Thread by @swardley

X : Did you see ...
Me : ... is this a COP26 thing?
X : Yes.
Me : I don't worry about climate change.
X : Do nothing?
Me : Quite the opposite. I think we should be having those discussions on who we can save.
X : You've lost me.
Me : My 2013 post - blog.gardeviance.org/2013/04/why-i-…

X : You don't think the 1.5 degree ...
Me : ... no hope. There will be lots of nice words, as Greta said - "blah, blah, blah" ... but we're not going to take the actions we need, we're not even going to discuss limiting consumption. I'd rather discuss future plans, who to save.

X : I suppose you have views on that?
Me : Of course, we need some form of lottery system but we also need to exclude the wealthiest 1% ... they caused most of the problems, we need to cut off their escape routes.
X : That'll never happen.
Me : Not in the West. But China might.

X : What will happen in the West?
Me : Not a lot. There is still that brigade of the super wealthy who think they're escaping to Elysium style space stations of luxury. That's why I want a lottery not that we will have one. Malawi has the right idea - "Pay up, or perish with us".

X : That's a bit gloomy.
Me : Oh, if you want gloom start looking into reliability of crop yield predictions for climate change. Start with this 2013 paper - core.ac.uk/download/pdf/4… and then start digging into the field (excuse the pun).

X : UK is doing well cutting emissions.
Me : Hmmm. The current average per capita for the world (metric tonnes CO2 equivalent) which is clearly not sustainable is currently 4.5t pp. UK is about 6T pp. China is about 8T pp. US is about 15.5t pp. Malawi is 0.1T pp ...

Me : ... when you say UK is doing well, you mean if we further reduce emissions by 33% then we will be average for the world which in itself is unsustainable. It's an alcholic claiming they are doing well by cutting down to two bottles of whiskey a day. It's better than three.

X : All doom?
Me : Doesn't have to be. There are some positive signs like the G20 agreeing a minimum corportate tax rate - news.sky.com/story/g20-summ…
X : How does that help?
Me : Do you actually think we're going to solve climate change without a global wealth tax?

X : I don't see why "having those discussions on who we can save" helps.
Me : It is exactly the tonic we need to help concentrate minds and prepare us to take the actions we need. I did a talk which touched on this subject for @agentGav years ago ... "Save Toms not Tonnes".

X : Eh?
Me : We need to stop talking about tonnes of CO2 and start talking about saving people. This is what it will mean.
X : Toms?
Me : Tom Cruises. I calculated a carbon cost for one Tom Cruise and converted excess activity into Tom Cruises we can no longer support.

X : Thoughts on IceBreakerOne?
Me : I like it. That's one of Gavin's projects. He has been pushing the need for more open and transparent data across multiple fields for a good couple of decades from AMEE to ODI etc.

X : What's a sustainable level of tonnes of CO2 per capita?
Me : Well, population is growing, so it's time dependent. However by 2050 then the figure is usually between 0.15 and 0.4 tonnes of CO2 per capita. So, UK needs to cut emissions by at least 95% by then.

X : What about the emissions we've already cut?
Me : Well, we need to cut emissions by 2050 to around 2% of our 1990 per person figure. We were about 14t per capita in 1990, we're currently 6t per capita, we will need to be <0.4t per capita. Long way to go in thirty years ...

i.e. we've cut our emission by 55%+ in the last thirty years. If we continue as is, then by 2050 we will be at around 2t per capita which will be nowhere near close to sustainable. We're going to have to up our game a lot and not through offsets etc.

To give you an idea, one return flight from London to New York today is about 900Kg of CO2 which will be around 2 years of your total per capita emission in 2050 which needs to cover heating, cooking, lighting, goods you buy etc. This is why we have to talk about consumption.

Me : At some point we need to talk about non transferable annual carbon quotas where people can sell a small fraction of their quota in the following year.
X : Non transferable?
Me : Search Russian shares sold for bread and the disaster that was "liberalisation" in Russia.

X : Will that happen?
Me : In the West? No. We will come up with some bitcoin based madness as the answer to climate change through market forces because ... when transactions are your problem, the obvious answer for people that benefit from transactions is ... more transactions.

X : Why exclude the 1% from the lottery?
Me : For the simple reason that the people with the power to change our current system (which is based upon exclusion) are unfortunately the ones that benefit from the system. You want to change that then you need to give them reason.

X : Exclusion?
Me : The market system is based upon trade which is based upon property which is based upon exclusion. You can't "exclude" people from the environment hence our market can't effectively value it. To give it value, create that future lottery which excludes the 1%.

X : There are a lot of people in that 1%.
Me : Yep and the President of Malawi is spot on with his "Pay up, or perish with us" ... we do need to take responsibility for being the caretakers of the future and we've done a lousy job so far.

X : How do you define the 1%?
Me : Net worth i.e. if your individual net worth (including all assets like home, pension, savings etc) is > £600k then you're in the 1%.
X : That includes me.
Me : What can I say ... you need to step up.

X : Tough reading with children.
Me : On the 15th Sept, I sit my kid down, look into their eyes and apologise for my failure as the guardian of their future. We get enough people who can do that, we will create enough will to make the changes necessary -

https://twitter.com/swardley/status/1309828247451062273

X : It's not my fault.
Me : We all say that. Look, the time to stand up for your children's future is not when the super wealthy are boarding their Elysium bound rocketships. The time to change is now and the only people who can change this path is all of us ... together.

X : You agree with insulate UK? XR?
Me : If I was in Government, I would be giving them medals and knighthoods.
X : Do you think oil companies are the new tobacco?
Me : No. Tobacco companies had the good grace to only kill their own customers.

X : Second hand smoke?
Me : Ah, good point. Ok, I can accept ... oil companies are the new tobacco.

X : Thoughts on nuclear?
Me : Touchy subject for me. Back in the 1990s when I used to work in the environmental field I was a huge supporter of nuclear. I used to get quite a bit of abuse and some threats. I haven't changed. We need nuclear more than ever ....

Me : ... but it's not enough to just look at production of energy which should be all renewable (solar, wind, tidal, geothermal) and nuclear - not fossil, not biomass, not anything else - we also need to look at consumption. That's the bit no-one seems to want to talk about.

X : You're very pro climate activists like XR and Insulate UK.
Me : Maybe because I don't see them as activists. I see them as guardians, trustees and wardens.
X : What do you see people who disagree with their tactics as?
Me : Vandals, plunderers and thieves.

X : Toms not Tonnes?
Me : Yep, it was about changing perspective, thinking about people. It was me, @agentGav and @TomRaftery ... hmmm, look there is even a note on it from 2008 - redmonk.com/tv/2008/12/02/… ... oh, and the comment whilst shocking was so typical of the time.

X : You worked in the environmental field in 2008?
Me : No. I worked in the field around 1990-94. I didn't have the stomach to fight against that brick wall. Used to get it from all sides (anti-climate lot + environmentalist against nuclear). I admire people who stuck with it.

Me : Back in those days, I spent 18 months researching energy use whilst living in a tiny one bed room in shared flat, surviving on £25 per week to develop skills on a subject that no business or government cared about and if you spoke the truth you were labelled an extremist ...

Me : ... I am really impressed by those that stuck it out but even today, I don't think people are truly listening.