The military is afraid of climate change
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 вер 2024
- President Trump is skeptical of climate change and its link to extreme weather events, but the U.S. Department of Defense takes the threat deadly serious. The Pentagon is fortifying military bases to withstand things like flooding and wildfire. Military leaders are also concerned that drought and water shortages in places like Syria and Pakistan can lead to violent conflict. Lou explains why climate change is a national security issue.
SOURCES & FURTHER READING
Rear Admiral Titley’s Ted Talk
www.ted.com/ta...
Report on Effects of a Changing Climate to the Department of Defense
media.defense....
2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community
www.dni.gov/fi...
Busby on Climate Change and US National Security: Sustaining Security Amidst Unsustainability
www.tobinproje...
Water, Drought, Climate Change, and Conflict in Syria
journals.amets...
CREDITS
Writer: Louis Foglia
Editor: Eavvon O’Neal
Researcher: Page Ellerson
Supervising Producer: Allison Brown
Follow Beme on
Instagram: / bemenews
Twitter: / bemenews
Facebook: / officialbeme
This is our new set. Dushyant, one of Beme's stellar researchers, thinks no one will notice. I beg to differ. We're still working on the lightning. This one is too dark. I think the one coming out next Thursday is too light. We'll get there....
New set up has some slight differences but it's coming together well. Cough cough podcast cough start one cough
And by "new" I mean we moved the old set to a different office building...
Louis Foglia holy shit i didn’t notice until this comment
@@LouisFoglia Why does everything seem tilted? haha
@@IuseanXboxController We fixed that, too, I think...
I feel like this is the only news outlet that is reporting on these issues in a way that is clear concise and easy to understand. Lou, did you get a haircut?
I like Vox too as an American News thingy. Vox with a V, not the F (I'm from Europe)
I love the connection of these two distinct thoughts. :) lol
Define irony: Fixing climate change so we can go to war.
Good. The government needs a reason to care about climate change.
Lou I really appreciate your diligence in reporting on climate change. Its literally because of your videos on the subject that I have taken steps in my personal life to up my carbon foot print game. We have always recycled cans, paper and some plastics but I now make a much more conscious effort to get all I can out of the trash and into recycle. Furthermore I have started including several of the packing materials from my business that I had previously just burned. I have a long way to go, but your reminders are an encouragement to me. Thank you.
This means a lot to me. Truly. Glad you have an open mind.
There are literally no cuts in Lou's talking parts. The man is a one take machine.
Oh, there are cuts.
Mario S don’t need to cut your words when your words cut deep
@@ToriKo_ ✊
It's hidden cuts
@Succ The hedgehog 6:20 😉🙂
3:45 Ben Shapiro called. He said the military should sell the soon-to-be-underwater buildings before moving away.
When you "go live your life". I always watch to see if you make it all the way out of the frame.. Sometimes you don't :D
Haha I do that too.
LOL. This new set has less space to roll into, so it's gonna be tougher going forward. I'm essentially rolling into a wall four feet away.
According to the IPCC we need to cut all emissions by 50% in 10 years, this is a near impossible task in a democracy, especially one whose head of state is opposed to any action. Given the short time frame we have left and the urgency of the situation, perhaps the military ought to take matters into their own hands and suspend democracy for 10 years to guarantee targets are met. No matter the cost! This is likely what it will take to avert the worse effects of climate change. I fear for the future of my 4yo and 2yo sons, we need drastic action, if it will not come from the government, we need alternative sources.
@North Peak
Empirical evidence points directly to co2 being a driving factor in the warming that we are in fact seeing. Go read some peer reviewed science, not your silly notrickszone and wattsupwiththat blogs with no credibility. Plenty of data to chew on from actual climate scientists.
agree 100%
@North Peak The fact that co2 causes a greenhouse effect has been proven a hundred years ago, it is beyond doubt. Even you yourself can prove this: take two bottes, put a thermometer in both, fill one with co2 and the other one with nitrogen and put both in the sun.
Also humans contribute a 3% increase each year in co2, NOT 3% of the total amount. The doubling of co2 in the atmosphere we have been observing over the last 200 years is entirely due to human activity, as proven by isotope studies.
@North Peak The fact that co2 causes a greenhouse effect, and its increase therefore a climate change, has been proven a hundred years ago, it is beyond doubt. Even you yourself can prove this: take two bottles, put a thermometer in both, fill one with co2 and the other one with nitrogen and put both in the sun.
Also humans contribute a * 3% increase each year in co2 * , NOT 3% of the *total amount* . The doubling of co2 in the atmosphere we have been observing over the last 200 years is entirely due to human activity, as proven by isotope studies.
Read the scientific literature, not blogs written by scientific analphabets. Starting point for you www2.bc.edu/jeremy-shakun/Shakun%20et%20al.,%202012,%20Nature.pdf
I don't think the military is prepared in anyway to run the government, or the private sector in order to stop climate change. Their first strategy would be to take over all of the oil reserves in Northern and Central America, to insure a longer fuel supply.
That was an excellent piece. It is a patriotic duty to mitigate climate change. I'm just waiting for someone on the right side of the spectrum (read that the way you want) to step up and sell this message that way. 🤞
do you mean patriotic??
@@ricksarkar6680 I do. Thanks for the correction!
I love your statue of Jeff bridges
If we will not rise up to save our children and grandchildren, I doubt we'll rise up for our nation.
Great video 👍🏼 Your portraying the effects of climate change really well.
This explains everything! I'm gonna ask my teachers to show this in class! We finally have someone who understands more and can explain it quickly! Thank you!
We could fix this so easily if we wanted to. But the oil and electric companies have 💰
Big oil and electric owns UK, France, Germany, Norway, Sweeden, etc. as well? If it's so easy why are those countries increasing their carbon footprint?
@@blondie7240 Dude, you managed to pick randomly almost all countries that invalidate your claim. Norway makes all of their electricity from water. You literally picked one mountainous country with small population that can meet 100% of their needs from hydro energy. Next you picked Sweden, country that makes energy from nuclear plants and burning their trash. What’s next, oh, France. They have highest ratio of nuclear energy from all countries. Environmentalists are debating how they can make reduction in CO2 emission before 2050 and France already achieved that in 20.century. UK during last 3 years almost phased out coal from their mix. They have now lower CO2 emissions per capita than some developing countries. Germany is only one that sticks out. Mostly because their irrational fear of nuclear energy (because hey tsunamis in Germany are so frequent, right). And even they managed small reduction.
I’m kind of impressed. There are 200 countries. Majority of which have coal as their major source of energy and increasing their CO2 production. And you managed to pick 5 that are exceptions.
@@stafer3 Maybe you think a country is only responsible for the emissions they produce in their country. But I see a country is also responsible if they outsourcing their mining and manufacturing.
Ex: solar panels, they make your country's emissions low, but they emitted massive amounts of carbon to be created. The mining for the rare minerals, and the manufacturing of the panels. I don't see China as responsible for the damage, we are just outsourcing the emissions to China.
Also Nuclar plants are being closed down in Europe and replaced by Natural Gas plants, being fueled by Russia.
@@blondie7240 I agree with you on outsourcing. Closing industry in countries with high environmental standards and reopening them in countries with low environmental standards is stupid since atmosphere doesn’t have borders. Those emissions produced in China won’t stay in China. So it would be better if industry came back to countries that are playing green on paper. We can’t really depend on high moral credit of large corporations, but maybe with recent advancement in automation those low wages in other countries won’t be the main attraction anymore. Since they slash most workers altogether.
But that statement about nuclear power plants doesn’t apply to all of Europe. Mostly to Germany, and at least in their case, they also are replacing coal plants with gas. So at least it’s something. Other countries have either stagnation in nuclear energy or they adding up new plants.
Yes please explain how easily this can be fixed given that energy infrastructure is among one of the most complex and largest scale industries in the world.
Love the new set, the darker lighting makes things seem more dramatic. Reminds me that 70s show with studio lighting. Great video as always. Now it’s time to rewatch this video cause I spent most of the video trying to spot differences in the set
Great Video! Also, if you haven't had a chance to read it, Id strongly encourage everyone to read Todd Miller's book Storming the Wall which delves into this very subject, the intersectionality of climate change, migration, and homeland security.
Wait? What "hostile enemy?"
We are the only hostile force on this planet, of any consequence.
:))) Indeed
i don't know why don't we stop subsidizing oil company's to make gas
I.E. carbon tax right there
The only climate the military fears changing is the will of the people. The military feared that will, during the Vietnam war. Now, they just tell you enough to keep you assuming if such climate change took place. Your safety is among their top priority. Regardless, of their participation to facilitate climate change. Their responsibility to reducing that foot print is not theirs but someone else's. They are to merely ensure, in the event of any catastrophic disaster they protect themselves while you watch them do it. Consider those advertisement about nuclear explosion. A blast so monumental it reduced houses to aches. Yet, told the people at the time. Merely hiding under a desk was good enough.
You play a mean devil's advocate, Louis.
Cereal question though; I know you didn't mean to patronize anyone by putting the wiki of global warming below the video, but did you stop to think if doing so, would?
Great video though, Lou!
I just found myself a new channel, and it seems pretty serious, bringing sources and shit. Good stuff. Thank you Mundus.
Love u Lou
Hey! Lou opened a window!!
how do you get more and more handsome every video lou?
i want an explanation in the update video.
The explanation is that you're becoming gay.
If this doesn't change the way the USA president thinks about Climate change... then idk what will
awesome video! thank youuu
Please talk about Sudan! It is very different from the last time you mentioned the country! Thank you for your videos!
my facebook page is centered on environmental effects of man and gmo's. and your video was the very first thing i've ever shared that got flagged by facebook as "against their policies"
They expect 80 feet of of sea level
Being unconvinced of the "links" does not mean not prepping for emergencies.
I can only imagine the military having EV tanks and jets
Now that's eco friendly and deadly
Yep. Definitely beneficial regarding an MBT's (or any ground combat vehicle's) heat profile in general.
..and in addition hugely energy conserving compared to idling all day long just to keep electronics up.
America's U.S. Naval headquarters is in the Colorado mountains. They know it's going to be bad.
@North Peak The Sun and the orbits DID control the climate for the last several million years, but humans took over. There has been Milankovitch influence for the last 10,000 years, but the industrial revolution changed all that.
@@johnperic6860 "the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere today isn't anything new or unseen in the past 180 years."
Huh, where did you get that info ????
"Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations in parts per million (ppm) for the past 800,000 years, based on EPICA (ice core) data."
www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide
@North Peak no theory of mine mate. Read it in scientific studies. There are three main drivers of global temperatures. Sun/ earth trajectories, atmospheric gasses and albedo ( reflectivity ).
Huge warming or cooling in the past has been a combination of all three, of which some huge temperature increases came from huge volcanoes, emitting heavy gasses.
In the last seven thousand years, the sun has been getting weaker ever so slightly, the volcanic activity has been sparse, so billions of tonnes of heavy gasses from fossilized sources have been the sole factor for the melting Poles and Glaciers , for a start.
Been reading about the record heat waves in Europe and India this week ?
Imagine if they stop making wars for oil 🤤
Get hyped for lithium battery wars
Actual CO2 level --> 415 ppm.
Optimal level of CO2 for plant growth? --> 1300 ppm.
Wirmish just because you need salt to live doesn’t mean you should eat 5kg of it very day
1) Dependence on agriculture
2) Recent history of conflict
3) Discriminatory political institutions
Was I the only one thinking that describes the US?
1. No
2. 0 conflict INSIDE the US
3. No
Yes
1. The United States workforce dependent on agriculture is 2%
2. “Recent history of conflicts IN THE AREA. The United States has not been in a large scale conflicted area with itself since the civil war.
3. Discriminatory political institutions WHERE THE NON DISCRIMINATED ARE IN POWER. Most of The United States’s institutions have made political, sexual, gender, religious, nationality, racial, ethnic, or other forms of discrimination illegal. And most of those discriminated still have the right to peacefully voice there opinions.
@@garrettallen7427 1. It represent ~6% of your GDP.
2. Heard something about a national crisis at your southern border. not that THE AREA matters anyway, we live i a global society.
3. You allow homophobic bakers deny customers access, you wage war on women's right to choose, you allow blind people gun-licenses, you tell brave LGBT-soldiers that they're not wanted and should we even start about your discrimination and killing of black people?
Johan Ylinenjarvi
1. Still a small percent that can be improved upon.
2. A globalized society with borders, and the “crises” is overblown, there is no invading army coming into the country, unless you see these refugees as an invading army.
3. First of all, the plaintiff said he had no problem with being around gay people or other LGBT+ members of society, he just didn’t want to serve them cake, I may disagree with that, but there is a “we have a right to refuse service” policy, and he choose to refuse service on the base of his religion. “You wage war on women’s right to choose” choose what, can you be more specific please? Is allowing blind people to defend themselves bad? We never told LGBT soldiers we didn’t want them, we told them we wouldn’t foot the bill. As for discrimination, I admit, it looks bad and is bad, but you CANNOT COMPARE IT to the early 50’s and 60’s, where it was actually legal to be segregated against. Now are problems are around mainly corruption and brutality, and these too can be solved.
John Peric well, I live in Texas a little farther up north from the border, so my experience may not be as on the ground as yours is.
Still, what I meant by my words is that Mexico isn’t trying to invade the U.S., so in that sense there is no crises.
Most of the refugees, that I’m aware of, have settled into the Mexican side of the border, weather that’s thanks to the president or not I’ll leave that up to you.
YA YOUR NEW LIGHTING IS MESSED UP YOU LOOK LIKE A GHOST!
Is that a bust of Jeff "The Dude" Lebowski?
Jeffery
You go live your life good my sweet precious prince
8 consecutive months with LOW temperature records...
bullshit, and 8 month's isn't climate anyway
Like many, I think the right term should be Climate Deregulation; more precise than Climate Change. Means it causes extrem weather whether low temperatures or hight (like -50°C for America vs +50°C for Australia in the same week). I recommand you the videos of Paul Beckwit that explain these phenomenons.
It is a bit too late though.....get busy with Life because it won't be that long... better yet Be Ready for the Armageddon because it is right around the corner!
Why the hell does YT need to put up the global warming banner on all these videos? And I like many journalists that use RT as their web host and have to be told they are Russian. Things are really messed up. Sort of like the Collapse of the Roman Empire mixed with Orwell.
(I liked the old lightning setup of your studio better)
Best thumbnail :)
The Arctic passage belongs to Canada.
no ..it belongs to Russia.
The US military is looking at the developing of a number of mobile power systems for its overseas bases. Mostly these are types of nuclear energy. With low carbon output. During the 1950s the US airforce wanted nuclear-powered aircraft. Obviously, this was impractical. But the research led to the construction of an MSR, Molten Salt Reactor prototype. The reactor was successful but not useful for aircraft. MSR technology is now very promising. Generation 4, Gen 4 reactor. China is building a reactor using US nuclear research. I would like to see the US developing this technology. If prototype reactors work effectively they will be revolutionary. No meltdown risks, very safe, extremely clean and even cheap. US government policy is slowly changing. Such a reactor will likely be built in the US. But maybe not soon enough. These reactors could produce 100 times less nuclear waste than current reactors. And energy production ten times as efficient.
If the military just would climate compensate, plant trees and avoid fossil fuels.
Maybe just talk a LITTLE bit slower so we can digest what you are saying. One line instead of 2.
Cover Hong Kong's battle against extradition laws!
I clicked like before even watching 😊
@North Peak It's not about being wise but it's the loyalty and trust towards the channel and it's content.
Shouldn't Trump take it seriously.
When ever the military identifies something as a threat, they should be met with serious skepticism. And to be consistent it should be no different with this issue. We should tell the generals to cut to the chase and tell us who they want to attack and/or what shiny new billion dollar toys they want us to buy.
After all, the business model of the military industrial complex is to generate fear of a perceived threat and then convince congress that new equipment is needed to meet that threat.
That said though, some of those billion dollar toys that they would like to buy could be useful in reducing dependency on fossil fuels.
The military is potentially shifting to electrically powered weapons like rail guns and high power lasers.
This in turn is stirring up interest for new energy sources that are portable and can be forward deployed. As exampled by Project Dilithium, a portable nuclear reactor, and even a portable fusion reactor by Lockhead Martin.
If they end up deploying these reactors, they might as well switch to electric, or at least rechargeable hybrid propulsion. Zumwalt and the potential Hybrid HUMVEE replacements are a step in that direction.
The government is often a great customer for the super expensive early generation of new technologies, what with their super deep pockets and inability to do basic math.
@ScarletDespair Your question seems to only be a deflection.
"Are you trying to imply that ____ is not a threat ??" Where "_____" could be terrorists, hackers, Russia, China, childhood obesity, etc…
I don't think the military, or government, fabricates issues.
I do however think that with every issue that comes along, they print out a bumper sticker and slap it on their bandwagon. People see it and say "hey, I believe in that issue" and jump on board without ever asking where it's headed.
Maybe close the bases and built nuclear power with this money?
@@johnperic6860 we can build about 150 nuclear reactors per year at the cost of foreign bases, that's about 150000 megawhatts of energy. That will make US energy production carbon neutral in 5 years flat. Bahm, global warming solved. Then us can build nuclear station in all allied countries for free, and secure their friendship for the next 60-100 years. Whack, foreign relations solved. Then china has no choice but to go nuclear, because India has super cheap energy and outgrows it, and carbon emissions in the whole world go to zero. But that will never happen, because muh bases
What extreme weather events has CC brought that were not happening before?
From the open - "I know, it’s not exactly a typical enemy. Nor is it completely responsible for extreme weather events. But the scientific community is clear that it has intensified potential disasters like storms, floods, and droughts."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Harvey
Never before has Houston seen this kind of flooding, and my family has been in the area since mid 1800's. Directly attributable to the abnormally high surface water temp in the gulf and high water vapor saturation in the atmosphere. If you think this flooding was not result of human activity, you are wrong. Ignoring the greenhouse effect CO2 concentration, the flooding was made worse because the entire county is essentially paved over preventing water from going underground. It's highly naive to assume humans have no effect on climate related natural disasters.
Louis you need to stop using fossil fuels every day - no driving, no flying, etc. you big fat HYPOCRITE
@@johnquest3102 quite a pivot there from your first comment. The short distance from that comment to this nasty one makes you someone who is easy to dismiss. And you know what my carbon footprint is? And even if it were large, the world should see more extreme weather because some random youtuber uses fossil fuels?
"How long before he mentions Hurricane Michael AND THERE IT IS." Hi from down here *wave*.
In 2020 vote blue no matter who!
.. before the REAL big blue 🌊 comes.
Well they could start shooting at a hurricane with tanks and missiles,
it would be uneffective but it would be a war atleast :D
This dude has a stuffed animal in the background. He literally destroyed his own credibility through his lack of professionalism. When he said he was going to go live his life, I visualized him reading a comic book in his mother's basement.
Maybe now there'll be a reason for them to actually do something about it...
It can’t happen to us until it does. Ignorance guarantees conflict.
North Peak apocalyptic fallout of climate change.
John Peric the question is what will be the effect at certain temperatures “too hot or too cold”. Drastic temperature change will displace massive numbers of people due to inhabitable regions due to flooding etc and create vast opportunities for violence.
John Peric where did you get your data? I would like a link.
Besides your numbers don’t tell a meaningful story. There’s no reference to the cascading effect of involuntary change. Numbers devoid of weather consequences, agricultural failures and hysteria. To name a few.
The US has had a declining rate of immigration yet a hysterical response to it.
So sterile in your presentation, that you missed the picture entirely.
Do you think migration due to climate change will be a voluntary act, and the only reason for migration?
This forum is inadequate for a complex conversations.
#guymcpherson
Advocate veganism
Why did they change the name from Global warming to climate change ? Because they wanted conspiracy theories abut it. :) jk.
learn to swim..
learn to swim..
learn to swim..
mothers going to put back to the way it outo be.
🐥
Wait when did we stop saying global warming??
Hahahahaha soon we’ll just call it climate occurrences.
Oh no!
Climate change and global warming are separate terms
North Peak You do realize that CO2 causing atmospheric warming is based on a well established scientific field, scientific laws and mathematical laws, so disproving that going to be quite a challenge for you.
And I’m not talking about some general laymen’s description of the green house effect either.
I’m talking about the relationship of linear dipole molecules with infrared vibrational spectroscopy and equipartion theorem.
North Peak Also climate change includes more than just warming, such as ocean acidification, sea level rise, atmospheric molecular composition and concentration, artic ice decline etc.
Climate change includes global warming, but looks at a much broader array of changes over a long period of time. Whereas global warming solely focuses on the rate of temperature increase over time within the earth’s atmospheres.
The biggest change we can do is to accept nuclear power, the newest generation of nuclear reaction can properly burn it nuclear waste and we need to be less selective of out diets. We need to have more of a natural mixed diet, a plant based diet will be more destructive toward the environment than a meat/insect based. The human body need specific nutrition and only specific plants can offer them. Depending on growing condition and requirement we either need to change the environment to match the requirement or ship them from across the world.
Solar, wind and water power should be carefully used. Solar and wind power can be destructive toward bird migration path, and they require batteries to make them effective in out society. Getting the material to make batteries and recycle them might be more destructive than not using them. Water power will destroy local eco system if not done correctly, and flooding risk for local community increase.
There is a compromise to nuclear. I live near a fault, and none of us want a nuclear power plant near us. The spent plutonium is just sitting at 83 facilities. Small scale reactors could use the spent fuel; and would be a good alternative from creating more plutonium, as well as avoiding burying it somewhere. There is a lot of spent fuel lying around in nothing more than metal barrels (fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42513.pdf).
Hilarious, you've almost convinced me climate change is a thing, not sure that you'll convince Trump lol. Great job.
Haha don't listen to your subscribers and this is what happens 🤣😂 y'all views hardly crack 30 k on a good day
What happened to beme news?
It's true I walked into a military base with a huge sign that said Climate Change and they were all running away.
LOL a Sign Board. You ain't flooding waters.
Unless China and India or Russia change their environmental policy...US wouldn't.
@North Peak I'm talking about pollution.. China and India and Russia do not care about carbon footprint because that would hinder the growth of their industries...hence policy. This to say it doesn't matter what we do unless we do it together... Globally as this is a global problem and not one isolated to Western hemisphere.
@@peterh.3008 China is the largest investor in green energy woldwide, half of the invested total sum.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China