I ended up joining the Hollywood Climate Summit virtually but really enjoyed the dairy debate. I've been encouraging sustainability conferences to organize more of these mock debates around contentious or at least interesting issues. It's way more engaging for audiences than the typical panel about how we all need to "innovate" and "collaborate" and "keep fighting." No disrespect to the panelists, but most of you are only speaking to people inside your bubble.
Really like the article. Good people are moving forward as I know they would. The scientific evidence and just looking at what’s happening worldwide proves we are in trouble. Realize not only climate science is being attacked, but all science. I am a chemist and feel personally attacked almost every day by this administration. It was the same the first 4 years and the second 4 years are worse. All the funding that is still being withheld held or cut from universities and the National Labs and the cuts in federal scientific staff will set back research and cost lives. The government is slowly dismantling science so people don’t understand or know. The ozone layer is getting worse because of new unregulated chemicals. Yes it’s ok to have fun, but science is under attack. I really do not think people understand how serious this is.
I share Sammy's disappointment that energy and transportation were left out of the proceedings. I don't think these "climate activists" understand the real problem if they're not going after those who buy gas cars. That is such a huge part of the problem and it's not being addressed at all. When over 41,000 new gas cars are being purchased EVERY SINGLE DAY in the US, you'd think actual environmentalists would want to lower that number. But instead of creating entertainment that dissuades progressives from buying gas cars, they play around with milk mustaches. Color me unimpressed.
And I think both you and Sammy missed the point - we aren't going to solve the climate crisis if we don't address animal agriculture as well, which massively contributes to GHG emissions, methane (animal ag is the largest contributor), land and water use, biodiversity loss, food security, labor systems, and public health crises. It's not a question of one or the other; we need many people working on many solutions. And shifting our food systems is just as important as shifting to renewable energy and clean transportation. Project Drawdown lists Diet Change as a leading climate solution: https://drawdown.org/food-and-climate
I appreciate your position and your passion, but want to point out that while diet is a big driver of climate change, primarily due to beef production, that is a function of overpopulation combined with the need for high protein diets to support the numbers. More importantly, it is very hard to convince a single person to stop eating meat, and you have to do that with billions of people. On the other hand, it's extremely easy to force 100% of all drivers to drive EVs. We do that by killing the internal combustion industry.
China, Europe, and CA, plus ten other states, all will stop the sale of new ICE after 2035, a mere nine years from now. BYD, and some other Chinese car companies have locked up South America, Africa, Asia, and a good chunk of the Euro market, and all they are selling are EVs. Currently, over 60% of new car sales in China are EVs. In Europe, the rates start at 30% and go all the way to 100% in Norway, the first European country to stop selling new ICE. Here in the US, we're at a paltry 10% EV sales mostly because Americans are not well informed, are selfish to a fault, and many of them are just plain mean. When you consider some 20,000 Dems buy new gas cars every day, that's gotta tell you something.
But after 2035, when Joe MAGA walks into his Lubbock Texas Ford dealer for a new pickup, the only ones available are electric. This is how we force everyone to drive EVs, we eliminate their choice to buy a polluting car. That's powerful leverage we should use.
Hey Paul, you know I appreciate your passion and respect your advocacy. I hope you'll keep showing up here in the comments. But I don't think you're going to convince too many folks that it's "extremely easy" to end gas car sales while also insisting that dietary change is impossible. I'm not sure I can convince you of anything whatsoever, but please try to see that for most climate advocates, those two positions are incongruous.
Also, Juli (I think that's you?), I hope it didn't come off in my piece that I was dismissing advocacy around animal agriculture. I just thought there needed to more focus on clean energy and clean transportation solutions relative to plant-based foods, especially if one of the goals was to broaden the coalition. It's all important!
"But I don't think you're going to convince too many folks that it's "extremely easy" to end gas car sales while also insisting that dietary change is impossible."
Ending gas car sales is going to happen, absolutely, because the ICE industry needs scale to remain profitable. Losing all of the Chinese and European markets and 40% of the American market does not leave enough sales for ICE to remain profitable.
The only question is how quickly this can happen, and that's why we're calling for the Adam McKays of the world to create media specifically aimed at dissuading progressives from buying gas burning cars. They are a very low hanging, easy to pick group, but to date, no one has tried to stop them from buying 20,000 new ICE cars every day.
As for dietary change, I'm all for it, but you know as well as I do that you cannot easily get someone to give up meat and dairy. I'm not saying it's impossible, but compared to how easy it will be to 100% eliminate all ICE vehicles from being built, it's a much heavier lift.
I'm not trying to argue your logic, I'm trying to get you to think about your allies and your strategy. If you dismiss food and animal agriculture as a relatively meaningless waste of time and yell at everyone who has has different ideas than you, you are not going to get very far convincing Hollywood to make movies.
I will be eating meat and drinking milk until I die. But I have not added children to our vastly over-populated world. If we could get back below 4 billion we stand a decent chance of seeing much improved climate conditions.
First of all, I haven't dismissed food and animal agriculture at all. I recognize the impact it has on climate. All I'm pointing out is that it's going to be much easier to eliminate 100% of ICE than it will be to eliminate 100% of animal agriculture. You have to agree that's the case, right?
And please tell me where I've yelled at anyone. I write measured responses these days, mostly providing information few Americans seem to have. If information triggers people into thinking they are being yelled at, I'm not sure what to do about that.
I ended up joining the Hollywood Climate Summit virtually but really enjoyed the dairy debate. I've been encouraging sustainability conferences to organize more of these mock debates around contentious or at least interesting issues. It's way more engaging for audiences than the typical panel about how we all need to "innovate" and "collaborate" and "keep fighting." No disrespect to the panelists, but most of you are only speaking to people inside your bubble.
I agree, the mock trial forum is awesome! Glad you caught it. Would love to see more lively formats like this.
Let’s bring that energy to SEJ — not that it’s among the “dry and exhausting” conferences!
Definitely! SEJ is one of the better ones, but nothing quite like the energy I've experienced at HCS.
Really like the article. Good people are moving forward as I know they would. The scientific evidence and just looking at what’s happening worldwide proves we are in trouble. Realize not only climate science is being attacked, but all science. I am a chemist and feel personally attacked almost every day by this administration. It was the same the first 4 years and the second 4 years are worse. All the funding that is still being withheld held or cut from universities and the National Labs and the cuts in federal scientific staff will set back research and cost lives. The government is slowly dismantling science so people don’t understand or know. The ozone layer is getting worse because of new unregulated chemicals. Yes it’s ok to have fun, but science is under attack. I really do not think people understand how serious this is.
"and the all night girls and their escapades out on the D train"
I share Sammy's disappointment that energy and transportation were left out of the proceedings. I don't think these "climate activists" understand the real problem if they're not going after those who buy gas cars. That is such a huge part of the problem and it's not being addressed at all. When over 41,000 new gas cars are being purchased EVERY SINGLE DAY in the US, you'd think actual environmentalists would want to lower that number. But instead of creating entertainment that dissuades progressives from buying gas cars, they play around with milk mustaches. Color me unimpressed.
Hi Paul - you must have missed the mock trial from last year: The People vs. Big Oil with Bill McKibben. Here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/live/4Y40hZoxwlc?si=WCEMLtwj-OUFzU51.
And I think both you and Sammy missed the point - we aren't going to solve the climate crisis if we don't address animal agriculture as well, which massively contributes to GHG emissions, methane (animal ag is the largest contributor), land and water use, biodiversity loss, food security, labor systems, and public health crises. It's not a question of one or the other; we need many people working on many solutions. And shifting our food systems is just as important as shifting to renewable energy and clean transportation. Project Drawdown lists Diet Change as a leading climate solution: https://drawdown.org/food-and-climate
I appreciate your position and your passion, but want to point out that while diet is a big driver of climate change, primarily due to beef production, that is a function of overpopulation combined with the need for high protein diets to support the numbers. More importantly, it is very hard to convince a single person to stop eating meat, and you have to do that with billions of people. On the other hand, it's extremely easy to force 100% of all drivers to drive EVs. We do that by killing the internal combustion industry.
China, Europe, and CA, plus ten other states, all will stop the sale of new ICE after 2035, a mere nine years from now. BYD, and some other Chinese car companies have locked up South America, Africa, Asia, and a good chunk of the Euro market, and all they are selling are EVs. Currently, over 60% of new car sales in China are EVs. In Europe, the rates start at 30% and go all the way to 100% in Norway, the first European country to stop selling new ICE. Here in the US, we're at a paltry 10% EV sales mostly because Americans are not well informed, are selfish to a fault, and many of them are just plain mean. When you consider some 20,000 Dems buy new gas cars every day, that's gotta tell you something.
But after 2035, when Joe MAGA walks into his Lubbock Texas Ford dealer for a new pickup, the only ones available are electric. This is how we force everyone to drive EVs, we eliminate their choice to buy a polluting car. That's powerful leverage we should use.
Hey Paul, you know I appreciate your passion and respect your advocacy. I hope you'll keep showing up here in the comments. But I don't think you're going to convince too many folks that it's "extremely easy" to end gas car sales while also insisting that dietary change is impossible. I'm not sure I can convince you of anything whatsoever, but please try to see that for most climate advocates, those two positions are incongruous.
Also, Juli (I think that's you?), I hope it didn't come off in my piece that I was dismissing advocacy around animal agriculture. I just thought there needed to more focus on clean energy and clean transportation solutions relative to plant-based foods, especially if one of the goals was to broaden the coalition. It's all important!
"But I don't think you're going to convince too many folks that it's "extremely easy" to end gas car sales while also insisting that dietary change is impossible."
Ending gas car sales is going to happen, absolutely, because the ICE industry needs scale to remain profitable. Losing all of the Chinese and European markets and 40% of the American market does not leave enough sales for ICE to remain profitable.
The only question is how quickly this can happen, and that's why we're calling for the Adam McKays of the world to create media specifically aimed at dissuading progressives from buying gas burning cars. They are a very low hanging, easy to pick group, but to date, no one has tried to stop them from buying 20,000 new ICE cars every day.
As for dietary change, I'm all for it, but you know as well as I do that you cannot easily get someone to give up meat and dairy. I'm not saying it's impossible, but compared to how easy it will be to 100% eliminate all ICE vehicles from being built, it's a much heavier lift.
I'm not trying to argue your logic, I'm trying to get you to think about your allies and your strategy. If you dismiss food and animal agriculture as a relatively meaningless waste of time and yell at everyone who has has different ideas than you, you are not going to get very far convincing Hollywood to make movies.
I will be eating meat and drinking milk until I die. But I have not added children to our vastly over-populated world. If we could get back below 4 billion we stand a decent chance of seeing much improved climate conditions.
First of all, I haven't dismissed food and animal agriculture at all. I recognize the impact it has on climate. All I'm pointing out is that it's going to be much easier to eliminate 100% of ICE than it will be to eliminate 100% of animal agriculture. You have to agree that's the case, right?
And please tell me where I've yelled at anyone. I write measured responses these days, mostly providing information few Americans seem to have. If information triggers people into thinking they are being yelled at, I'm not sure what to do about that.