenager, we/I knew about climate change.
Did we do enough about it? No.
So we gotta get up off our arses and stop just talking about it!
We - adults - need to act on climate change. Now!
Otherwise coming generations will hate us for what we've done - with good reason.
all of the energy in fossil fuels and in life´s carbon bonds (like say in wood) mean that life has generally had cooling effect on the planet, 'terraforming' it, right?
like all the sun's energy used up in animal locomotion would have otherwise been absorbed by the planet as heat, yeah?
"Don't listen to me, listen to the empiric evidence!"
Older people ask why do you believe this and find nothing.
Well.. I think you vote whit your money so buying plastic or something that is linked with climate changes is like pointing your finger to others and saying they are the problem but instead you are also contributing to the problem..
just because she isn’t perfect doesn’t make her message less true (ad hominem) and secondly: it is not easy in this time where EVERYTHING is packed in plastic to live completely without it and without anything that has a climate impact. We can change, but the transition of each individual takes some time. At least she tries and advocates appropriate actions, which is better than buying plastic and not even care, because latter won’t change anything.
But maybe she should have worded it differently, to make the message clearer
'voting with your money' is such a bs argument. Money is not a ballot paper and economy is not elections. People have virtually no choice when it comes to how majority of products are made or packaged. The whole idea of 'carbon footprint' as consumer responsibility was invented by BP and we all are in some kind of Stockholm syndrome taking the blame for what corporations are doing. Manufacturers should bear the environmental costs of their industry. Hoping that collective mass change in consumer behaviour will save us is just another form of green washing.
The climate problem is too big for individual consumption choices to matter. The focus should be on changing government policies.
Why was 'just a girl' wearing a mask?
Because she was filming in the hallway of her college/university, not at home. Wearing a mask in public is a good idea, and may even be mandatory at her school.
@@qwerty_and_azerty Thanks, I was wondering because I thought "surely she is 6 feet from the camera" but your explanation makes sense.
when i was young we had the 'give a hoot, don't pollute' owl and the native crying over litter.
both became jokes.
environmentalism doesn't work because people don't want to give up the comforts they've become accustomed to.
don't blame the corporations for your poor choices, like the plastic cup.
are corporations responsible for most environmental destruction?
of course, but those companies are kept in business by the individual consumers who can't live without a bunch of useless toys and knickknacks.
only when enough people decide to turn their backs on consumerism and overconsumption will anything start to change.
respecting the earth is a lifestyle choice, not a cause to believe in. 🌎💕
Environmental responsibility doesn't mean giving up creature comforts. That's a propagandist lie, and an obvious lie. Just look at the old East Germany, an environmental disaster, vs West Germany. Which was more polluted, and which was more comfortable?
I get the logic behind that, but there's an issue I see with it: advertising is a way companies affect what we want or don't want. Lobbying and political support affect the way our political leaders talk and what they talk about. Mass media has a huge impact on our public discourse.
Every company has the motivation to influence our desires, and many of them have the means.
Not to say people have zero influence. And you're probably right that if we could get everyone (or enough people and enough wealthy people in particular) to live better lifestyles we could probably solve the problem. It's just that many corporations will be very opposed to this change, and put a lot of money and effort against it.