Climate Change movement has failed | Assaad Razzouk | TEDxUniversityofEdinburgh
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ม.ค. 2025
- In his captivating talk Assaad, a clean energy entrepreneur, evaluates climate change as a movement, and suggests why risks associated with climate change needs to be incorporated into asset pricing.
Assaad is the Chief Executive of a global sustainable resource developer and operator, Sindicatum Sustainable Resources and a leading international voice on climate change policy. Believing the current climate change movement to have failed, he has become a leading campaigner for decarbonisation and international responsibility for the environment, proposing new ways to tackle the critical issues we face.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at ted.com/tedx
A very prescient talk, and one that foreshadowed the Paris Accord's complete lack of teeth. The hypocrisy of flying academics around the world for one day conferences to talk about some hope for incremental reduction in emissions in some process is painful at times.
That said, finally the hedge funds are leaving fossil-fuels. It took another 5 years, but it is happening.
“Flights...twice a year...and we have produced thousands and thousands of...”. Tons of carbon? “...papers.” Oh.
5 minutes in and he hasn't said anything of value.
He summarises mainstream Climate Change action as wasteful bureaucracy that doesn't achieve anything.
The Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age - and the CO2 level was 4400ppm. This must be one of those "inconvenient truths..."
Joe Burks do some research. Bet ur a trump supporter too🙄
@@hanjo7166 Research done. And no I am not a Trump supporter any more than I was an Obama supporter. Your head will do better in the sunshine...
@@ElPasoJoe1 Our children will get what we deserve. That much you can bank on.
The Last Word on Climate Change
If fossil fuels are fossils, safe to say that there was a time in the past when they were living things, animals and plants. In returning these fossils to the surface and consuming them or re-configuring them into other materials, are we not just re-purposing and in fact liberating/returning them back their original location?
If you believe that these fossils originated from planet Earth, then returning them to the surface can only return the climate to the state it was at when these fossils were living things. Saying otherwise would be like having a man reach around to his own collar and lift himself off the ground, it’s an impossibility.
Now if these fossils had an extraterrestrial origin then returning them to the surface could effect the climate to something new the Earth has never witnessed before.
BTW, it doesn’t matter what you believe, Science is not Theology.
In 1970, experts informed us, in no uncertain terms, of our self-inflicted demise;
“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against
problems facing mankind.” Harvard biologist George Wald.
“At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, itʼs only a matter of time before light will be
filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” Ecologist Kenneth
Watt.
“In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution...by
1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching the earth by half.”
Life Magazine.
“Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man
have already been born...by 1975 some experts feel that food shortages will have
escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable
proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision
will not occur until the decade of the 1980ʼs.” Paul Erlich.
“Air pollution..is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few
years alone.” Paul Erlich.
“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a
rate that there wonʼt be any more crude oil. Youʼll drive up to the pump and say, ʻFill ʻer
up, buddy,ʼ and heʼll say, ʻI am very sorry, there isnʼt any.” Ecologist Kenneth Watt.
“One theory assumes that the earthʼs cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust,
fumes and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and
jet planes. Screened from the sunʼs heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall
and freeze, and a new ice age will be born.” Newsweek Magazine.
“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue,
the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but
eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us
in an ice age.” Ecologist Kenneth Watt.
"
Itʼs tough to make predictions, especially about the future,” Yogi Berra.
In May 2018 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued this statement;
“The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term
prediction of future climate states is not possible.
”
Obviously extinction was not lurking several-many years ahead back then. Itʼs not now
either. Whatʼs ahead is loss of freedom if we continue to deny truth, instead bowing to
falsified data. Climate change has always existed. Mankind didnʼt invent it and canʼt
control it. The experts were wrong, but theyʼre still crying “wolf, wolf.” Climate alarmists are still telling the same lies 50 years later, that's insanity!
A question for all you climate alarmists, were the above claims truth or disinformation?
Itʼs time to ignore the experts.
All those airplane flights probably didn't help the environment either.
How much co2 was generated by people going to Paris. This guy has admitted he has a huge carbon footprin, he does a lot of co2 generating transporting. The Paris climate change convention has a huge carbon footprint.
0:50 that's his motivation..... he has vested interests in green energy. it's the 1950's and thalidomide all over again. SELL SELL SELL!!!! no matter the costs.
This is the anthropocene.
Climate control movement > climate change movement
Because we have to face up to the responsibility of newly found power
"risks associated with climate change needs to be incorporated into asset pricing".huuummm....too soon to do this, I think. Uncertainty is still too high. Mores basic knowledge is needed before well defining associated risk.
Recent study shows what the London School of Economics and IMF found to be the actual cost of fossil fuels. I don't think they also factored in the human suffering.
www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/18/fossil-fuel-companies-getting-10m-a-minute-in-subsidies-says-imf#comment-52371308
+William Freimuth What about the horrible suffering of Africans and people from poor countries that are kept in poverty with inefficient clean energy? Horrible costs associated with clean energy, but who cares? We're not in a third world country.
How to say NOTHING in 15 minutes....
He talked science and sense, not the usual up-beat 'cover all rooftops in solar' and recycle.
I wonder why Assad does not accept my Connection Request in LinkedIn. I hope he will read this comment here since I can not send him a message there. Open discussion and exchange of ideas is what is scientifically recommended.
Carbon has to go or we will all go.
+Bearded Bard False, carbon has led to great technological innovations and frankly, we would not enjoy the convenient, modern life and extended lifespans without carbon based energy. Think stone age.
You are making claims about history, Steve. Bearded Brad is talking about the future. Two different things.
Then you go. Because even he said we are at a peak in 400,000 years. Thats a blink of an eye in geological timelines. Aka, carbon ain't going anywhere kid. And we are no where near the worst point. Cretaceous period had little to no ice at the poles for millions if year's. Last I checked there was life. And it was doing well.
This guy has a financial reason to support climate change.
This talk has not aged well. Things are better. Slow but better. Now the majority in the US believe the scientists.
Search: doable drawdown solutions
Climate change especially the small amount we create will make the planet slightly warmer which overall is better for us in land usefullness also will make are crops at least double productiveness while giving more crop lengths also will double. The small amount of sea level rise will only effect some coastline properties that are not very productive anyways
Focus on clamate change!
10 minutes and 36 seconds of my life that I won’t get back. 11 minutes if you include this message
It's not really insanity, it's stupidity, greed, and laziness.
Citizens Climate Lobby has a laser focus, pursued relentlessly. That organization has a focused, coherent , and consistent policy to price carbon and redistribute the $ generated
A novel idea would be to present the facts. CO2 is good for plant life which stabilizes temperatures, beanheads.
Jungle Jargon you can fill a library with how much shit you do not know.
I think the fascination ends after two or three of these facts.
environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/
97% of scientist agree that global warning is happening and is caused by humans.
To take an uneducated, uninformed opinion of Jungle Jargon would be insane. Do you not understand that there is a misinformation campaign to create doubt spearheaded by the heartland institute, subsidised by the coal industry and other polluters who would lose money if the issue was attacked more aggressively? Things like carbon taxes would hurt their bottom line.
And you Jungle Jargon get sucked in because your a conspiracy addict. Seriously JJ, do some reading and research this stuff more carefully for everybody's sake.
Peter H. That is a logical fallacy you just made. Try to say something that has substance.
Peter H. Facts are facts. CO2 is good for vegetation. Real world observation shows CO2 does not cause global warming so you are the one with the conspiracy theory. Heating your home causes more global warming.