4th Street Forum | Program | #1216


>>THIS WEEK, “FOURTH STREET FORUM” IS ON THE ROAD TO THE 11th ANNUAL SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT, HELD AT THE WISCONSIN CENTER IN DOWNTOWN MILWAUKEE. THE TOPIC TODAY — CLIMATE CHANGE, A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY, AND NEW ENERGY. WELCOME TO “FOURTH STREET FORUM.” I’M MARCUS WHITE OF THE GREATER MILWAUKEE FOUNDATION AND YOUR HOST THIS WEEK FOR THE FORUM. THE GREATER MILWAUKEE FOUNDATION IS A NEARLY CENTURY OLD COMMUNITY FOUNDATION WITH A MISSION OF INSPIRING PHILANTHROPY AND STRENGTHENING COMMUNITIES. IT IS IN THAT SPIRIT THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH MILWAUKEE PUBLIC TELEVISION TO BRING YOU THESE CRITICAL CONVERSATIONS. WE ARE VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE AT THE SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT AND I JUST WANT TO START OFF RIGHT AWAY BY THANKING OUR GUESTS. WE ARE VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE THESE THREE GUESTS WITH US TODAY, FOR “FOURTH STREET FORUM.” THEY ARE PEOPLE WHO WILL BRING US NATIONAL AS WELL AS INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE ECONOMY AND OUR FUTURE. OUR GUESTS ARE — DR. CHARLES HALL IS A PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND FORESTRY AT SUNY COLLEGE IN SYRACUSE, NEW YORK. PROFESSOR HALL HAS SPENT RESEARCH AND TEACHING TIME IN MANY COUNTRIES, INCLUDING ARGENTINA, BOLIVIA, CHINA, COSTA RICA, AND MEXICO. WELCOME, CHARLES.>>THANK YOU. DR. DEBRA ROWE IS THE SENIOR EDUCATION FELLOW FOR THE ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY LEADERS FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE. PROFESSOR ROWE HAS TAUGHT FOR OVER 20 YEARS IN THE AREAS OF RENEWABLE ENERGIES AND ENERGY MANAGEMENT. HER STUDENTS HAVE INCLUDED BUILDERS, ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, AND BUILDING TRADES PEOPLE AS WELL AS FACILITY MANAGERS. SHE IS A FORMER OWNER OF A RENEWABLE ENERGY AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY. WELCOME, DEBRA.>>>>CARL HEDDE IS DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE RISK MANAGEMENT AT MUNICH RE AMERICA, A WORLD LEADER IN REINSURANCE. THEY ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE ISSUES OF CLIMATE AND SUPPORT CLIMATE PROTECTION AND ADAPTATION TO GLOBAL WARMING. MR. HEDDE’S WORK INCLUDES CATASTROPHE MANAGEMENT AND RISK EVALUATION. HE ALSO MANAGES A GROUP OF SCIENTISTS THAT PROVIDE SEISMOLOGICAL AND METEOROLOGICAL EXPERTISE AND RESEARCH.>>THANK YOU.>>WELCOME, CARL. GOOD TO HAVE YOU HERE. CHARLES, WE’LL START WITH YOU AND ASK EACH OF YOU THE SAME QUESTION TO GET US STARTED, JUST VERY BRIEFLY, AND THAT IS REALLY JUST TO HELP US DEFINE SOME TERMS HERE AT THE VERY BEGINNING. WE’RE AT THE SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT. WHAT DOES THE TERM SUSTAINABILITY MEAN FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE?>>MOST PEOPLE THINK ABOUT IT AS HAVING THEIR CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN HAVING THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES, IN ENVIRONMENT AND SO FORTH, AS WE, THE NATIVE AMERICANS IN SYRACUSE, IN THAT REGION OF UPSTATE NEW YORK, SAY FOR SEVEN GENERATIONS, AND IF WE DO THAT, THEN IT’S — IT’S PRETTY TOUGH. DO YOU WANT MORE?>>A LITTLE MORE. WELL, MINE, ARE HOURS –>>OK. I THINK THERE’S NO WAY POSSIBLE THAT WE’RE GOING TO HAVE THE SUSTAINABILITY AT THE LEVEL OF POPULATION AND AFFLUENCE THAT WE HAVE COME TO EXPECT. MY FOCAL POINT IS ON OIL AND SOMETHING CALLED PEAK OIL. YOU GO THROUGH A NATURAL RESOURCE OVER TIME, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, A CURVE OVER TIME OF USE AND WE’RE SOMEWHERE UP HERE WITH OIL AND PRETTY SOON, WITH GAS, AND LITTLE BIT MORE, ANOTHER FEW DECADES FOR COAL, AND EXACTLY WHEN WE DON’T KNOW, BUT WE KNOW IT’S COMING, AND EVERYTHING WE DO IS DEPENDENT UPON PETROLEUM.>>SO TELL ME WHAT SUSTAINABILITY MEANS.>>ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD.>>HAND THEN THERE’S CLIMATE.>>THAT’S A GOOD START. DEBRA, WHAT DOES SUSTAINABILITY MEAN TO YOU?>>WELL, I WOULD SHARE WITH YOU THE MOST COMMONLY RECOGNIZED DEFINITION INTERNATIONALLY. IT WAS DEVELOPED BY OVER 100,000 PEOPLE, AND — IN OVER 100 COUNTRIES AND IT’S A DEFINITION OF SUSTAINABILITY DEVELOPMENT THAT SAYS MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE PRESENT IN SUCH A WAY THAT FUTURE GENERATIONS CAN MEET THEIR OWN NEEDS. I WOULD ALSO LOOK TO THE WORLD OF BUSINESS WHO STARTED COMING TO BUSINESS SCHOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES AS WELL AS INTERNATIONALLY AND SAYING, GIVE US STUDENTS WHO WERE EDUCATED IN SUSTAINABILITY, BECAUSE WE’RE BEING ASKED TO DO SUSTAINABILITY ANNUAL REPORTS AND AUDITS, AND SO WE NEED TO LOOK AT NOT ONLY OUR ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE, BUT ALSO OUR ENVIRONMENTAL AND OUR SOCIAL PERFORMANCE. AND SO THE TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE IS ANOTHER WAY THAT SUSTAINABILITY IS OFTEN LOOKED AT. THAT BY MAKING SMARTER DECISIONS WITH BETTER INFORMATION, WE CAN SIMULTANEOUSLY CREATE HEALTHIER ECOSYSTEMS, SOCIAL SYSTEMS AND ECONOMIES AT THE SAME TIME. SO I WOULD SAY THAT THAT’S WHAT I TEND TO THINK ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY, AND I JUST FINISHED, WE JUST PUBLISHED LAST WEEK AN ENCYCLOPEDIA CALLED ACHIEVING SUSTAINABILITY, VISIONS, PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES AND IN THE PREFACE I ACTUALLY USED THE THEME OF SUSTAINABILITY ABUNDANCE, SO WE CAN COME BACK TO THAT.>>VERY GOOD. CARL?>>I LOOK AT SUSTAINABILITY FROM AN INSURANCE PERSPECTIVE, AND REALLY, DOWN TO THE MICROLEVEL OF US AS RESIDENTS AND PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. WE’VE SEEN CLIMATE CHANGE, WE’RE SEEING THE IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND OUR LOSS OF STATISTICS OVER THE LAST 34 — 30, 40 YEARS SHOW THAT. AND NOW, YOU KNOW, WE’VE BEEN DEBATING WHAT IT IS AND HOW — WHAT’S CAUSING IT. I TAKE A VERY LOCAL LOOK AND SAY, WHAT DO WE DO TO PROTECT OURSELVES. SO WE’VE BEEN DOING AN AWFUL LOT OF RESEARCH IN AN ORGANIZATION THAT I’M INVOLVED IN WITHIN THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY, TRYING TO STUDY AND HOW DO WE BUILD OUR HOMES AND BUSINESSES SAFER. YOU KNOW, IF WE COULD PROTECT SOMEBODY IN A STORM, NOT THAT THEY SHOULD BE STAYING IN A CAT 5 STORM, BUT IF THEIR ROOF DOESN’T BLOW OFF, OR THE HOUSE DOESN’T GET DESTROYED, THE COMMUNITY BECOMES MORE SUSTAINABLE OVER TIME. THEY DON’T HAVE TO MOVE OUT AND LEAVE A COMMUNITY. THE SAME THING WITH OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES. IF THESE THINGS COULD SURVIVE, THAT THE CHANGING WEATHER THAT WE’RE SEEING, I THINK I LOOK AT IT’S COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY, BUT IT STARTS WITH A FAMILY SUSTAINABILITY.>>WELL, CARL, LET ME STAY WITH YOU THERE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, A SORT OF VERY REAL PERSPECTIVE, GIVEN YOUR INDUSTRY. AND YOU MENTIONED LOSS, AND LOST STATISTICS. SO YOU KNOW, JUST FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT, IS THIS REAL, IS CLIMATE CHANGE REAL AND ARE YOU SEEING IT IN TERMS OF THE IMPACT IT HAS ON THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY?>>I’M LUCKY TO WORK FOR MUNICH RE AS YOU MENTIONED AS I WAS INTRODUCED. OUR ORGANIZATION STARTED TO SEE AND UNDERSTAND AND THINK OF THE IMPACT OF CLIMATE ON ITS POR FOLAYEMI OF BUSINESS AROUND THE WORLD ABOUT 30, 40 YEARS AGO IN THE EARLY 1970’S. WE WERE ONE OF THE FIRST INSURERS, REINSURERS TO START TO HIRE EXPERTS IN THE FIELD AND START TO STUDY IT. HASN’T BEEN POPULAR WITH SOME OF OUR CLIENTS AROUND THE GLOBE, BUT WE SEE IT IN OUR LOSS OF STATISTICS. NOW, IS IT ALL CLIMATE, I’M NOT SURE, I DON’T THINK SO, IT MIGHT BE SOME DEMOGRAPHICS LEAKING INTO THE STATISTICS, BUT IF YOU SAW THE GEOPHYSICAL EVENTS, THE LOSSES SUSTAINED IS FAIRLY CONSTANT OVER THE LAST 40, 50 YEARS. IT’S THE WEATHER RELATED EVENTS THAT WE’VE SEEN THE UPTICK, SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT’S REAL, AND AGAIN, COMING BACK TO MY EARLIER RESPONSE, IT’S REAL, I WORK FOR AN ORGANIZATION, WE’RE NOT DEBATING IT’S REAL, WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT TRYING TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT IT. WE’RE ALSO TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, OK, WHAT DO WE DO AS A SOCIETY, HOW DO WE REACT, ADJUST AND LIVE IN THAT CHANGING CLIMATE.>>THAT I HOPE IS FOR US IN THIS CONVERSATION WHAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE AWAY FROM IT IS WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO IN OUR SOCIETY. DEBRA, LET’S ASSUME THAT INDEED, CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL, THAT WARMING IS REAL, THAT STORMS HAVE INTENSIFIED AND ARE DIFFERENT. COULD IT BE THAT THIS IS SIMPLY PART OF A CYCLE, MAYBE EVEN A CENTURY’S LONG CYCLE THAT WE JUST DON’T HAVE THE DATA TO KNOW THAT THIS KIND OF THING HAPPENS?>>NO, WE HAVE THE DATA, OK. THE ONLY WAY YOU THINK WE DON’T HAVE THE DATA IS IF YOU LISTEN TO TALK SHOW HOSTS THAT DON’T LET EXPERTS SPEAK TO THE FACTS, AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN SCIENCE, WHAT YOU DO IS COMPILE A LOT OF EVIDENCE, AND THE OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE SHOWS THE CLIMATE CHANGE IS HAPPENING, THAT PART OF IT IS HUMAN INDUCED, THE PART THAT’S REALLY MAKING IT SO DANGEROUS, IT’S GOING TO INCREASE HUMAN SUFFERING SO MUCH, A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH THE COMBUSTION OF FOSSIL FUELS. BEYOND THAT, THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES, WE COULD BE MOVING TOWARDS THOSE ALTERNATIVES. THEY WOULD BE NOT ONLY SAFER FOR US IN TERMS OF OUR OWN HEALTH, IN TERMS OF OUR ECONOMIC SECURITY, BUT THEY ALSO END UP BEING GOOD INVESTMENTS. AND WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS UNFURL THE REGULATIONS OF THE MONOPOLIES AND THE OLOGOPIES THAT WE CALL UTILITIES COMPANIES THAT HAVE BEEN HOLDING TO THE STATUS QUO BECAUSE THEY MAKE MONEY BY HOLD TO GO COMBUSTIBLE FUEL AND NOBODY HAS MADE US FULLY MAY FOR THE ILLINOIS ECONOMIC EFFECTS AND THE LONG-TERM DESTRUCTION OF ECOSYSTEMS THAT WE ALL DEPEND ON TO LIVE EVERY DAY.>>CHARLES, YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR OPENING REMARKS, COAL, AND DEBRA HAS TALKED ABOUT FOSSIL FUELS AND THE EFFECTS, SO HOW MUCH IS COAL THE BURNING OF FOSSIL FUELS, HOW MUCH HAS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THIS NEW REALITY?>>I DON’T WANT TO ANSWER THIS. I SPEND MOST OF MY LIFE STUDYING THIS QUESTION. I’M CONVINCED THAT CLIMATE IS CHANGE, AND I’M NOT PERFECTLY CONVINCED THAT HUMANS ARE BEHIND IT, QUITE FRANKLY, THAT’S — I’M A MODELER, I KNOW THESE MODELS AND THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE UNANSWERED IN THE MODELS, ESPECIALLY WATER VAPOR AND ISSUES RELATED TO THAT, BUT LET’S NOT GO THERE. THE PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE, I WOULD AGREE, IS FOR HUMANS BEHIND IT, BUT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN IS THIS. THAT IF YOU STOP BURNING FOSSIL FUEL TOMORROW, 95, 99% OF THE PEOPLE ON THE PLANET WOULD DIE. WHAT’S THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THAT, AND SO IF WE ARE GOING TO GO TO SOMETHING ELSE, I’M AN ECOLOGIST, I WAS AT ONE TIME PRO NUCLEAR, WHICH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DATA, IS SAFEER THAN COAL CERTAINLY, AND BUT IT’S TOO LATE FOR THAT. CAN WE POSSIBLY — DO WE EVEN HAVE ENOUGH FOSSIL FUEL TO BUILD ENOUGH SOLAR DEVICES TO HAVE ANYTHING LIKE TODAY’S STANDARD OF LIVING FOR SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE. IT’S NOT CLEAR.>>WELL –>>WE’RE CAUGHT BETWEEN TWO ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE SITUATIONS IN MY OPINION, AND I DON’T KNOW THAT WE HAVE A SYSTEMS APPROACH, I’M A SYSTEMS SCIENTIST, A SYSTEMS ECOLOGIST, I DON’T THINK WE HAVE A SYSTEMS APPROACH, WE ARE NOT EDUCATING TO A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO TRAIN PEOPLE TO DEAL WITH THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROBLEM. EVERYBODY JUST TAKES THEIR ONE PIECE. AND ARGUES FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW. I COULD GO ON, BUT –>>DEBRA, I WANT TO ASK YOU, YOU KNOW, BASED ON SOMETHING CHARLES SAID, IT ALWAYS SEEMS TO ME IN A LOT OF CONVERSATION, ESPECIALLY ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY, ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE, I THINK THAT’S WHAT YOU’RE GETTING AT CHARLES, THAT WE HAVE THIS ASSUMPTION THAT FOR GENERATIONS TO COME, WE NEED TO SUSTAIN AN AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS LIFESTYLE. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT’S SIMPLY FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE. WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THE WORLD. WHAT’S THE IMPACT RIGHT NOW ON THE REST OF THE WORLD, IN TERMS OF THE IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE, AND ARE WE TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO CREATE SOME KIND OF, YOU KNOW, TWO-CAR FAMILY FOR EVERYONE AROUND THE WORLD?>>I LOVE THE UNITED STATES. I LOVE OUR COUNTRY AND I WANT TO CONTINUE TO SEE IT BE A WONDERFUL COUNTRY THAT OTHERS CAN LOOK TO, BUT WE’RE DOING SOME THINGS THAT ARE REALLY OFF BASE, SO IF YOU LOOK AT ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT, YOU’LL FIND THAT IF EVERYBODY LOOKS IN THE WORLD LIKE WE DO, IN THE U.S., WE’LL NEED FOUR TO SIX PLANETS OF RESOURCES.>>JUST FOR THE RESOURCES –>>WE ONLY HAVE ONE, SO LET ME EXPLAIN TO YOU, I HAVE GRADUATE DEGREES IN PSYCHOLOGY, I HAVE A Ph.D. IN BUSINESS, I OWNED AN ENERGY COMPANY, I WENT INTO SENIOR CITIZEN COMPLEXES, WHERE PEOPLE WERE CHOOSING BETWEEN HEATING AND EATING. AND SHOWED THEM HOW THEY DIDN’T HAVE TO MAKE THAT CHOICE. THE AMOUNT OF WASTE IN THIS COUNTRY, IN OUR CONSUMPTION, IS UNCONSCIONABLE. IT’S SHAMEFUL. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH OF WHAT BUILDS QUALITY OF LIFE, ONCE YOU CAN PAY YOUR BASIC BILLS, IT’S THE QUALITY OF YOUR INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS, IT’S NOT MORE STUFF. SO PART OF THIS IS EDUCATING OUR COMMUNITY, EDUCATING WHICH IS A LOCAL COMMUNITY, A NATIONAL COMMUNITY AND A GLOBAL COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW TO BUILD A QUALITY OF LIFE THAT DOESN’T DESTROY THE PLANET FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. WILL WE PAY THE PRICE FOR WHAT WE’VE DONE SO FAR? ABSOLUTELY. ARE THERE THINGS WE CAN DO? YES. ALTHOUGH I WOULD WARN ABOUT PUTTING A STRONGER ROOF ON A HOUSE THAT’S ON A COASTLINE, THAT’S GOING TO HAVE SO MANY STORMS, BUT IT’S STILL NOT VIABLE AND I’M NOT SURE I WANT MY TAX DOLLARS RECOOP RATING AND SAVING THAT — RECUPERATING AND SAVING THAT COMMUNITIES OVER AND OVER AGAIN, I WANT TO MAKE INVESTMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO PAY FOR THEMSELVES AND CREATE CLEAN AND GREEN ENERGY FOR ALL OF US FOR THE FUTURE.>>WE’RE ADVOCATES OF THE FIRST STEP IS REALLY THE LAND USE PLANNING, IT’S NOT BUILDING — THE OTHER PIECE THAT I THINK THAT WE — I KNOW WE ADVOCATE AND I THINK IT’S VERY IMPORTANT IS RISK-BASED PRICING. AND RISK BASED PRICING AND HIGHLY USE IT IN THE CONTEXT OF INSURANCE PRODUCT, IF YOU PUT YOURSELF ON THE COAST, IF YOU PUT YOURSELF IN HARM’S WAY, YOU SHOULD BE PAYING A HIGHER PRICE TO ENSURE YOURSELF.>>THIS IS WHERE WE’RE MOVING RIGHT NOW. ISN’T THERE ACTION IN CONGRESS TO DO JUST THAT.>>THERE WAS ON THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM, BUT THAT’S BEEN ROLLED BACK A FEW YEARS, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, RISK-BASED PRICING WAS A LITTLE BIT MAYBE TOO OUT THERE FOR POLITICS.>>OK.>>OF THE SITUATION, BUT RISK BASED PRICING, I THINK, WILL CHANGE PEOPLE’S BEHAVIOR AND THAT’S WHAT WE’RE TRYING TO CHANGE. WE’RE TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, DO SOMETHING SMARTER. DON’T PUT YOURSELF IN HARMS WAY, BUT IF YOU ARE IN HARM’S WAY, UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A COST TO THAT, UNDERSTAND THAT YOU COULD MAKE YOUR HOUSE AND ROOF STRONGER, IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE, BECAUSE WE WORRY ABOUT LIFE SAFETY ISSUES AS WELL AND AGAIN, NOT THAT YOU SHOULD STAY IF YOU’RE TOLD TO EVACUATE SOMEPLACE, YOU SHOULD GET OUT, BUT WE’VE DONE SOME TESTING AND YOU MIGHT HAVE SEEN THE WIND RESEARCH FACILITY AT THE IBHS, WE BUILT TWO FULL-SCALE HOMES IN THIS WIND RESEARCH FACILITY, BOTH BUILT TO ILLINOIS BUILDING CODES, SUBJECTED THEM TO 90, 95-MILE-PER-HOUR WINDS AND ONE THAT WAS BUILT TO CODE BUT WASN’T BUILT TO FORTIFIED STANDARDS BLEW DOWN. BUILT TO CODE. AND A 90, 95-MILE-PER-HOUR WIND, WE’RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A MASSIVE HURRICANE-FORCE WIND, SO THINK ABOUT A YOUNG FAMILY THAT’S LIVING IN THAT BRAND NEW HOME THAT THEY’VE JUST MOVED INTO, AND THAT HAPPENS, SO WE HAVE TO CHANGE, YOU KNOW, IT’S LAND USE PLANNING, WE HAVE TO CHANGE OUR BUILDING CODES, WE HAVE TO CHANGE OUR BUILDING PRACTICES. SO MUCH WE COULD DO AND NOW SOME OF THE RESEARCH THAT’S BEING SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE INSURANCE COMPANY, ARE TEACHING US HOW TO MAKE SOME OF THESE CHANGES.>>ARE WE SEEING MORE OF A NEGATIVE IMPACT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD, IS IT A CASE WHERE YOU KNOW, THE WESTERN EUROPE, NORTH AMERICA, WE’RE LIVING OUR LIFE STILLS AND OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD ARE SEEING THEIR WATER RISE, ARE WE AT THAT KIND OF POINT YET?>>THAT’S NOT MY AREA OF EXPERTISE.>>MY AREA.>>ALL RIGHT.>>I HAVE A GIRLFRIEND WHO IS A LAWYER FOR THE HIGH — ISLAND STATES AND SHE COMES TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES WITH A MASK AND SNORKEL ON, BECAUSE SHE WANTS TO SHOW PEOPLE THEY’RE GOING UNDER WATER. I WORKS WITH SMALL BUSINESSES, COLLEGES AND COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, TO INFUSE SUSTAINABILITY IN WHAT THEY DO, BUT WE GREW UP IN THIS STATE OF HISTORY CALLED THE FOSSIL FUEL. IF YOU THINK EVERYBODY HAS A TERRIBLE QUALITY OF LIFE BEFORE THEY WERE FOSSIL FUELS, I DON’T THINK SO. WHETHER WE WORK WITH THESE –>>BUT NOT FOR SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE.>>I KNOW. SO WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY ADDRESS THAT AND I THINK WE CAN.>>POPULATION.>>ABSOLUTELY. LET’S GIVE CONTRACEPTION TO EVERY WOMAN WHO WANTS IT AND EDUCATION. LIFTING THEM OUT OF POVERTY. IF YOU HAVEN’T READ PLAN D, A PLAN TO SAVE CIVILIZATION BY LESTER BROWN, YOU CAN DOWNLOAD IT AND IT SAYS AT THE END THINGS CAN YOU DO TO LIFT PEOPLE OUT OF THE POVERTY AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE’RE ADDRESSING THESE ISSUES OF CLIMATE CHANGE. IS IT ALL THE SOLUTIONS OR NOT? NO. BUT IS THERE A CONTINUUM OF REDUCING HUMAN SUFFERING AND IMPROVING QUALITY OF LIFE? YES. SO STOP FEELING DOOM AND GLOOM AND GO OUT THERE AND HELP BE PART OF THE SOLUTION. WE’LL TALK ABOUT THAT LATER.>>WE’LL TALK ABOUT THAT. I AM BY THE WAY NOT GOING TO THROW MY NOTES AWAY, BECAUSE — BUT CHARLES, LET’S TALK MORE ABOUT THE SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE, AND INDEED, PRIOR TO FOSSIL FUELS, THERE WAS A QUALITY OF LIFE, EARTH HAD NOTHING LIKE THE POPULATION IT HAS NOW.>>HALF A BILLION PEOPLE.>>HALF A BILLION PEOPLE, INCREDIBLE. SO WHAT IS IT THAT YOU WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE AS INDIVIDUALS DO? THE POPULATION IS ONLY GOING TO CONTINUE INCREASING, RIGHT? EVERY PROJECTION –>>I DON’T KNOW.>>WELL, LET’S ASSUME IT’S GOING TO CONTINUE TO INCREASE.>>THAT’S NOT WHAT THEY SAY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE STATISTICS, THERE WILL BE A LEVELING OFF OF POPULATION.>>INTERESTING.>>TANNED — AND THERE MAY BE –>>AND THERE COULD BE A LOT MORE LEVELING, EXCUSE ME FOR INTERRUPTING.>>I APPRECIATE.>>THERE COULD BE A LOT MORE IF WE COULD GET POPULATION BACK IN THE MAINSTREAM DISCUSSION, IN THE MEDIA, IN OUR CONGRESS, AND ALL AROUND THE WORLD, BECAUSE A 5% OR 10% OF THE PEOPLE WITH VERY STRONG VIEWS, NOT THAT I DON’T RESPECT EVERYBODY’S VIEWS, BUT 5% OR 10% OF THE PEOPLE FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS HAVE BEEN RUNNING THESE AGENDA ON POPULATION AN WE HAVEN’T BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT AND WE’VE BEEN BAILING OUT MORE PEOPLE WITH MORE OIL, THAT’S WHAT WE’VE BEEN DOING AND NOW WE CAN’T DO IT ANYMORE. AND YOU LOOK AROUND THE WORLD, YOU LOOK AT ALL THE PLACES THAT ARE HAVING HUGE POLITICAL ISSUES, SYRIA, EGYPT, VENEZUELA, ARGENTINA, AND WE CAN GO ON, ALL OF THESE COUNTRIES WERE ONCE MAJOR OIL PRODUCERS, HAVE REACHED THEIR OWN PEAK AND ARE DECLINING AND IT’S A 12 OR 15 YEARS AFTER THEIR PEAK, AROUND ALL OF A SUDDEN, THEY NOT ONLY DON’T HAVE THE BENEFITS OF SELLING THEIR OIL TO THE WORLD, WHICH WAS OFTEN HOW THE GOVERNMENT IS PAID FOR WHATEVER THEY DID, NOW THEY HAVE TO BUY IT, SO THAT EGYPT CAN’T EVEN — DOESN’T EVEN HAVE DIESEL TO RUN ITS PUMPS, TO PUMP THE NILE RIVER UP TO THE AGRICULTURE, TO RUN THEIR TRACTORS, BECAUSE IT’S TOO EXPENSIVE.>>SO THIS IS WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU SAID IF WE STOP BURNING FOSS STILL FUELS TOLD, IT’S BECAUSE SO MUCH OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE RELIES ON FOSSIL FUELS.>>WITH SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE OR EVEN WITH 300 MILLION, 300 PLUS MILLION IN THE UNITED STATES, AT OUR LEVEL OF AFFLUENCE. IT’S ALL DEPENDENT UPON OUR USE OF FOSSIL FUELS AND NOT –>>BUT WE’RE ALL PRETTY CLOSE TO ALL.>>LET ME GIVE YOU AN ALTERNATIVE. DR. MARK JACOBSON IS AT THE STANFORD ENERGY INSTITUTE AND HE A FEW YEARS AGO PUBLISHED A PAPER BASED ON RESEARCH, SAYING WE COULD MEET 100% OF OUR ENERGY. A LOT OF EXPERTS ARGUE, IS IT 70%, 80%, 100%, WE’RE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO THAT NOW. SO WE’RE SITTING WITH THE POTENTIALS OF INSTALLING SYSTEMS THAT WILL PAY FOR THEMSELVES, WHEN IS THE LAST TIME YOU BOUGHT SOMETHING THAT PAID FOR ITSELF? THAT WILL GIVE YOU RETURNS ON INVESTMENT, THAT ARE LESS VOLATILE, AND AS HEALTHY AS WHAT YOU SEE IN A STOCK MARKET, SO NOW WE HAVE ECONOMIC SECURITY FOR PEOPLE’S RETIREMENT. WHY IS IT THAT IF YOU HOOK UP TO YOUR UTILITY COMPANY, YOU’RE PAYING FOR A COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT, THAT HAS BEEN FINANCED OVER A VERY LONG TERM, AND YOU ONLY PAY SMALL PAYMENTS, BUT IF YOU WANT TO GO SOLAR, YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR THE WHOLE THING UP FRONT AND PAY FOR THE MAINTENANCE. THAT IS A — THAT IS A POLITICAL POLICY PROBLEM. SO YOU CAN CONTACT YOUR UTILITIES, CONTACT YOUR ELECT REPRESENTATIVES, THEY ARE TOO COMFORTABLE RIGHT NOW WITH THE STATUS QUO. SHINE A LIGHT ON THEM AND SAY, WE NEED TO CHANGE THIS, AND YOU’RE NOT MOVING FAST ENOUGH. WE HAVE A GROUP CALLED YOUTH ENERGY SOLUTION, THAT’S DOING EXACTLY THAT. BUT GO LOOK AT MARK JACOBSON’S WORK AT THE STANFORD ENERGY INSTITUTE, LOOK AT THE SOLAR INSTITUTE AT GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, LOOK AT THE ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, LOOK AT WHAT THE WORLD BANK IS DOING, REFUSING TO FINANCE MORE COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS AND YOU START TO SEE THE SOLUTIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE. ALSO, YOU GOT TO DO SOME WORK ON OVERCOMING YOUR GRIEF. HONOR YOUR GRIEF, BUT MOVE BEYOND IT, SO THE DOOM AND GLOOM DOESN’T KEEP YOU FROM MOVING FORWARD ON VIABLE SOLUTIONS.>>SO CARL, IN TERMS OF MOVING FORWARD, WHAT IS IT THAT WE ALL CAN DO, WE KNOW WE CAN MAKE — WE CAN CREATE GREATER DEMAND FOR SOLAR, FOR WIND POWER, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO BE DOING IN OUR OWN HOUSEHOLDS, IN OUR OWN COMMUNITIES.>>I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS, AND AS AN INSURANCE, REINSURANCE ORGANIZATION, WE HELP TRANSFER RISK, YOU KNOW, YOU PUT SOLAR PANELS UP ON YOUR ROOF, AND THERE’S A RISK ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. SO MY ORGANIZATION, WE’VE BEEN SUPPORTERS OF THAT RISK TRANSFER MECHANISM. AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE’VE MADE SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS IN DIFFERENT I WOULD SAY DIFFERENT ENERGY TYPES OF NOT NATURAL GAS OR COAL, BUT SOLAR AND WIND FORMS, BOTH FROM A RISK MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE, BUT ALSO INVESTMENTS. WE HAVE A MAJOR INVESTMENT AS WELL AS RISK MANAGEMENT TRANSFER MECHANISM FOR A SOLAR FORM CALLED DESERT TECH, IN NORTHERN AFRICA, SO YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THAT, WE COULD DO, AN COMING BACK TO THE INDIVIDUAL, YOU HAVE TO TAKE STEPS IN YOUR OWN FAMILY, WHETHER IT’S CONSERVATION, WHETHER IT’S CHANGES TO YOUR OWN INFRASTRUCTURE.>>ARE WE GOING TO SEE COMMUNITIES, YOU MENTIONED NORTHERN AFRICA, ARE WE GOING TO SEE PLACES IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO GROW, TO DEVELOP THEIR ECONOMIES, WITHOUT EVER HAVING THE SAME RELIANCE ON FOSSIL FUELS THAT WE HAVE HAD?>>I’M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT.>>THAT’S ALREADY OCCURRING. THERE ARE EXAMPLES IN CHINA, THERE ARE EXAMPLES IN AFRICA, INDIA, SO YOU HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK. SO, SO MANY OF US ARE ISOLATED IN THE UNITED STATES. WE ARE NOT AWARE OF THE SOLUTIONS OUT THERE AND YOU CAN EVEN USE GOOGLE AND FIND THOSE SOLUTIONS. YOU KNOW AUSTRALIA HAS A NATIONAL ENERGY EDUCATION PLAN. WE DON’T. IN THE UNITED STATES. I’M OFTEN A KEYNOTE SPEAKER INTERNATIONALLY, AT CONFERENCES, AND OFTENTIMES, THEY CAN’T HEAR WHAT’S GOING ON THAT’S SO GREAT IN THE UNITED STATES. BECAUSE THEY HEAR ALL THE THINGS WE AREN’T DOING, ALL OF THE THINGS WE’RE DOING THAT’S CONTINUING TO CREATE MORE POLLUTION AND ILLNESS. NOT ONLY IN THE ECONOMY, BUT IN PEOPLE’S HEALTH, HERE AND AROUND THE WORLD. AND UNTIL THEY ASK THE QUESTION OF WHAT ARE YOU DOING OVER THERE? DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU’RE DOING, AND I CAN SPEAK TO THAT? THAT THEN THEY CAN HEAR THE GOOD THINGS THAT WE’RE TRYING TO DO, BUT REALLY, THE MODELS ARE IN OTHER COUNTRIES AS WELL. TAKE A LOOK AT THE REACH LAWS. YOU KNOW, THE THOUSANDS OF CHEMICALS THAT WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTRY THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN TESTED FOR SAFETY? WELL, IN THE EUROPEAN UNION THEY TOOK BLOOD SAMPLES OF PEOPLE WHO ARE POLICYMAKERS AND AS SOON AS THEY SAW THAT STUFF WAS IN THEIR BLOOD, THEY PASSED A LAW TO TEST THOSE.>>WELL, ISN’T THAT INTERESTING? CHARLES, LET ME ASK YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE POLICY SIDE, AND YOU KNOW, CARL MENTIONED A LITTLE BIT, THAT THEY’VE ROLLED BACK ON THE FLOOD INSURANCE CHANGES. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT, YOU KNOW, IN ANY PRESIDENTIAL KIND OF ELECTION PERIOD, NO ONE WANTS TO ALIENATE FLORIDA, AND SO PERHAPS IT JUST GETS DOWN TO POLITICS MORE THAN POLICY, IN TERMS OF ANY OF THESE CHANGES. THE NOTION OF A CARBON TAX COMES UP FROM TIME TO TIME, IT SEEMS TO GO IN FITS AND STARTS. IS THERE SOMETHING TO THAT, IF WE DO INDEED NEED TO DECREASE OUR DEPENDENCY ON FOSSIL FUELS, EITHER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT OR BECAUSE THEY’RE COMPLETING, IS THERE A WAY THERE — COMPLETING, IS THERE A WAY THERE TO MOTIVATE DIFFERENT BEHAVIOR?>>FIRST OF ALL AS A SCIENTIST, I TRY NOT TO DO POLICY SO I HAVE TO ANSWER AS A CITIZEN.>>FAIR ENOUGH.>>AND CARBON — WHEN YOU DO THESE KINDS OF THINGS — OH, YOU’RE GOING TO KILL ME FOR THIS.>>I’M SITTING FURTHER, YOU’RE SAFE.>>YOU USUALLY HAVE TO DO A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND IF THE COST OF BURNING A TON IS $20, THEN I’VE GOT AT LEAST ONE STUDY, MAYBE IT’S SUSPECT, MAYBE NOT, THAT SAID THE BENEFIT IS 100 TIMES MORE. THAT WOULD NOT SURPRISE ME, BECAUSE ALL OF OUR WEALTH ESSENTIALLY COMES FROM BURNING FOSSIL FUEL. NOW, COULD WE DO THAT WITH OTHER FORMS OF ENERGY, WE ALL WOULD LIKE THAT? IT’S VERY, VERY TOUGH. BECAUSE THE ENERGY RETURN ON INVESTMENT, THAT’S MY THING, THE ENERGY YOU GET BACK FROM THE ENERGY YOU PUT IN IT IS GENERALLY, ESPECIALLY IF YOU INCLUDE DEALING WITH THE IRREGULARITIES OF AVAILABILITY OF SOLAR AND WIND AND SO FORTH, BUT ANYWAY, IT’S QUITE — AS THE WORLD EXISTS NOW, WHICH IS, I ACCEPT THAT THAT’S THE WAY IT IS, NOT THE WAY IT SHOULD BE, WE CERTAINLY GET A HUGELY GREATER RETURN FROM A TON THAN WE GET FROM BURNING IT. NOW SHOULD WE HAVE A TAX THAT WILL ENCOURAGE US TO GO IN A DIFFERENT WAY? I THINK I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. BUT LET’S MAKE SURE WE’RE FAIR IN DOING BENEFITS AS WELL AS COSTS, IN FOSSIL FUEL, MOST PEOPLE WOULD NOT LIKE TO GIVE UP THEIR AFFLUENCE. EVERY COUNTRY — I WORKED IN 30 DIFFERENT COUNTRIES, I NEVER MET ANYBODY WHO WANTED TO BE POOR.>>CARL, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE –>>AGAIN, I’LL PUT MY CITIZEN HAT ON, AND YOU KNOW, COMES BACK TO MY EXAMPLE OF RISK ADEQUATE PRICING ON THE INSURANCE SIDE. I THINK, YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY, IF IT WAS RISK ADEQUATE PRICING ON THE ENERGY SIDE, AND THERE’S A COST OF RISK, IT’S NOT — MIGHT NOT BE JUST THE COST OF THE PRODUCT ITSELF. YOU CHANGE BEHAVIOR. AND YOU KNOW, PEOPLE — WE MAKE DECISIONS ON INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. AND IF YOU FEEL THAT THAT’S COST EFFECTIVE FOR YOU TO CHANGE YOUR BEHAVIOR, I THINK THAT WILL CHANGE BEHAVIOR.>>DEBRA, LET ME ASK YOU AGAIN ABOUT THE IMPACT OF ALL OF THIS CHANGE THAT WE’RE SEEING. WHAT IS HAPPENING IN TERMS OF AGRICULTURE, IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE BASICS OF LIFE. WE TALK A LOT ABOUT OUR CARS AND THE ENERGY WE NEED FOR THIS AND THAT. BUT WHAT ABOUT SOME OF THE FUNDAMENTALS, ARE WE SEEING AN IMPACT ON HOW WE’RE ABLE TO EVEN PRODUCE FOOD?>>WE’RE SEEING IMPACTS, YES. WE ARE NOT REALIZING POTENTIALS YET. SO IF YOU WANT TO HEAR ABOUT SOLYNDRA OF THE POSITIVE POSSIBILITIES THAT WE HAVEN’T IMPLEMENTED YET, GO LOOK AT THE WORK AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY. ONE OF THE FIRST LAND GRANT COLLEGES IN THE COUNTRY WHO HAVE DONE THE ANALYSES ON CAN WE FEED THE WORD WITH SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE. FAN FAST — FANTASTIC. AGRICULTURE IS COMPLICATED, DEPENDING ON THE WATER AND SOIL THAT IN SOME PLACES YOU’LL BE ABLE TO PRODUCE MORE, OTHER PLACES LESS, BUT THAT WE CAN MEET OUR FOOD NEEDS, WITH THE FORM OF AGRICULTURE THAT DOES NOT DESTROY OUR ECOSYSTEMS OR OUR HEALTH. THE SECOND PLACE THAT I WOULD LOOK TO IS THE DAIRY INNOVATION COUNCIL. SO THE DAIRY INNOVATION COUNCIL WORKED WITH THE U.S. DAIRY FARMERS ASSOCIATION AND THEY WERE THE ONLY GROUP TO MAKE FIRM COMMITMENTS TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GASES FROM THE UNITED STATES AT THE COPENHAGEN CONFERENCE. YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THE DEMOCRATIC, THE REPUBLICAN, AND THE LIBERTARIAN ARGUMENTS FOR SUSTAINABILITY, ALL THREE EXIST AND TO STOP POLARIZING THESE GROUPS. WHEN I SAW THE TEA PARTY AND THE SIERRA CLUB COME TOGETHER IN GEORGIA TO ASK FOR MORE RENEWABLE ENERGY HANDS ENERGY EFFICIENCY, BECAUSE IT MADE ECONOMIC HEALTH, IT MADE PHYSICAL HEALTH SENSE, THEN I SAW THAT THINGS ARE MOVING IN A GOOD DIRECTION, BECAUSE THEN IT — THEN YOU’RE GOING TO START TO GET THE POLICY DONE. AS A SOCIAL SCIENTIST, WE ACTUALLY ANALYZE POLICY AND ITS IMPACTS. THOSE STUDIES HAVE BEEN DONE. THERE ARE LOTS OF EXAMPLES OF WHERE THOSE STUDIES HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN OTHER COUNTRIES IN SPECIFIC STATES IN THIS COUNTRY. GO TO AC-EEE, AMERICAN COUNCIL ON ENERGY EFFICIENT ECONOMY, THEY’RE WELL KNOWN FOR ANALYZING DIFFERENT STATES AND THE POLICIES. CAN YOU GO TO DSIREUSA.ORG AND YOU WILL GET A WHOLE DATABASE OF THE DIFFERENT INCENTIVES THAT EXIST. DO YOU KNOW THAT NO, SIR SILL FUELS GET $100 BILLION MORE A YEAR IN SUBSIDIES THAN RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES, AND THAT’S ACCORDING TO THE ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, WHICH IS NOT SOME KIND OF, YOU KNOW, ADVOCACY ORGANIZATION, IT’S A WELL-KNOWN, WELL RESPECTED ORGANIZATION, LOOK UP THE ENERGY LITERACY HANDBOOK, IT’S IN ONE OF THOSE PAGES.>>BUT THEY PROVIDE 100 TIMES MORE ENERGY IN RETURN. YOUR ENERGY BACK PER DOLLAR, TAX DOLLAR INVESTED IS NOT SO TERRIBLY DIFFERENT.>>SO YOU REALLY NEED TO READ THE STANFORD ENERGY INSTITUTE REPORT, BECAUSE IT’S NOT ABOUT — IT’S NOT ABOUT HOW MUCH DO WE SUBSIDIZE VERSUS HOW MUCH DO WE GET BACK? BECAUSE DON’T YOU HEAR THAT RENEWABLE ENERGIES ARE TOO EXPENSIVE SOMETIMES? EVEN THOUGH THE FACT IS IS THAT WIND IS COST EFFECTIVE AGAINST COAL. YOU HAVEN’T HEARD THAT VERY MUCH, HAVE YOU? THAT ENERGY EFFICIENCY IS MUCH MORE — HAVE YOU EVER FOUND A FOSSIL FUEL PLANT THAT PAID FOR ITSELF, WHERE THE FUEL IS FREE? NO. HAVE YOU FOUND AN ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM WHERE IT IS? YES. IS ENERGY EFFICIENCY FULLY IMPLEMENTED IN THIS COUNTRY? NOT EVEN CLOSE. STILL WITH A HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE. SO THIS THING THAT YOU HAVE TO BURN FOSSIL FUELS IN ORDER TO HAVE A HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE INSTEAD OF USING RENEWABLE ENERGIES IN STORAGE, I THINK WE NEED TO DIG IN TO THAT A LOT MORE.>>FOR THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE.>>I WANT TO GO WHERE YOU WANT TO GO.>>WE HAVE TO GO WHERE I GO. WE WON’T HAVE ANY MORE OF THIS STUFF, BUT WILL WE DESTROY OUR ECOSYSTEMS IN THE MEANTIME, SO THE FASTER WE GO, THE LESS HUMAN SUFFERING WILL BE CAUSED. AND WE HAVE THE SOLUTIONS SITTING THERE.>>AND CHARLES, IF WE WERE TO STOP, DO WE HAVE ANY SENSE OF HOW LONG THE DAMAGE WILL CONTINUE EVEN IF WE WERE TO STOP TODAY? IS THERE — WITH THE GREENHOUSE GAS, ETC., IS IT JUST OUT THERE SO MUCH THAT EVEN IF WE TRIED TO CLEAN THINGS UP, WE’RE STILL LOOKING AT YEARS OR DECADES OF DAMAGE TO COME?>>OH –>>YES.>>CENTURIES.>>CENTURIES. FROM WHAT WE’VE DONE TO DATE.>>GOD, YES. BUT YOU KNOW, IF YOU TAKE THE LONGER VIEW, ONCE THE LARGEST ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT THAT’S EVER HAPPENED TO THE EARTH? THE EVOLUTION OF GREEN PLANTS. BECAUSE THEY PUT THIS TOXIC STUFF, OXYGEN, INTO THE ATMOSPHERE, AND OVER THE LONG TIME, ORGANIZE ORGANISMS — ORGANISMS NOT ONLY ADAPTED TO IT, THEY USED IT. YOU AND I NEED OXYGEN. AT ONE TIME IT WAS 4 BILLION YEARS AGO, IT WAS VERY TOXIC. SO YES, WE’VE CHANGED THE WORLD A LOT, WE’VE CHANGED IT IN WAYS I DON’T LIKE, AND I’M SURE MOST OF US DON’T LIKE. BUT WILL IT GO AWAY IN DECADES OR CENTURIES IF HUMANS DISAPPEARED FROM THE PLANET? WELL, THE CHANGE AND IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT DAMAGE, I PROBABLY WOULD AGREE, BUT IN LONG HAUL, ORGANISMS WILL ADAPT TO THAT. AND SO IT’S REALLY WHAT DO HUMANS WANT. BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THE EARTH DOESN’T GIVE A DAMN WHAT WE DO.>>RIGHT. RIGHT.>>TALK ABOUT WE’RE GOING TO SAVE THE EARTH, THE EARTH IS GOING TO BE HERE. NOW WHETHER WE’RE HERE, THAT’S A DIFFERENT QUESTION.>>TOTALLY AGREED.>>THAT’S THE FUNDAMENTAL THING. THE EARTH IS BIGGER THAN HUMANITY. THE EARTH WILL CONTINUE, LIFE WILL CONTINUE, WE JUST MIGHT NOT BE PART OF IT. WE’RE GOING TO SHIFT HERE AND TAKE QUESTIONS FROM OUR AUDIENCE AT THE SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT. YES?>>HI. MY NAME IS MEL BROMBERG, I GOT THE FIRST HONOR OF ASKING THE QUESTION HERE. SO YOU’RE ALL TALKING ABOUT BEHAVIOR, AND CHANGING BEHAVIOR, AND WE’VE HAD 19 GLOBAL CONFERENCES ON CLIMATE CHANGE. WHERE THE COUNTRIES CAN’T DECIDE WHAT KIND OF ADAPTATIONS OR MITIGATIONS THEY WANT TO HAVE, AND SO I GUESS WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS, AND THEY GET ACCUSED OF POLITICAL WILL IS PART OF THE PROBLEM, THEY WON’T ACCEPT THIS. WHY CAN’T WE GET COUNTRIES TO SIGN ON TO COMMITMENTS WITH CLIMATE CHANGE WHEN WE’RE ALL TRYING TO CHANGE OUR BEHAVIORS INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY AND WHAT IS IT THAT’S STOPPING COUNTRIES, INCLUDING OUR UNITED STATES, WHERE THERE’S BEEN MANY HOPES FOR SIGNING ON TO A CLIMATE AGREEMENT, THAT WE CAN’T GET THIS DONE?>>DEBRA?>>SO I THINK IT’S INCUMBENT UPON EVERY CITIZEN IN THE UNITED STATES TO GO READ ABOUT THE KOCH BROTHERS. AND TO UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE, TO GET MISINFORMATION OUT OF OUR AIRWAVES, TO HAVE MYTH BUSTERS, AND WE DO HAVE THEM, YOU JUST HAVE TO GO TO THEM, AND READ ABOUT IT. THERE ARE VESTED INTERESTS THAT ARE WORKING VERY HARD. I’LL GIVE YOU A VERY SPECIFIC. WHEN I STARTED TEACHING RENEWABLE ENERGIES 30 YEARS AGO, NOT 20 YEARS AGO, I USED TO HAVE TO GO UP TO THE CAPITOL OF OUR STATE TO HAVE MEETINGS WHERE WE WORKED ON FOUGHT THANK YOU OF THE ELECTRICITY PLANT FOR THE STATE. I RAN THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. EVERY SINGLE TIME WE WENT TO A MEETING, THERE WERE UTILITY STAFF PEOPLE WHO WERE PAID TO GO. I ALWAYS HAD TO GO ON MY OWN TIME. IF WE HIT A WEEK WHERE THOSE OF US GOING ON HOUR OWN TIME COULDN’T ATTEND, THINGS GOT PASSED IN OUR ABSENCE. SO — AND IT’S NOT THAT THE UTILITY COMPANIES ARE BAD PEOPLE, THEY AREN’T BAD PEOPLE. WE HAVE REGULATED THEM TO MAKE MONEY OFF OF THE BURNING OF FOSSIL FUELS, SO THEY DO THAT AS WELL AS THEY CAN TO MAKE MONEY FOR THEIR SHAREHOLDERS. I DID SOMETHING THAT BILL Mc KIPEN MIGHT ACTUALLY DISAGREE WITH. I BOUGHT STOCK IN MY LOCAL UTILITIES, JUST A LITTLE BIT AND I SHOWED UP AT THE ANNUAL STOCKHOLDER MEETING AND I SAID, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A POND IN MY FRONT YARD AND IN MY POND AND IN EVERY INLAND LAKE IN THIS STATE, PEOPLE CAN’T EAT FISH OUT OF THAT LAKE. IF YOU’RE OF REPRODUCTIVE AGE MORE THAN ONCE A MONTH BECAUSE OF THE MERCURY, AND THAT’S COMING OUT OF COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS TO A LARGE EXTENT, AND WHY ARE YOU PUTTING MY MONEY AT RISK? AND THE C.E.O. OF THE UTILITY COMPANY CAME OVER AND SAID, DEBRA, I WANT TO DO A DEEPER DIVE INTO ENERGY EFFICIENCY, I WANT THAT TO BE MY LEGACY. I HAD THREE STUDENTS CALL A SENATOR, AND CHANGED HIS VOTE ON A SOLAR BANK BILL. IMAGINE IF THERE WAS A BANK WHERE ALL OF YOU COULD INVEST IN SOLAR ON YOUR HOME, AND YOU WOULD TAKE IT NOT OUT OF YOUR OWN PERSONAL CREDIT, BUT FROM THIS BANK AND PAY BACK OUT OF THE SAVINGS, YOUR CASH FLOW AHEAD EACH YEAR, THERE ARE WAYS FOR US TO GET THIS DONE. BUT WE’VE GOT TO GET INVOLVED IN THE POLICY PIECE. I WAY LAYED YOUR QUESTION.>>THANK YOU. TREK. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE’RE GOING TO TAKE ANOTHER QUESTION. YES.>>HOW ARE YOU PANEL?>>I’M SO GLAD TO HAVE THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE, BECAUSE YOU COME FROM DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. SO MY QUESTION IS THIS. HOW DO WE GET CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND EARTHQUAKE RISK, THE CATASTROPHE OF EARTHQUAKES AND ANOTHER EXAMPLE, WE HAVE FOLKS THAT ARE MOVING TO NEW MEXICO, ARIZONA, THE SUNBELT, THERE’S NO WATER THERE. HOW DO WE GET PERSONS TO UNDERSTAND THIS?>>CARL, I HEARD RISK AND CATASTROPHE.>>THE CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE ISSUE IS VERY INTERESTING. WE HAVEN’T HAD A MAJOR EARTHQUAKE IN CALIFORNIA IN QUITE A NUMBER OF YEARS. AND CURRENTLY, WE THINK ABOUT 15 TO 20% OF THE PEOPLE ACTUALLY BUY EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE. AND SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE LIVE ON SOME OF THE MAJOR EARTHQUAKE FAULTS, AND YOU HEAR THE SCIENCE TALKS ABOUT A VERY HIGH PROBABILITY OF HAVING A MAJOR EARTHQUAKE OVER THE NEXT 20 TO 25 YEARS. NORTHERN OR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. IT’S — IT’S THAT EDUCATION, IT’S THAT PERCEPTION OF RISK. IF PEOPLE THINK THEY HAVE A RISK, AND THEY UNDERSTAND IT, I THINK THEY THEN REACT TO TAKE CARE OF IT. AND THEN THERE’S THE COST OF THIS. WELL, WE HAVEN’T HAD ONE SINCE I’VE LIVED IN THIS HOUSE, SO YOU KNOW, PEOPLE BECOME COMPLACENT. THE SAME THING, WE’RE VERY MUCH CONCERNED, WE HAVEN’T HAD A MAJOR HURRICANE IN THE U.S., I THINK IN SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS AND FLORIDA DEFINITELY HASN’T HAD ONE. THEY THINK ONLY THE HURRICANES HAPPEN UP IN THE NORTHEAST. PEOPLE BECOME COMPLACENT. THEY DON’T — THEY’RE NOT TAKING — EITHER NOT BUYING THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF INSURANCE, WHICH IS SECONDARY, IT’S REALLY HOW DO YOU PROTECT YOUR FAMILY, HOW DO YOU PROTECT YOURSELF, AND HOW DO YOU PROTECT YOUR BUSINESSES AND PEOPLE HAVE TO MAKE BETTER DECISIONS.>>THERE’S ALSO A QUESTION IN THERE ABOUT WATER AND THE AVAILABILITY OF WATER AND WE’RE SEEING POPULATION GROWTH IN AREAS WHERE WATER IS VERY HARD TO COME BY AND VERY EXPENSIVE. WHAT ROLE, DEBRA LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT THAT, WHAT ROLE DOES ACCESS TO FRESH WATER PLAY AND IS THAT GOING TO GET MORE HAND MORE DIFFICULT?>>SO PEOPLE KILL EACH OTHER OVER WATER, RIGHT? I MEAN, THE WILD WILD WEST IS — WE GOT A RICH HISTORY OF PEOPLE KILLING EACH OTHER OVER WATNEY, AND I’M CONCERNED THAT IT’S GOING TO BE GOING BACK MORE TOWARDS IN THAT DIRECTION. IT FEEDS INTO THE FIRST QUESTION WE HAD TOO, WHICH IS, HOW DO WE DEVELOP THE KNOWLEDGE, AND THE INTERPERSONAL SKILLS, SO THAT WE’RE AWARE THAT THERE’S A — THERE ARE PROBLEMS, AND WATER AND CLIMATE CHANGE, AND WE HAVE THE BEHAVIORAL CHANGES, BOTH AT THE INDIVIDUAL ELLEN DEGENERES AND AT THE SYSTEM — INDIVIDUAL LEVEL AND THE SYSTEMIC LEVEL TO CREATE THE KIND OF CIVILIZATION WE WANT. I WOULD ARGUE WE NEED TO GET RID OF ALGEBRA.>>ALGEBRA.>>>>ALGEBRA.>>I’M ALL FOR THAT.>>MOST PEOPLE ARE. WHAT IT DOES IS ALGEBRA — I HAPPEN TO LOVE ALGEBRA, I’M A MATH PERSON, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE GET TURNED OFF TO MATH THE WAY WE TEACH MATH. INSTEAD, WE COULD TEACH A MATH THAT APPLIES TO THE ISSUES OF THE DAY. SO THAT PEOPLE WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THEY’RE AT RISK, IN THEY LIVE IN CERTAIN AREAS, THEY WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THEIR ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. AND WE ALSO HAVE, I RUN TWO NATIONAL NETWORKS OF HIGHER ED ASSOCIATIONS THAT ARE WORKING ON SUSTAINABILITY, AND WE SAY, THE ASSIGNMENTS SHOULD BE AROUND REAL WORLD PROBLEM SOLVING. NONE OF THIS WRITE A PAPER AND GET GRADED ON IT AND GET IT HANDED BACK OR MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS. ENGAGE IN THE COMPLEX PROBLEMS WE HAVE TODAY AND BE PART OF THE SOLUTIONS LEARN HOW TO BE EFFECTIVE CHANGE AGENTS WHILE YOU’RE IN SCHOOL, LEARN FINANCIAL LITERACY, INSTEAD OF ALGEBRA, LEARN THE STATISTICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE. LEARN STATISTICS. WHEN’S THE LAST TIME YOU USED THE QUADADRIC EQUATION? BUT INSTEAD WE COULD USE REAL WORLD MATH AND PROBLEM SOLVING SO YOU COME OUT EMPOWERED AND HAVE THE SKILLS AND SELF-CONCEPT TO MAKE THE DIFFERENCES THAT WE NEED.>>LAND TO DO THE ACTUAL COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS THAT WE ALL NEED TO DO AND CHARLES, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT. YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING.>>JUST BRIEFLY. SINCE I’M THE ONLY ONE HERE REPRESENTING DEPLETION AND I THINK DEPLETION, PARDON ME ME, WILL TRUMP MOST OTHER THINGS, ESPECIALLY WITH RESPECT TO HIGH QUALITY FOSSIL FUELS, BUT A BIG ONE IS DEPLETION OF OUR AQUIFERS IN COLORADO, TEXAS, AND SO FORTH. AS WE USE UP THE FOSSIL WATERS, FOSSIL MEANS OLD, AS WE USE UP THE OLD WATER, THAT’S WAY DOWN IN THE GROUND, THEN WE HAVE TO USE MORE AND MORE ENERGY TO PUMP IT A HIGHER DISTANCE TO GET IT UP TO THOSE IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE, UNTIL SOME POINT WE CAN’T AFFORD TO DO THAT, AND SO YEAH, WHY THE HELL ARE PEOPLE MOVING DOWN TO –>>BECAUSE THEY CAN AND SO WE DON’T HAVE THE REGULATIONS, WE DON’T HAVE THE VISION. WE ALSO HAVE TO HAVE A HUMAN CONVERSATION ABOUT — HUMAN CONVERSATION ABOUT IS WATER A HUMAN RIGHT.>>IS WATER A HUMAN RIGHT.>>HOW CAN IT NOT BE A HUMAN RIGHT. ARE YOU ACTUALLY GOING TO SAY — I’M GOING TO FILM MY SWIMMING POOL AND YOU’RE GOING TO DIE OF DROUGHT. INDIVIDUAL DEATHS, ARE YOU WILLING TO WASTEWATER BECAUSE YOU THINK THAT MAKES YOU COOLER AS A PERSON WHO HAS WEALTH? I MEAN, REALLY. I LIVE IN DETROIT. WE LIVE — I LIVE IN OAKLAND COUNTY, IT IS THE THIRD WEALTHIEST COUNTY IN THE COUNTRY, FILLED WITH ALL THESE PEOPLE WITH CONSPICUOUS CONSUMPTION, RIGHT ON THE BORDER WITH DETROIT. ALL THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY POOR AND THROUGH OUR COURSES, THEY BOTH LEARNED THAT STUFF DOESN’T MAKE THEM HAPPIER, AND WHAT DOES MAKE THEM HAPPIER AND THEN YOU START TO SEE THE BUILDING OF COMMUNITY. YOU START TO SEE THE DEEPER FULFILLMENT OF LIFE POSSIBILITIES THROUGH WORK, AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER, AS A FAMILY MEMBER, AS A CITIZEN. THAT’S WHERE SUSTAINABLE ABUNDANCE CAN COME FROM.>>VERY GOOD. WE’RE GOING TO TAKE ANOTHER QUESTION. YES?>>HI. GEORGE STONE, MILWAUKEE AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE. CHARLIE SAID FOSSIL MEANS OLD, HERE I AM. NOW, STUFF, I COULDN’T AGREE MORE. GEORGE CARLIN TAKE HIS ADVICE, GET RID OF IT. I HAVE A COMMENT AND A QUESTION. JAMES HANSON LIKED TO SAY WITH REGARD TO THE INEVITABLE TRANSITION AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS TO RENEWABLE ENERGY AND ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES, HE WOULD SAY WE HAVE TO DO THIS EVENTUALLY ANYWAY, SO WHY NOT DO IT NOW BEFORE WE TOTALLY TRASH THE PLANET. AND SO THAT’S MY COMMENT. MY QUESTION IS, ASIDE FROM THE DIRECT SUBSIDIES, FOSSIL FUELS BENEFIT FROM A LOT OF INDIRECT SUBSIDYIES. CARL IS TALKING ABOUT RISK, COST OF RISK, AND FACTORING THAT IN. WHAT ABOUT THE COST OF AWFUL THE EXTRAANALTIS. DEBRA TALKS ABOUT THE MERCURY IN THE FISH. YOU CAN’T EAT THE BIG FISH FROM LAKE MICHIGAN BECAUSE OF ALL THE COAL THEY BURN. WHAT ABOUT THE PLANETARY PROBLEM OF GLOBAL WARMING, LET’S CALL IT CLIMATE CHANGE, TEMPERATURE RISING DUE TO COMBUSTION OF FOSSIL FUELS, CAUSING ALL KINDS OF CATASTROPHES. TAKE TYPHOON HYAN, THE FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES, WHICH ARE INDIRECTLY CAUSING ALL THIS DAMAGE, THEY DON’T HAVE TO PAY A DIME. INSTEAD, WE’RE PAYING THEM. THAT CREATES AN UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD, AND IT MAKES THE TRANSITION, THE INEVITABLE TRANSFORMATIVIZATION WAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS ALL THAT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT. WHAT DO YOU SAY?>>CHARLES, I’M GOING TO THROW THAT ONE TO YOU FIRST.>>YOU WANT ME TO DEFEND FOSSIL FUELS. YOU KNOW, THEY’RE HORRIBLE. BUT THE ALTERNATIVES AREN’T THAT GREAT EITHER IF YOU LOOK INTO IT. ALL OF OUR WIND TURBINES HAVE 600 TONS OF NEODEMION IN THEM. I SHOWED A PICTURE AT THIS CONFERENCE OF WHEN OUR NEODEMION IS COMING FROM AND IT’S TRASHING A WHOLE BIG AREA OF CHINA SO WE CAN HAVE THE CLEAN WIND TURBINES IN THE UNITED STATES, AND THERE’S FOSSIL — I MEAN, SOLAR TECHNOLOGY DOESN’T COME FREE EITHER AND THEY’RE VERY ENERGY INTENSE DIFFICULT AND FOSSIL FUEL INTENSE DIFFICULT TO GET UP AND — INTENSIVE AND FOSSIL FUEL INTENSIVE. I JUST DID A STUDY WITH THE PRINCIPAL ENGINEER OF SPAIN, IT’S IN A BOOK FROM SPRINGER’S, SPAIN’S PB REVOLUTION AND WE LOOKED AT THE DATA FROM SPAIN AND SPAIN IS THE SUNNIEST PLACE IN EUROPE CERTAINLY, AND WE LOOKED AT WHAT THE ENERGY RETURN ON INVESTMENT IS. REMEMBER THAT’S MY THING. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DO THAT JUST LOOKING AT THE COLLECTORS, BUT WE LOOKED AT EVERYTHING YOU NEEDED TO DO TO MAKE A SOLAR SYSTEM WORK, AND WE FOUND THAT OVER 25 YEARS, YOU GOT BACK ONLY 2.4, OUR BEST ESTIMATE, CALORIES, WE USED JEWELS, BUT CALORIES PER CALORIE INVESTED. THAT’S A DAM LOW ENERGY RETURN ON INVESTMENT AND SOMEBODY SAYS, HOW COME THESE COUNTRIES AREN’T TURNING SO SOLAR. WELL, ONE OF THE REASONS IS, THEY’RE EXPENSIVE AND ONE OF THE REASONS THEY’RE EXPENSIVE IS THAT THE ENERGY RETURN ON INVESTMENT AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND AS WE DO IT NOW, IS NOT VERY GOOD, AND EVERYBODY IN THE SOLAR COMMITTEE COMES AND BEATS ME ON THE HEAD HAND THEN TWO MORE STUDIES, ONE BY GRAM PALMER IN AUSTRALIA AND ONE FROM GERMANY COME UP WITH THE SAME NUMBERS WE DO FOR VERY DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. SO I’M SORRY, WE ALL LIKE VOLTOVOTAICS, BUT FROM THE ENERGY VIEW, THEY’RE NOT GREAT. THEY’RE POSITIVE BUT NOT GREAT. IF YOU CAN GET 80 TO 1 FROM COAL AND 2.4-1 FROM SOLAR, IT’S GOING TO BE REFLECTED IN THE FINANCIAL DECISIONS THAT MAKING — PEOPLE ARE MAKING. NOW DO WE WANT TO TIP THE FIELD, PUT IN TAXES AND SO FORTH, AS A CITIZEN, I WOULD SUPPORT IT TO HAVE MORE SOLAR, BUT I DEAL WITH REALITY. AND THAT’S REALITY.>>RIGHT. SO I WOULD ARGUE THAT ENERGY INTO ENERGY OUT IS THE WRONG METRIC. IF THE ENERGY IN, TO ENERGY OUT ARE MOTOR RENEWABLE ENERGIES, VERSUS THE ENERGY IN, TO ENERGY OUT IS POLLUTING DISEASE-CAUSING ECOSYSTEM DESTROYING ENERGY, THAT YOU HAVE TO EXPAND THE KIND OF METRICS YOU’RE USING.>>SO IS THE SOLAR AND IF YOU TOOK ALL OF THE OUTPUT FROM THE SOLAR AND YOU GREW IT SO THAT IT MADE 50% OF OUR ENERGY OUTPUT, YOU WOULDN’T GET ANY OUTPUT, FOR 25 TO 50 YEARS.>>THAT’S YOUR TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE, RIGHT, DEBRA, IT’S NOT JUST THE INPUT AND THE OUTPUT, BUT THERE ARE OTHER IMPACTS?>>IT’S NOT ONLY THAT, IT RECOVERS THE ENERGY THAT IT PUTS IN AND PRODUCES MORE. I’VE NEVER SEEN A FOSSIL FUEL THAT DOES THAT. AT LEAST THE FOSSIL FUELS WHEN THEY’RE CAUSING DISEASE AND THEY’RE CAUSING ECOSYSTEM DESTRUCTION, IF YOU ADD IN THOSE COSTS, WHICH WE ALL HAVE TO PAY.>>WE WANT TO TRY TO SQUEEZE IN –>>YOU REALLY HAVE TO — YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT’S A GREAT PLACE TO GET INVOLVED WITH POLICY AS WELL. DO YOU KNOW THAT COUNTRIES NEXT YEAR HAVE TO REPORT WHETHER THEIR MINERALS OR CONFLICT MINERALS OR NOT. LET’S DO A LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS ON ALL OF THIS, AND BY THE WAY, I AGREE WITH WHAT GEORGE STONE SAID AND AT THE SAME TIME THE FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES MAKING THE HIGHEST CORPORATE PROFITS OF CORPORATE PROFITS IN OUR COUNTRY. SO THE CASH FLOW CHANGES ARE POSSIBLE TO REDUCE HUMAN SUFFERING, AND I THINK YOU WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. THE CASH FLOW CHANGES ARE POSSIBLE, THROUGH FINANCING AND POLICY CHANGES, TO REDUCE HUMAN SUFFERING, AND HAVE CLEANER AND CLEANER ENERGY. DOESN’T HAVE TO BE 100% GREEN, IT HAS TO BE LESS DAMAGING THAN WHAT WE DO NOW.>>I WOULD LIKE — JUST LET ME SAY ONE THING.>>WE’LL DO ONE MORE QUESTION.>>WE HAVE SOME DISAGREEMENTS, BUT I REALLY RESPECT YOUR ARGUMENTS. I HOPE YOU RESPECT AT LEAST SOME OF MINE, AND I THINK YOU AND I COULD SIT DOWN AND DO A HELL OF A GOOD ANALYSIS, BUT NOBODY PAYS TO DO THAT.>>LET’S DO ONE LAST QUESTION, QUICKLY.>>HI, MY NAME IS THERESA, I’M A GRADUATE STUDENT AT MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY, WE’VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE INTERACTION BETWEEN VARIOUS SYSTEMS, BETWEEN ECOSYSTEMS AND SOCIAL SYSTEMS, AND ABOUT VAIR VARIOUS CONSUMPTION LEVELS AND I WAS INTERESTED IN ADDITION TO CONSUMPTION LEVELS, HOW OUR CONSUMPTION MIGHT BE INFORMED BY UNEQUAL IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES?>>DEBRA.>>SO THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE HAS BEEN TRYING TO GET US TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT AT EVERY INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE THAT WE HAVE. THE AMOUNT OF SUFFERING CAUSED BY FLOODING AND NONINDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD MAKE ALL OF US CRY. YOU KNOW, SUSTAINABILITY AT ITS CORE, IS ABOUT LOVING PEOPLE BEYOND YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS. AND IF YOU LOVE PEOPLE BEYOND YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS, AND YOU KNOW, WE’RE OF QUITE YOUNG SPECIES, SO I THINK SOMEWHERE IN THE TODDLER OR ADOLESCENT STAGE AND DON’T THINK THAT OUR HUMAN NATURE IS WE BAILIFF SO FAR AS THE HUMAN NATURE WE HAVE TO HAVE IN THE FUTURE. LET’S BUILD OUR EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE. LET’S BUILD OUR ABILITY TO DO TEAMWORK AND DEMOCRATIC CONVERSATIONS THAT CAN CREATE WIN-WIN SOLUTIONS THAT TAKE IN TO ACCOUNT THOSE IMPACTS, BECAUSE WHEN WE GO TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES NOW, THEY’RE CALLING US TO THE TABLE ABOUT HOW IT’S BEEN OUR USE OF FOSSIL FUELS THAT IS CAUSING THEIR HUMAN SUFFERING, AND THEY’RE SHOWING US SOME MODELS ABOUT HOW TO USE RENEWABLE ENERGIES, JUMP OVER AND AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS AND STILL HAVE A HIGH QUALITY OF LIFESTYLE.>>THANK YOU.>>CARL, WE’LL WRAP THINGS UP. WE’LL START WITH YOU, AND WE’LL JUST COME BACK AROUND AND ASK EACH OF YOU VERY BRIEFLY, REALLY IN JUST ABOUT 20 SECONDS IF YOU CAN, GIVEN THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS MATTER, ASSUMING THE DESIRE TO IMPROVE THINGS, WHAT IS SOMETHING THAT’S IMPERATIVE FOR EACH OF US AS INDIVIDUALS TO DO?>>WE’VE SAT HERE AND I’VE GOTTEN MORE HAND MORE DEPRESSED AS WE’VE GONE THROUGH THIS. BUT IT COMES BACK TO — I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS ON A LARGE SCALE, BUT THEN, IT’S COMING BACK AND CHANGING, FIRST YOUR OWN BEHAVIOR, AND THEN STARTING TO DRIVE SOCIETIAL BEHAVIOR. WE CAN ALWAYS TAKE SMALL STEPS AND I’M HOPING THAT WE’RE STILL TODDLERS AND NOT THE RETIREMENT AGE, BUT I THINK WE COULD ALL — IT STARTS WITH OURSELVES.>>THANK YOU. DEBRA?>>SO I WOULD SAY WE CAN TAKE LARGE STEPS NOT SMALL STEPS. LOOK AT WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST FEW DECADES, WITH CIVIL RIGHTS, WITH HUMAN RIGHTS, WITH SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS WE HAVE SOLVED, AND I’D SAY WE NEED TO MAKE CHANGE ON TWO LEVELS. INDIVIDUAL LEVEL, THAT’S GREAT, GO TO ENERGY STAR AND READ ABOUT THAT, GO TO MOM’S RISING, ALL YOU MOMS AND DADS AND PEOPLE WHO CARE ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE, AND GET INFORMATION THERE. BUT ALSO, WORK ON MAKING SYSTEMIC CHANGE, LOOK AT THE LEVERAGE POINTS TO CHANGE POLICY. GET INVOLVED, SHINE THE LIGHT ON THE UTILITY COMPANIES, ON YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONS ON YOUR STATE LEGISLATURES. DON’T BE AFRAID TO TALK TO THEM E. AND TELL THEM YOU WANT A CLEANER, GREENER ENERGY FUTURE.>>THANK YOU. CHARLES, WHAT’S SOMETHING WE ALL MUST DO?>>LIVE THERE WHERE YOU WORK, DON’T BUY STUFF YOU HAVE — YOU DON’T NEED, GET RID OF ADVERTISE, WHICH MAKES PEOPLE BUY STUFF THAT THEY DON’T NEED, AND GET RID OF THE IDIOTS ON THE TALK SHOWS HAND SO FORTH, WHO DELIBERATELY GIVE OUT LIES. THIS IS TOO IMPORTANT AN ISSUE NOT TO HAVE — IT’S FINE TO HAVE DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW, AND WE HAVE TO HAVE DEBATES TO DO THAT WHEN WE CAN’T DO IT BY EVERYBODY TURNING TO WHATEVER IS THEIR FAVORITE POLITICAL CHANNEL. WE HAVE TO HAVE THEM TOGETHER, AND WE’VE GOT TO DEPOLITICIZE A LOT OF THIS, AND AS A SCIENTIST, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, THERE ARE FACTS OUT THERE, YOU NEED MORE THAN FACTS, BUT YOU CAN’T WORK WITH LIES INSTEAD OF FACTS.>>VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. AND WATCH MORE PUBLIC TELEVISION.>>AND WATCH MORE PUBLIC TELEVISION.>>THIS HAS BEEN A GREAT DISCUSSION. WILL YOU ALL JOIN ME IN THANKING HOUR GUESTS. THANK YOU HALL VERY MUCH. — THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.>>THANK YOU.>>THANKS, CARL.>>THAT WAS GREAT.>>WE THANK OUR GUESTS, WE ALSO WANTS TO BE SURE TO THANK THE TEAM HERE AT THE 11th ANNUAL SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT FOR HOSTING US TODAY AND SPECIAL THANKS TO THE SUMMIT’S CO-CHAIR, DR. GEORGE STONE. [APPLAUSE]>>NEXT WEEK, “FOURTH STREET FORUM” RETURNS TO HISTORIC TURNER HALL FOR PART TWO OF THIS DISCUSSION, PROFITING FROM SUSTAINABILITY. MOVING FORWARD A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY IS NEW TERRITORY. NOW, WISCONSIN BUSINESSES SEEK PROFITABILITY AS THEY TRANSFORM TO MEET THE CHALLENGES OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND SUSTAINABILITY. “FOURTH STREET FORUM” GETS DOWN TO EARTH WITH GUESTS WHO TAKE PROFITS AND SUSTAINABILITY SERIOUSLY. FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE SHOW, TO SIGN UP FOR WEEKLY EMAIL NOTIFICATIONS, OR TO WATCH ANY OF OUR PREVIOUS PROGRAMS, GO TO THE “4TH STREET FORUM” PAGE AT WWW.MPTV.ORG. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US AT THE SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT. THANK YOU FOR BEING PART OF THIS CONVERSATION, LET’S KEEP TALKING. [APPLAUSE]