With Professor Kevin Anderson Discussing Remarks By Bill gates
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 вер 2024
- Bill Gates has been interviewed on different occasions in the last couple of months making bold statements about planting trees and, more recently at COP28, how a temperature rise of 3ºC is not too bad. This segment with climate scientist, Professor Kevin Anderson from the Tyndall Centre at University of Manchester and also at the University of Uppsala, reflects on Bill Gates and people like him, asking why they get so much media coverage considering the accuracy of what they say.
Please subscribe to the podcast for free or to get episodes early, become a member on UA-cam or Patreon.
Nick Breeze’s book, ‘COPOUT - How governments have failed the people on climate’ is available to preorder from Amazon and all bookshops: amzn.to/4a7HPAB
Thanks Nick and Kevin. This is the reality we must have. Tell the truth, stop burning fossil fuels, stop all new licencing and extraction, and transition with 100 percent effort globally. Together with global equity and social justice, It's our purpose in life.
How very wrong you are!!!!
Yeah but nobody cares. Everyone wants sportsball, iphones, and meat on the shelves. Walk outside and go to your local interstate highway and stare at it for a few seconds... really?
@brianwheeldon - Ever heard of the Aerosol Masking Effect? As James Hansen ruefully puts it - The Faustian Bargain - We're now too far down the path to extinction... The stable door is open, the horse has bolted, kicking over the pale of milk in its headlong gallop towards the 'unsinkable ship' that has already sailed... An impasse, for humans need to divest from fossil fuels, yet in the process - especially if done rapidly - will INCREASE global warming by at least 1.5 deg C... And then there's the existential 'wild card' - Nuclear Energy.
.
Idiots like various politicians and ignorant celebs like Oliver Stone are advocating MORE nuclear generating facilities as a means to 'mitigate' AGW... There are already 440+ civil nuclear generating facilites peppered around the planet - all near large bodies of water; mostly on coaslines, tectonic margins, rivers, lakes and reservoirs, all potentially at risk from sea-level rise, thermal uptake of both oceans, lakes and rivers; where the continued cooling of both reactors and cooling ponds are at most jeopardy... But face total collapse, once industrial civilisation collapses... Which is now inevitable.
.
Once those reactor faciliites lose their maintenance insfrastructure and support, the liklihood of a mass release of ionising aerosols to atmosphere will result in the complete depletion of the stratospheric ozone regions - which for the past six-hundred million years has been shielding the Earth's surface from the lethal effects of HF Ultra Violet radiation - the very reason how life was able to evolve and inhabit the land masses - No stratospheric O3 and you can kiss goodbye to ALL extant terrestrial and pelagic organisms. Ergo - more nuclear energy = total extinction of all species except perhaps the chemotrophs inhabiting the geo-hyrothermal vents deep in the oceans.
.
The current ongoing mass extinction is set to become Earth's FINAL MASS EXTINCTION, or at the very least, revert evolution back to pre-cambrian status...
======================================================================================
Anthropocentric Humans - Either drunk on hubris (Gates, Musk, Stone etc...), stoned on hopium, or in a coma of denial (most of humanity), or a fug of faith (most of humanity) and completely oblivious to O B L I V I O N.
@@TheDoomWizard Well how STUPID can we be to allow ourselves to be so distracted that we don’t see the edge of the cliff we’re approaching. 😖
One of the most frustrating arguments to hear is carbon capture coming to save the day. Not only do people like Gates peddle it, but many "science influencers" jump on the bandwagon as well - people even who should know better.
Upton Sinclair’s quote seems particularly apropos here
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary (my aside- or his lifestyle) depend on him not understanding it
Our current lifestyles are unsustainable but politicians dare not do anything about it ...
Right we're toast
Kevin is such a strong educator. And deserves a tremendous amount of respect for his willingness to present unbiased perspectives of the world today.
ZNonsense.
You airhead
Mr Bill Gates nervous fidgety body language is quite hilarious to observe 🧐
Coupled with the snarky, reptilian, cynicism, one might suspect Soylent Green is actually people.
Thanks Kevin and Nick! The solution really is quite obvious. A destructive economic system in which billionaires are even a thing makes no sense at all.
Thanks Nick, Kevin is a honest scientist .
No he is a standard issue North of England leftie moralists who interprets the causes of climate change in a particularly political manner
This quote also seems timely;
Money sometimes makes fools of important persons, but it may also make important persons of fools
Walter Winchell
Well that was refreshing.
So is my channel
To address this issue would require a fundamental change in how we live and that is not going to happen. I live in the U.S. The vast majority of Americans aren't going to change their high consumption lifestyles for anything except if they no longer have the money to support that lifestyle. Where I live, the vast majority of people won't go anywhere without their motor vehicle, won't do any work without some motorized equipment and can't live without a myriad array of equipment that requires fossil fuel energy to build, transport and use. A hundred years from now, people will be asking "What were they thinking?" They were thinking that their comfort and convenience is far more important than future generations,.
Entrenched destruction.
I agree that one has choices usually but hey are not significant even in the aggregate, and low carbon lifestyles are possible choices for many perhaps but again, the scale of the carbon problem and the urgency as emphasized here is huge and will not be fixed by consumer choices. This requires government urgent and frankly severe, inconvenient mandates. Yet no government is yet willing to do that.
Please more of these, thank you.
"If I want to know about the abuse of monopoly power with a sort of b-rated software..." FAS.
Thanks for sharing this video. My feelings exactly.
He burned him! 🤣
Having a job in a company that competed with MSFT during its early/mid years gave me a close-hand look at Bill's operating methodologies and values, and they were extremely self-serving and manipulative then, and still are. I'm not sure how Melinda stayed married to him for so long, he's insufferable as a person.
Scholars unite!! Teach us the damn truth! If you know what we don't...TELL US!! NO There's NO FRIGGIN REWARD FOR GOOD ACTS!
Spot on!
Well said.
I'd asked opinions on several climate channels after he made these remarks. So glad you are covering it. How can someone so clever be so clueless. The power of trees to moderate climate, reflect solar energy, store and filter water, build topsoil, prevent erosion and is a renewable resource.
Indeed.My concern is how damaging such this 'flip' remark like this one about trees could be. He seemed much more immature than I realised.
Thank you , Nick.
Great to see this Man in the 'zone'.
I would love to see someone like him do a selection of 'commenting on' or 'reviewing' video clips similar to this on the array of climate oriented channels that effectively deny the issues or where we are at.
Kevin just 'riffing' ✌😁
Clip 'em down and send them off onto the various social platforms.
That one about Bill Gates and bgrade software could go viral, I am sure.
Take care.
Of course Kevin is correct. Who gives a flying F that Gates was in the right place and right time to make zillions? Does that make him a scientific guru? Give me a break. We're so used to listening to celebrities, when they are only interested in maintaining their lives of excess...! Aaaaaargh...!
100% agreed!
Hello Nick. Just throwing this idea out there: Kevin Anderson and Ian Dunlop in conversation, hosted by yourself, over their thoughts on the future of the fossil fuels industry?
Noted thanks.
Bill Gates BRAGS he spends about $10,000,000 on CO2 mitigation, but he knows damn good and well that is a trivial amount that does not come close to eliminating the massive, massive, massive amount of CO2 that he alone emits, because he chooses to live a highly exotic luxuriant lifestyle.
Thank you! Just discovered your channel and very grateful to have your voice available.
Damn you are so right on!❤
I cannot disagree with anything Kevin said there. WELL PUT KEVIN ANDERSON!
One thing we, the people Kevin refers to as the main individual contributors to emissions, can do is get out of the jobs that make us high consumers, let younger people have those positions and go off and live low impact lives. People who maximize their retirement income then become big fliers and cruisers and giant RV travellers. I was happy to let a forty-year-old get a nice promotion when I went off into the bush with my hundred pounds of beans.
Thanks Nick. Very well said. 👏
We're moving goalposts so alarmingly fast, soon even +4C will be considered "not that bad of a scenario". A decade or two ago, +2C was considered to be cataclysmic.
Growing hemp or natural regeneration of grazed lands both would do more
Exactly, and NOT CUTTING trees. I've been watching tree planting for a long time. It never gets the attention it needs... It isn't that trees are bad, or that tree planting doesn't work in general... But commercial sized plantings rarely ever survive... Or they plant the trees too close, or don't water them. A handful of projects have been very successful, over the course of decades. Planting a few trees a year. Major commercialized campaigns usually always fail. What was it 90% of Mr beasts 20 million trees died... That wasn't a very effective use of 20+ million dollars...
Billionaires who don't understand the bottom line !
Mr Gates also declared EVs we're not a thing couple years ago. He's one of the bigger distributors of the most addictive drug in America. Hopium. Leads to complacency and not me disease....
The only value Microsoft of relevance is the scale of opportunity cost of licences across UK for MS products over open source. Their products are used across the public, private charity and domestic sectors. The extract money for OS, server software training, cloud storage and many other areas. These are huge opportunity costs on services and tackling climate not to mention migration costs.
Multiply this across countries and their footprint on servers and finances are huge.
The timeframe we have to address climate change is the reason I still think we need to degrow, at least in the sense of consuming less resources. And it is the urgency of the crisis that makes focusing so much on technological solutions misguided.
I mean we should be focusing on redesigning city life, the economy, supply chains, waste processing... with the technology available.
Chill out guys. Bill Gates may not be perfect but who else is doing more for the poorest people in the world?
I do have to wonder what caused my previous comment to be censored.
Couldn't have been an AI censoring.
It seems to me there is a lot of low hanging fruit that could result in not insignificant reductions in fossil fuel usage.
Firstly national maximum speed limits on roads. During the 1970s energy crisis the USA had a speed limit of 55mph and in the UK it was temporarily 50mph. For a typical car, the difference in fuel consumption between that when driving at 70mph to 50mph could be equivalent to 30%.
2. Tourism and business flights…put a limit on everyone of the number allowed. 1 return holiday flight a year each (and no trading of allowances) and two business flights.
3. Domestic gas consumption. Put a limit on how much each household is allowed to burn in a year. Anything about that attracts a massive tax (with different levels of tax depending on household income) which is used to buy food for the people that need help.
Ok those won’t take us anywhere near net zero but why is there no discussion at all about regulations to cut back FF demand….or do we all know why?
@5:18…so that’s it, 1.5 or 2 are merely aspirational, and if you do the numbers they’re not likely?
“Now, fortunately, if you stay below 3 . . .”
Words fail.
So predictable!
I wonder if that interview with Obama where he described a conversation with his daughter, about maybe getting to 3.5 and then getting it down later, I wonder if he'd been talking to Gates instead of climate scientists. It's all Atlas Shrugged coming true.
@@lshwadchuck5643 Gates funds one segment of the geoengineering space who routinely say that descriptions of tipping points and anticipated impacts between 2-3ºC are hyperbolic.
Prof. Anderson, The problem is so great!! We need to work together on this. Gates isn't perfect but he is trying. If you can somehow communicate with Gates, it may make a difference. Thank you for your work!
the only thing gates is trying is to justify his own existence
Keep the dominate narrative going!
EatTheRich
Bill is a rich nobody
Another Bill Gates hating thing. I hated how Microsoft behaved as a company as well but he is not Microsoft anymore. I'm not a Bill Gates expert but what does qualify him to talk on some of these subjects is he ( with his wife) started a charitable foundation and put the vast majority of his personal wealth into it. He convinced Waren Buffet and other bilionares to do the same. He then spends this money (leveridged for more effect) on things like eradicating maleria and providing sanitary toilets in countries where there aren't enough of them. He also raises and spends huge amounts of money on Clean energy projects and spends a good proportion of his time speaking to the engineers and scientists working on these technologies. So in short yes he does know more than the bloke down the pub. He is doing more to solve these problems than the vast majority of people. I know Windows 3.1 was really really bad but get over it he's doing good things now :-)
He is saying factually wrong things from a position of authority. That is the point.
@NickBreeze what's the worst thing he is saying ( genuine question I don't really know a massive amount about him)
@NickBreeze he does spread his foundations investment across a huge range of technologies ( you might say he's contradictory). I suppose he's hedging his bets as to what will work
You do know why these US gazillionaires go into the philanthropy biz? Tax avoidance.
@nicktecky55 I suppose it could be a big swiz ( I haven't dug into it in massive detail ) but don't think so he literally is giving away the vast majority if his wealth to the foundation so it can invest. I'm not saying he is a saint I'd hope I or most peopke would do something similar if they had that much personal wealth. He's keeping enough that he will still be an extremely ritch man its just he has more than he could possibly spend on pointless BS in a hundred lifetimes so instead he wants to do good things with it.
F Bil goats
I see what you did there
Even if we could roll out carbon capture infrastructure fast enough and at a scale that made a dent in the atmosphere GHG concentration, the energy requirements to power this type of infrastructure is astronomical. The experimental plants by Climeworks, Carbon Engineering and the like, require 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆 to capture (and store) a single CO2 molecule than the energy released during the fossil fuel burning reaction that originally generated that same CO2 molecule! Pursuing carbon capture faced with this kind of energy cost is pure insanity.
Carbon capture machines are a failure no doubt about it, we’ll have to use nature itself to store carbon V and there are a number of ways of doing this. I also think stratospheric aerosol injection most likely will be necessary sooner or later. To give us the time to do all this other stuff we have to do.
This is why carbon capture and Hydrogen are solutions promoted by status quo business and petroleum companies.
Because they worked really hard to find solutions that grow energy demand.
"Let's use a huge amount of electricity reducing some of the emissions from our electricity generation."
Anyone with a pen and paper and the smallest about of common sense can figure out how stupid that is.
But someone is spending billions trying to convince us it is a good idea.
The petroleum industry, they are spending the billions.
ONE example of any of "the number of ways of doing this"
"plant trees" -> 38,600mi2 burned alone in Canada.@@deanfowles3707