Science Vs - Climate Crisis: We're Solving It?!

Episode Date: October 21, 2024

The climate is a mess. It's hot. There's fires, floods, hurricanes — and we may have even crossed some rather scary climate tipping points. But there is hope. So today, we’re answering your questions about solving the climate crisis. We find out how you can help in the fight against climate change, if carbon offsets are a scam, whether renewables really work and what exciting new technologies could help save the planet. Our guests are Dr. Sven Teske at the University of Technology, Sydney, and Wei Sue, head of strategy at Monash University's Climateworks Center.  A video version of this episode is available on Spotify. Find our transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsClimateAMA  In this episode, we cover: (00:00) Is it the End of the World? (04:21) The biggest emitters (05:24) What can you do to help?  (07:07) Does recycling fight climate change? (08:42) Should you stop eating meat?  (09:58) Buying an Electric Vehicle (14:54) Can you really make a difference? (17:05) Carbon Offsets  (21:14) Renewables: How good are they? (26:31) Nuclear Power: The Silver Bullet? (31:21) Giant Shades in Space!  (34:14) Hope?  This episode was produced by Wendy Zukerman and Meryl Horn with help from Joel Werner, Rose Rimler, Ekedi Fausther-Keeys, and Michelle Dang. We’re edited by Blythe Terrell. Fact checking by Erica Akiko Howard. Video editing by T Cruz. Mix and sound design by Sam Bair. Music written by Bumi Hidaka.  A huge thank you to Nick Johnson, Stupid Old Studios and Lily Kim. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hi, I'm Wendy Zuckerman and you're listening to Science Versus today on the show, how do we solve the climate crisis? Can we do it? A couple of weeks ago, we had an episode about climate change tipping points that ended a little sadly. The climate's not doing well. It's hot. there's been fires, there's been floods and we may have even crossed some rather scary climate tipping points. But I did tell you

that there was hope and that's what this episode is hopefully about. We asked for your questions, what you want to know when it comes to solving the climate crisis we heard from hundreds of people all around the globe. Generally these questions fit into two big batches. One, what can me as a little individual person do for the climate if anything? And two, what exciting new technologies could help get us out of this mess? So to answer these questions and more, we have our first guest, Dr. Sven Teske. He is the research director at the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology Sydney.

And Sven studies how countries and industries can do the seemingly impossible, which is to get off fossil fuels. He has written detailed analysis for more than 50 countries for how they can get to net zero. These are countries like the US, China, India, France, and Bangladesh. So welcome to the show, Sven. Thanks for inviting me. Our second guest is Wei Su.

She is the head of strategy at Monash University's Climate Works Center in Melbourne. Climate Works is a climate non-profit that gives advice to governments and companies about how to reduce their emissions, focusing on Australia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific. And Wei is a self-described nerd at heart. So welcome to the family. Thanks for having me. Question number one actually comes from the Science Versus team. So when you both think about climate change right now, which song best represents where we're at?

I'll give you some options. It's The End of the World As We Know It by R.E.M., Cruel Summer by Taylor Swift, We Can Work It Out by The Beatles, Sunshine, Lollipops and Rainbows, famously by Leslie Gore. What do you think? Where are we at with the climate right now? We can work it out. We can work it out.

I actually agree. Yeah, actually. Okay. Why do you say that? There's actually some really simple steps if you distill it down to what can be done. And these steps are one of... Oh, let's, we'll have to save them for after the break. Don't do a spoiler alert there.

Now, Sven, as someone who's been in this, in the climate space for a long time, decades now, what's been the most frustrating thing for you? Um, well, I was at COP1, a youth representative. Um, so I'm almost 60 now. So introduce people who don't know what COP, what's COP? Well, I was at COP1 a youth representative. So I'm almost 60 now. So you introduce people who don't know what's COP? COP1, the climate negotiations, they started in Berlin in 1995. And you were a little Greta Thunberg, were you?

Yeah, no, I was about, yeah, it was my late 20s. So the first 10 years of those climate negotiations, we were discussing, do we actually have climate change? The next 10 years was, ah yeah, we might have it, but it's not us. And then the last 10 is, okay, we have climate change and it is us, what can we do? And we continue to go through the same loops

of conversation. It's like an endless spiral, never actually continues. So we really need to move on and focus on what works and we actually know what works. So for you, maybe the song of this moment is Lizzo, it's about damn time. Groundhog Day. Groundhog Day. Groundhog Day. All right.

Well, with all of that and a bit of hope and a bit and a bit of frustration, which sounds right for the time that we're in, after the break, we're use to help make it easier. Like Shopify. They're a commerce platform focused on one thing and one thing only. Commerce. They challenge the status quo so that your business can do bigger and better. And you can focus on building what's next. For enterprise brands that believe there's a better way, there's Shopify. Learn more at Shopify.com slash enterprise.

All lowercase. Y'all afraid of ghosts? How about ghost peppers? It's the moment you've been waiting for. The ghost pepper sandwich is back at Popeyes. A buttermilk battered chicken breast served on a brioche bun with barrel cured pickles. And here's the best part.

It's topped with a sauce made from ghost peppers and ancho chilies. If that doesn't send a chill of anticipation down your spine, nothing will. Get your ghost pepper sandwich today at Popeyes before it ghosts you for another year. Take it from Popeyes. Welcome back.

All right, let's jump in and find out how we can solve the climate crisis. To kick us off, Sven, let's just set the scene. So Sarah Rose in a Bubble on Instagram wants to know, who creates the biggest carbon footprint? If you look at the historical footprint, it's the US. So historical is, how far are we going back here? Between like 1800 when it started, so the industrialization started until 2019. So that's sort of the carbon emissions during that period. There were 450 gigatons of CO2 from the US and about 280 from China.

So the US is ahead by a mile. Yeah. If we look at the emissions now, China is by far the largest emitter. One third of all emissions globally energy related come from China while having 18% of the population. So our next question is from Sassy Bitch Maddie on Instagram. And the question is, I hear all the time that our individual choices won't have enough of an impact on climate change because of big corporations and government emissions. Is there anything we should be doing in our day to day that will actually make a meaningful difference in the face of climate

change? Wei, what do you think? Definitely. Even if we just start within our own homes, for example, if you think about where we use energy and where we create emissions, just going about our day-to-day lives. So when we cook, when we heat, when we cool, when we drive our cars to get from one place to another, all of that uses energy and therefore produces emissions. And there are some simple steps that anyone today can take, which will actually have a significant impact,

and I'll talk through that a little bit. But if we start with just thinking about energy efficiency, or put another way, minimizing wasteage. Having, on a very basic level, having a window open while your heater is on. Yeah, or like just putting on a jumper before you think about putting the heater on that requires energy. And does any of that actually make a difference if you add it up? If everyone in America put on a jumper instead of putting on their heating, would it matter?

But everything needs to happen because if everyone thinks that it's not going to matter, then it's not going to happen. So that's one way to see it. But the energy efficiency side of things also has the additional benefit of actually reducing people's energy bills. And then there's other things that you can do as well around shifting away from relying on fossil fuels. So, for example, rooftop solar PVs now, like people walk down a street and they see lots of it on their home,

on other people's homes or on your own homes. Surveys find that a lot of people think that recycling is one of the best things that they can do to reduce their carbon footprint. So when it comes to recycling, at moustache ballerina on Instagram wants to know how exactly does it help? How much of an impact does it make on climate change? And I actually thought recycling doesn't do anything for climate change. So I'm very interested in this.

So recycling in itself, in principle, will actually have an impact on emissions because it avoids the extraction of raw materials. So for example, plastics being... Everything produced plastic, you produce fabrics from large extent out of oil. Petroleum-based. By recycling plastics, it means that you avoid going upstream in the process to actually have to, for lack of a better term, dig. So digging things out of ground requires energy, which has an emissions impact. So there is that element in terms of avoiding that energy and emissions that goes into the

production of raw materials. However, it can vary the amount of like sort of the emissions benefit from recycling different materials can vary. The good news on steel but also aluminium is you can recycle it endlessly. You can't recycle plastic endlessly because it won't work, but steel and aluminium you can recycle actually almost endlessly. But people are recycling yoghurt tubs, milk bottles. Is the plastic from that making any difference?

Everything makes a difference, but I mean... Oh, that's the answer for no. So if both of you could snap your fingers and everyone on the planet would give up one thing for climate, what would it be? Options could include giving up meat, never flying in a plane again, never driving a gas car again, not having children. I think riding a bicycle or walking and then downsize your car. I mean, you don't really need a very, very, very large car to move from A to B. I think a smaller car, electric vehicle is also can do the same job.

Mm. Okay. Okay. Are those the things? Eating meat is not... Going vegan is not on either of your lists. Both of you big burger fans? I think it's very important. I mean, for me, to be perfectly honest, I'm an engineer and focus on what I know. So methane that comes out from cows, essentially, these emissions, they are quite large and

actually quite difficult to address as well, for a couple of reasons. They are very fragmented. What do you mean by fragmented? Like each it comes out of each cow. Exactly. So in terms of needing to capture it, it's almost an impossible task logistically. Right. You put like a muzzle on every cow because it's from their burps. Exactly.

Pivot on to EVs, electric vehicles. We had a lot of questions about these. So Jake on TikTok wants to know, are electric vehicles making any impact at all? Does the energy they use from charging and being built still come from fossil fuels? Wait, you want to take this one. So regardless of the amount of fossil fuels that are in the electricity grid, it is actually still better to drive an electric vehicle than it is to drive a petrol vehicle. And the simplest reason there is because petrol cars are simply very inefficient in converting

petrol into the energy that is required to move that chunk of metal along the road. And electric motors are actually a lot more efficient at doing that. Hmm. An average combustion engine has an efficiency of about 50%, usually less. Yeah. So you lose at least half of the petrol you put in your tank. Wow. And then it's sort of, if you then calculate the amount of energy you actually get on the wheels, sort of when the rubber hits the road, you are down to like 20%. So wow, so much wasted energy in your average car, in your average gas guzzling car.

Yes. Wow. And EVs, how efficient are they? Much more efficient. Electric engines have an efficiency of about 90%, 90-95%. The extreme growth of electric vehicles in China, first time ever, led to a reduction of the oil demand. So we actually see that electric vehicles cut into oil demand.

Okay, it's tiny, but it starts. It can grow. Choosing to buy an electric vehicle, for example, when you're replacing your petrol car, that sends a strong signal to car makers around the world that people want electric vehicles, and then they will go off and invest in more technologies that are around electric vehicles, or the infrastructure to charge electric vehicles. So while individually, maybe my decision to buy one car is not going to make a difference, but collectively it can make a difference. And so with electric vehicles though, there has been a lot of concern around how we're getting the materials used to make the batteries.

We're trying to get these materials like cobalt and lithium. And people say that the way that we do it now is really harmful for the planet. We got a couple of questions about this. Probably because there's been a lot of headlines like this one, why surging sales of large electric vehicles raise environmental red flags. Is this actually a problem that we need to fix? I think, yes, we need to fix it.

But I have to say, we also have options to avoid some materials. So for example, cobalt is technically not needed for batteries anymore. So we can actually use battery, we can build batteries that don't need cobalt. We can phase out cobalt from batteries and we should. Lithium is an element which is really, really almost everywhere. So we're not running out of lithium. Because they're called rare earth minerals. They really need a brand update, don't they?

No, I mean, lithium is not a rare earth. There are other rare earth metals. And also, if you look at rare earth, what is it used for? Electronics to a large extent, mobile phones, and every single electric motor or generator needs that. No matter if it's a wind turbine, a gas, a coal power plant, they all have the same metals in there. Unfortunately, we focus right now the debate about wind turbines

using magnets with rare earth, but the gas power plant next door uses exactly the same. Georgie Tunny And half the electronic stuff in your home is also using these minerals? Anna Schade The laptops and the clothes that we use. Georgie Tunny Not my laptop, come on now. Also using these minerals, interesting. So why the big blow up around renewables? I mean, when I started sort of promoting renewables for solutions, it was very expensive.

There was like, it was $10 per kilowatt hour. And then it went- How many years ago was this? That was 30 years ago. We are now at four cents or three cents. So the argument against renewables is not the price anymore because it's the cheapest form of electricity generation. You can't do it cheaper than solar and wind. Full stop. There's no other technology. It's really cheap. So the only argument, if you are an incumbent company,

it's like a coal or gas power plant, is to argue, to find arguments against them. And the metal is won. Interesting. Just broadly speaking, how do you feel about this idea that the individual, that we can make a change? Little old me can make a change. So while a lot of emissions are controlled and

influenced by governments or big corporates, consumers or voters have a huge influence over the actions and decisions that corporates and governments make. I mean, it's not a yes or no. Of course, you need to change, but maybe I'm too long around to see that it doesn't work that way. We won't solve the climate crisis with voluntary measures. We need policy, and we need specific policy to implement specific technologies and to face out others. Without that, we won't be able to do it. So it's nice if we can do something in our own household, but it will be only a very, very, very small fraction of what we actually need to do.

But, you know, Don, I mean, I would say the biggest difference, first and foremost, is vote for politicians who actually implement the policy we need to change our economic system, to decarbonise our energy system. I feel like where you've both headed is the biggest things we can do is if you are buying a new car, go EV. If you can do without a car, even better. And then voting, really, and I guess keeping your home as energy efficient as possible. It is important to actually also change your diet and eat less meat, maybe not totally give it up, but really eat less. That's, I think, the first good step. Remember, during the Paris Agreement,

the world agreed to net zero. You can't get to zero if there's still bits left. Yes. We're going to have a quick break. And after that, we'll find out if carbon offsets are the biggest climate scams. This episode is brought to you by Shopify. are the biggest climate scams. so that your business can do bigger and better, and you can focus on building what's next. For enterprise brands that believe there's a better way, there's Shopify.

Learn more at shopify.com slash enterprise, all lowercase. Welcome back. Let's jump back in. This next one is a question that I've been thinking about a lot. It comes from music2742 on TikTok. And they ask, when you look at carbon offsets, are these systems actually working? So Sven, did you pay to offset your flight today?

It's a standard for our university to do that. Is it a waste of money? Should they have done it? It definitely serves the feel good factor. Feel good, feel good. Well, let's go back a hot minute. When you do tick that box to say that you will pay an extra $8 to offset your flight,

what is actually going on? How does carbon offsetting work? I would say, let's put it first in a positive way, the idea was actually quite good. Saying, okay, we have some processes where we can't reduce the emission right now. We have another process, this old ancient machine to get sort of CO2 out of the air, it's called a tree. And we plant them and then it sort of levels out. In theory, that's a that's a good idea. So what what it's doing basically is your your flight is going to emit

just as many emissions as it always would. But instead, what they're going to do is plant trees somewhere else to that somehow they've calculated how much tree, how much that tree is going to remove carbon from the atmosphere. And they're like, that's about right. That's probably the first problem, because in the tree when you plant it will not get take any CO2 out of the air. Right, when you put a seed in, it's not going to do anything. It needs to get leaves first, right? 10, 15 years. So after 10, 15 years, you start to actually see something.

And it needs to survive for that 10, 15 years. Let's hope it will not burn down like in the last forest fires or bush fires in Australia. Yes, because there have been several now instances, right, of areas of huge swathes of forest that have been set aside for carbon offsetting and now they burnt. And then when they burn, they then emit carbon into the atmosphere. Yeah, I mean, they can, they emit the same amount of CO2 they actually captured before,

obviously. There are other forms of offsets, for example, you invest in solar equipment in an African country where they would usually maybe burn kerosene for light. But fundamentally, offsetting is about the fact that I can't reduce the emissions by virtue of taking a plane or a flight, but I'm paying someone else to do it elsewhere. Now that can be anywhere. The challenge there is, one, it's remote. It happens elsewhere. So there is what we call a measurement and verification problem.

How am I? You don't know it's actually happening. Exactly. Exactly. Right. If it's a tree planting project, what trees are they planting? How long have the trees been there? Are the trees going to survive?

And how much carbon is the tree going to sequester? All of those are questions that the payer, in this case myself, don't have readily accessible answers to. Yes. And so, I mean, offsetting, carbon offsetting has also been blamed for allowing this huge industry of greenwashing to emerge. So for example, this huge gas company, a fossil fuel, has a goal to be net zero by 2050. And they've said that a big way they're going to do that is through offsets.

How can a fossil fuel company be net zero? That doesn't work. Sorry? That doesn't work. Sorry, that doesn't work. On a global scale, if you sell gas, you will have emissions. And with whom do you want to trade? With Mars? So you can't. So you have to actually reduce the fuel emissions, fossil fuel emissions entirely.

Okay. So then let's move to renewables. Canary Exploder on Instagram asks, how good are solar and wind these days? Can we really use it to power a bunch of our energy needs? Wei? Solar and wind is really good these days. It is already one of the cheapest forms of new electricity generation. If anyone wants to think about building a new power station,

solar and wind is the cheapest form of technology today. Wow! So how did that happen? How did that happen? One of the reasons is because of the sheer amount of solar and wind that has been built over the years. So I'm a nerd at heart, as I said, and about 10, 12 years ago, when we first started modeling solar PV as a technology, it was more expensive than things like some energy efficiency options, and it was more expensive than carbon farming, which is essentially tree planting. But today, it is one of the cheapest forms of technology in Australia, but also in other parts of the world, I'm sure. And so we are already seeing solar and wind making a huge impact in terms of reducing

the emissions that come from powering our homes, some in cases our cars, our industries and our businesses. When I started my engineering degree, the market, the global market for solar was about 60 megawatts. Now we build 1200 megawatts a day. And that is economies of scale. Solar panels are modular. So you can actually bring down the cost of producing a solar panel significantly the more you make them. And you can get huge economies of scale by having a factory line that's basically churning

out solar panels and get much more efficient and much better and much smarter at doing it when you do thousands, millions. And the difference between that and a gas or a coal power plant is that they are still going to be tied to needing to pay for the gas or pay for the coal or needing to extract. Pay to mine it out of the ground. Mine it out of the ground. You can't make that cheaper up to a point.

Well yes, you can't get that down to zero. Whereas with a solar plant, once you've got the panels in place, most of your cost is upfront and it costs very little to continue maintaining it. You don't put any fuel into running a solar plant. Fossil fuels, I mean people are constantly complaining about the gas prices. Why are fossil fuels not getting cheaper? Because it's not a technology, it's a source. And that's why fossil fuel companies will have a problem and had a problem in the past to actually go to renewables because that

is absolutely not their business. They are digging out resources out of the ground. A solar and wind company is a technology company. They produce technologies, and it's a total different business concept. So in 2023, renewables provided 30% of global electricity for the first time, according to the think tank AMBA. Also, calculations suggest that this year in Europe, they just hit this big milestone where wind and solar has overtaken fossil fuels for the first time. So in the first half of this year, wind and solar power generated more electricity than

fossil fuels in Europe. It's amazing. It's just one more stat. In China, clean power made up 35% of China's electricity mix in 2023, all according to EMBA. China is a big reason solar PV costs have fallen so much. If we keep taking on renewables at the rate that we are with solar and wind, can we hit net zero? So unfortunately, with the emissions that we talked about earlier, so sort of methane

emissions from cows or process emissions from cement production being two examples, there are others, renewables unfortunately is not going to be the silver bullet that will address those type of emissions. Let's put it this way, it's the silver bullet for the energy part of the problem. Yeah. And so I feel like part of the climate denial, the journey of climate denialism, let's say, started with, as Sven, you told us at the beginning of the show, started with this, this isn't happening, it's happening, but it's not our problem. Oh no, it's our problem. And it's definitely happening.

Oh, but renewables, they, you renewables, when the sun's not shining, when the wind isn't blowing, what are we gonna use? Storage? Mm-hmm. What are we gonna use? Tell me. Batteries. Batteries, and this is working, this is working.

We're doing it, we're doing it. I would say, the electricity will be dominated by solar and wind in the next 10, 15 years. I mean, most countries will go north of 60%. So that is relatively clear. This is so exciting. It's happening. It's happening. Just because it's cheaper and it's actually quicker to build.

So a coal power plant takes you six, seven, ten years to build. Solar and wind takes you, depending on how long you wait for the construction permit, but once you have that, it's a few months. Yeah. So yesterday alone, a record high was set in Australia, where solar generated 64% of electricity. Wow. So renewables, really exciting, really exciting. They're going to do a lot of work here in helping us solve the climate crisis. But this does take us to our next question, which comes from Ian in Iowa.

It seems like nuclear power might be the silver bullet. It seems like the big thing that's holding it back is the fear of a nuclear meltdown and disposing of the nuclear reactants and whatever's leftover when you're done. Am I right about that assumption that if we just switched over to nuclear, we would just kind of fix everything or am I missing something bigger here? He's missing something bigger there. Okay. All right. Let's start. Tell us about where tell us about where you grew up, because this is very relevant. Yeah, relevant. Little Sven, what happened to you?

My little Sven was about 18 years old and just moved out with his friend, Dieter, and we lived together and Chernobyl exploded. Right. Chernobyl was only 1700 kilometers from my hometown and we had nuclear fallout in my hometown. We were not allowed to eat food, vegetables from our garden for two years. So we had to wash our clothes before we entered the apartment. So we basically experienced firsthand what it means when a nuclear reactor actually blows up. At that time I was an offset printer. I was a tradie. I decided to study engineering, to study renewable

engineering, to actually provide a solution. So then we fast forward. For listeners who... I just wanted to add some stats. Nuclear right now, like one kilowatt capacity to build is about six to 10 times more expensive than wind and solar. A nuclear reactor construction on average, we have about 450 nuclear reactors globally, the construction takes on average 12 years.

There is one reactor in the US which took 30 years. So it is extremely expensive, it is very slow, then you have nuclear waste. Germany paid about 40 billion euros, which is about 50 billion US dollars, to build the fleet. Now they pay exactly the same amount of money to decommission the fleet. And it cost 1.1 billion euro a year for generations to come to store the nuclear waste next to the former nuclear power plant. We have no concept where to put it. And my son, who's just started working as an engineer, and his kids have to pay for grandpa and grandmother who actually had electricity from those power plants. So it is extremely expensive.

It's too slow, too expensive. We don't need it. Right. And so if I could be the nuclear lobbyist for the day, just to play. So it is clean energy. It's not emitting carbon dioxide at least. The length of time it takes to build it, I have heard a lot of that is getting permits, which is true of renewables as well, but is the actual building process, even if the government was like, let's do it, I'm going to... I think China is a good example.

China has no problems giving permits. Right. Five to six years is sort of the absolute minimum. Usually it's seven to 10 years. Right. So Wei, do you agree nuclear not part of the solution? Nuclear is definitely not the silver bullet. Firstly, it only addresses energy emissions, if at all, and then I'll get to that, but then...

And Jack, we can't put little nuclear on our cows. No, we can't. I don't even know how that would work. So it still does not address non-energy emissions, as we talked about. But the way I see it, when faced with these options where you have nuclear or renewable energy technologies, so you still have to put uranium in as a form of fuel for the life of the nuclear plant. Not the same case in renewable energy. You don't need to pay for the sun and wind. And not to mention the really huge hidden cost, if you like, which is the environmental impact and the social impact that nuclear plants can have,

all of which does not come with wind and solar technologies. So, forget it. Forget it. Okay, okay. So, forget nuclear. Our last batch of questions, really, a lot of people were curious about exciting, big projects that can help get us out of this mess.

So here is Liz. There are days when I feel like all the little incremental changes are just not going to work. So my question is, do any of the big dramatic options, like the giant shade that someone wanted to put in space. Do any of those actually seem like they would work? Are any of those something that I should be getting behind and supporting? Because I'm just, I'm honestly not sure. Wei, is a giant shade going to save us?

I can't say yes or no at the moment, but there is a role for some of these new, emerging, almost science fiction technologies. And I am generally quite a bit excited about new technologies because I do believe that, you know, solar and wind was in like, was that big shade that people are talking about today. 30 years ago, people didn't understand that, how can we reliably get electricity at scale from this panel that absorbs solar radiation? Now we can.

So who am I to say that this big shade isn't gonna be the thing that's gonna come and save us? However, we don't know that yet today. Okay, Sven, what do you think? Cause there's, I guess, other ideas out there. We're going to suck carbon out of the sky. There's direct air capture. We've got geoengineering projects, giant shades.

How do you feel about all these balls in the air? I'm a professor at a technical university. I'm agnostic. I'm interested in technology. But also I've seen a lot of proposals, which the first and foremost the job is to delay to implement a solution and just to keep going sort of business as usual. That's right. That's right. If I read one more headline about what about this? What

about that? When this is my concern is that it gives people this idea that some magic scientific technology will come and save the day, and we can just keep living our lives on fossil fuels until that magic moment comes. But my question is, do we really want to live on fossil fuel or do we want to have energy? I mean, I don't want to have fossil fuels. I want to have a climatized home. I want to drive. I want to do stuff. But at the end of the day, as a consumer, isn't it totally irrelevant if it's from electricity or is it burning oil? It doesn't matter as long as it works. So to cap us off, how hopeful are you both feeling that we will solve this? That we will stay below some temperature that means we're not completely screwed? I totally believe that.

I have to say, I totally believe that because I think first, we now have no other option. Secondly, all the solutions actually grow exponentially right now. Solar and wind grows exponentially. And I think that's the real hopeful thing. All the solutions currently grow exponentially, and that's really good. Right. We can do this. We are also seeing the most momentum in the public and private sector

than we have ever seen in the past. You're saying this because you're going into those offices, meeting those suits. Yep. We've got a commitment from basically every country in this world to get to net zero. The time matters how quickly we can get there, but there is a commitment. Most governments in the world have policies in place to reach these commitments to different extents, but they are talking about this. Net zero is now a household term where emissions wasn't even a thing 20 years ago. So we

are seeing the most momentum than we have ever seen in the past in history, really, around understanding and acknowledging climate change and then taking action and also making some significant real investments both by the public and private sector in terms of reducing emissions. So, because a lot of our listeners, there was a lot of depression, a lot of hopelessness, but we don't need to feel like that.

No. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you both, Span and Wei.