Calderia on Climate Science and Choices (Pt. 2)


have written more than once i think that
no one should expect a gate four six five pcc report to suddenly
make it easy oh now we know anup that weekend have
societal discussion this is let me my own research to want
to get more involved in looking at the solution side of things that what kind
of energy systems and developed that might help solve the problem because i
really that we’re going to see huge advances in
climate science over the next decade prior to that iraq going to radically
change our understanding of the problem but in this edition of the bill without
the cc wandering uh… you know i think but we’ve known about
the you need to know tax for a few decades now and and this kind of a pretense of these i_p_ cc
reports that it’s this latest science that happened in the last two or three
years that’s really can make a difference that’s
that’s the the balance in favor of action and that and then i get a really we’ve been filling in details for the
last thirty years in the picture hasn’t changed substantially paperwork increasingly is an ethical and
moral issue in that there uh… at mag senses that we can look at the environment there’s
some kind of endowment and the and it’s okay to live off of the interests of the
endowment that we have some responsibility to pass this and down
onto future generations and that statement where dating changes that people in the future will
be ok living where but there might be a long and so we
should just beatrice reverses and try to deal with
the problem but it’s much easier to be act that they
clear that the act that recieved anything but with acting erratically requires us
to make great sacrifices we tend to cut corners and so i think that solutions really
erin finding were for will alternative energy systems that don’t rely on using
the atmosphere as the waist down so it sounds like you’re saying you
don’t have confidence that we’ll have we have the politics of word the ethics two raise the cost of the pollution here’s
efficient to drive the change higher well i have been there starting at about you know is it a good idea for us to be using the
atmospheres of waste dump and just phrase in the simple way
because i think if you ask most people yes should we be dr narda sure waste
into the atmosphere mostly also in our and of course it has to come at a point when the uh… billion plus people in china
and those in india difficult decisions well let’s work it
through challenge yanks he’s eager for a lot one’s hands in the stands a problem i’m
not sure that your honor cornerback unite for credit tested the limits of
what william it uh… yeah hard that yellows and the internet but constituting a reserve goin they presented there some plans so far they were going to
other energy systems like the basically they said all this efficiency stuff that allows us to reduce emissions following p_c_r_
another growth we’re gonna do that and this stuff that costs money or
carbon capture and storage decide we’re not going to do and they were very clear about uh… you know that uh… them economic
development comes first and and let’s get back to what i was saying about that uh… you know we can act i think the
when acting ethically is cheap but when acting ethically is expensive we tend to
cut corners and and so having and feasible alternative energy
technologies that are karna of the warble on seems central and then uh… you know which is why things lead
basically a hierarchy and all these stones energy development and since then form now you pushed me into a corner recently
and uh… email discussion we had that included admits unbearable author of
recent paper metrocast where you know i’ve been basically saying
seems sensible lied to me to move from call to natural gas for you
can as long as you’re not leaking for ground it seems like a no-brainer in terms of
bring things for new said well yeah but you’re building all this infrastructure
that’s convenient for day decades figure it’s not just the warming potential of
the gas but uh… the stuff you build and so um… but again looking at these trajectories
like for china you know you know i recently wrote about whether dave victor ormond for stanford gag weighed in at length on is the biggest climate win possibly china moving expeditiously from coal to gas so i don’t know you want to cut touch
and that that were asking i think there are two issues of natural
gas is and oneness the and get your building this year to admitting energy infrastructure and adjust and face a bit hard for me to conceptualize how if your goal
is to reducing our two missions how building
more power plants that dump the c_o_ two into the atmosphere is
going to g vagal the other issue is more political that you’re sending and and you do if you think what is your
creating a constituency of expanding the natural gas industry of people who have incentives to allowable they continue dumping c_o_ two
into the atmosphere i think you also uh… make it more difficult to get the phase
change in societal attitudes that i think stuff happened that that i think uh… if we if you re say the people of kato kato
that c_o_ two is that came from natural gas it’s okay to omit c_o_ two if you
paid the tax on it uh… and that this is the but it’s not
ok if it came from call five apparently didn’t pay the
facts that this is a want the kind of message that i think will never delfina it’s the population and so i think the the message needs to be that c_o_ two from any source causes climate damaging climate risk and
that it’s not ok to use the answers away stuff but i think it’s like putting
across that simple and correct message there we might actually solve the school