AI transcript
0:00:02 – Now streaming on Paramount Plus
0:00:05 is the epic return of Mayor of Kingstown.
0:00:06 – Warden, you know who I am.
0:00:09 – Starring Academy Award nominee Jeremy Renner.
0:00:10 – Have a sway in these walls.
0:00:12 – Emmy Award winner Edie Falco.
0:00:15 – You’re an ex-con who ran this place for years.
0:00:18 And now, now you can’t do that.
0:00:20 – And BAFTA Award winner Lenny James.
0:00:22 – You’re about to have a plague of outsiders
0:00:24 descend on your town.
0:00:26 – Let me tell you this, there’s gonna be consequences.
0:00:27 – Mayor of Kingstown,
0:00:30 new season now streaming on Paramount Plus.
0:00:32 – You know what’s better than the one big thing?
0:00:34 – Two big things.
0:00:35 – Exactly.
0:00:40 The new iPhone 17 Pro on TELUS’ five year rate plan price lock.
0:00:42 – Yep, it’s the most powerful iPhone ever.
0:00:45 Plus more peace of mind with your bill over five years.
0:00:47 – This is big.
0:00:51 – Get the new iPhone 17 Pro at telus.com/iphone17pro
0:00:54 on select plans, conditions and exclusions apply.
0:01:02 – Most stories about climate change begin in the same place.
0:01:08 With loss, fire, flood, extinction, collapse.
0:01:11 That’s what all the charts and graphs show us after all.
0:01:15 But what if there was a different story to tell?
0:01:18 One that began with what’s working.
0:01:22 with what we’re already building.
0:01:25 One based on a whole different set of numbers.
0:01:29 The ones that show us how far we’ve already come.
0:01:34 – I’m Sean Elling, and this is The Gray Area.
0:01:41 My guest today is Hannah Ritchie.
0:01:43 She’s a data scientist at Oxford
0:01:45 and the author of Clearing the Air.
0:01:48 She calls herself a data optimist
0:01:51 and her work shows that the world
0:01:54 is decarbonizing much faster than we think.
0:01:56 And that the real challenge now
0:02:00 isn’t necessarily the technology, it’s belief.
0:02:02 belief that progress is still possible.
0:02:05 The kind that isn’t focused on shrinking our world,
0:02:07 but expanding what’s possible.
0:02:11 The kind that makes you want to live in the future.
0:02:23 Hannah Ritchie, welcome to the show.
0:02:25 – Thanks very much for having me.
0:02:31 Well you have spent a lot of your time looking at cold,
0:02:36 hard data and somehow, miraculously,
0:02:40 you’ve come out of that experience more hopeful, not less.
0:02:41 – Yeah.
0:02:44 – What changed your mind about the path we’re on?
0:02:47 – The focus of my work is often on environmental problems
0:02:49 and climate change in particular.
0:02:52 And I think before we even zoom in on the climate problem,
0:02:55 I think one thing you get from looking at data,
0:02:58 and specifically data over long timescales, right?
0:03:01 But you know, how have things changed over decades or centuries?
0:03:07 What you tend to find when you zoom out is that humans have made amazing progress in many ways.
0:03:11 Actually, if you look at almost any kind of human development indicator,
0:03:14 whether it’s poverty or hunger or child mortality
0:03:16 or saving mothers or life expectancy, the list goes on.
0:03:20 We’ve made huge improvements over the last few centuries,
0:03:23 and in particular, over the last 50 years.
0:03:29 And I think it’s often hard to get that perspective just following the day-to-day coverage of stuff,
0:03:32 or what people are speaking about happened in the last hour.
0:03:35 We are capable of solving problems and making progress.
0:03:38 And then I think specifically on the environment and climate,
0:03:42 you know, we’re still in a very bad position on that.
0:03:48 You know, progress has been too slow, but we have made progress in many different ways.
0:03:54 And I think some of the very clear data there is on stuff like the price of renewables
0:03:57 or the price of batteries and how competitive they are,
0:04:00 or actually now how quickly we are deploying this stuff,
0:04:03 which again, you just can only see through the data.
0:04:06 You know, you’re just not going to get that in a daily news headline.
0:04:10 You need to step back and look at the data to understand the scale of what’s happening
0:04:12 on these solutions.
0:04:19 I do often feel like we are kind of toggling between dueling climate stories.
0:04:23 There’s either a story about denial or a story about despair,
0:04:27 and not much in between, present company excluded.
0:04:34 Do you think we’re just naturally attracted to extremes because maybe in some ways that’s
0:04:37 just a simpler, neater way to look at the world?
0:04:39 I think so.
0:04:46 I think we’re often more fine-tuned, I think, to be pessimistic about the world in general.
0:04:49 And I think there’s some ingrained psychology in that, that in the past,
0:04:53 it’s definitely more advantageous to think about what’s the next problem that’s coming,
0:04:55 rather than saying, you know, “Oh, look how good we’re doing.”
0:04:59 So I think there’s that kind of psychological part in us.
0:05:06 And then I think most people get their information from the news or from social media.
0:05:11 And I think the reality is that often nuanced stories just don’t do well in the media, right?
0:05:16 Often it is one extreme or the other that gets the attention.
0:05:21 And if that’s where you’re getting your news on what’s happening on climate or any other issue,
0:05:25 then I think you are mostly seeing the extremes in one or the other direction, right?
0:05:30 As you say, either, you know, this climate’s not a problem, we’re doing fine, or the opposite.
0:05:33 You know, the world’s going to collapse tomorrow and we’re all doomed.
0:05:36 And I’ve spoken to journalists in the past about this, right?
0:05:43 And their response has often been, “Well, we kind of want to, you know, produce the more nuanced
0:05:48 stories that don’t have the really click-baity extreme headline, but then no one reads them
0:05:49 and no one clicks on them.”
0:05:54 So I think there is this kind of unfortunate dynamic between the people producing content
0:06:00 and also us as consumers of content that we are drawn more to these kind of interesting extremes,
0:06:02 rather than the kind of nuanced middle.
0:06:07 Yeah, I don’t know how wild the marketing people were here when we came up with the name,
0:06:08 The Gray Area.
0:06:11 We’re going to lean into the nuance.
0:06:18 It’s not the sexiest cell for sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s the wrong way to look at things.
0:06:21 I mean, I don’t know, have you always been pretty level-headed when it comes to this stuff,
0:06:26 even before you dove into the data? Are you just wired for reasonableness?
0:06:31 I mean, definitely not. I’ve changed a lot on this in the last decade or 15 years,
0:06:36 where now I’m framed as the kind of optimistic person on climate. But, you know, 15 years ago,
0:06:41 I was very pessimistic. I was very much in that we’re all doomed because of climate change,
0:06:45 and there’s just no way we’re going to solve this. And I won’t really have, as a young person,
0:06:51 I won’t really have a kind of livable planet to grow up in. So no, it’s definitely not been hardwired.
0:07:01 I mean, I think this has been kind of taught, and a lot of it has come from stepping back to look at the data. And that has actually rapidly shifted my perspective on this.
0:07:14 Yeah, I think I’m about 15 years behind you. I mean, I think you say pretty early in the book that the question you get the most from people is,
0:07:29 are we doomed? You know, I think what people are really asking when they ask that is whether anything we do—innovation, growth, building—really makes a difference.
0:07:36 How do you think about our agency at this stage of the crisis? How much of a difference can we still make?
0:07:43 We can absolutely make a difference. So, if you look at any of the kind of future pathways,
0:07:50 the range of possible climate futures, you know, the trajectory we take is very much determined by
0:07:57 the decisions we make today and tomorrow and the next day. And we’re very much the driving force of the
0:08:04 the trajectory that we take, the final temperature rise that we end up in. I think people have a sense that
0:08:10 there is often some single threshold in the system that once we pass that, it’s over. There’s nothing
0:08:16 we can do to stop this. This is generally not how climate impacts work. What’s really clear is that
0:08:23 the higher the warming, the higher the impacts, right? So, going from 1.5 to 1.6 to 1.7 to 1.—all
0:08:29 of those incremental increases in global temperatures make a difference to the impacts.
0:08:33 So, I think people have this sense of, you know, if we’re past 1.5, you know, we’re done,
0:08:37 we’re doomed. Or if we’re past 2 degrees, you know, we’re done, we’re doomed. That’s not how it works,
0:08:45 right? Even if we’re past 1.5, pursuing 1.6 or 1.7, these all make a difference to the final climate
0:08:52 outcomes that we will have to deal with. So, it’s always worth making the effort to reduce those potential
0:08:58 dangers and hazards as much as we can. Another question I get a lot is, you know, as individuals,
0:09:04 do we have any agency in this, right? And here I often hear kind of polar opposite arguments where
0:09:09 some people are all about individual behaviour change, right? It’s this notion that, you know,
0:09:14 if we all just do a little, you know, we’ll fix this. I think that’s incorrect, you know. It’s not
0:09:20 the case that if we all as individuals do something, we’ll fix this huge global problem. But you also get the
0:09:25 other extreme that says, you know, individuals don’t matter. This is purely about systemic change,
0:09:31 right? So, it’s only on governments and businesses and economic systems to change this. And I think
0:09:38 that’s a false dichotomy. I think both really, really matter here. What’s really key is that governments,
0:09:45 companies, investors, etc., they play a huge role in making the alternatives to the drivers of climate
0:09:51 change. So, fossil fuels, for example, they play a huge role in making good decisions on what energy
0:09:57 sources we build, what products are available. So, you know, an electric vehicle versus a petrol
0:10:03 vehicle or public transport. They play a huge role in making that available, making that easy for people
0:10:09 to switch, and making it cost effective or affordable for people to switch. They play a huge role in that.
0:10:13 But as individuals, you know, if they put in that effort, as individuals, we can’t sit in our hands
0:10:18 and say, you know, we’re not going to move from the petrol car to the electric vehicle or we’re not going
0:10:25 to shift to a more plant-based diet. As individuals, we play a key role in driving the systemic changes that are needed.
0:10:34 One thing that really comes through in your work is that the world is actually improving faster than
0:10:39 we think, than most people think. And yet, for some of the reasons you’ve already mentioned,
0:10:47 the public mood still feels pretty grim. But there is, however, a chart early in the book that shows
0:10:54 that most people underestimate how much others care about climate action, even in the U.S.
0:11:01 And, you know, I confess that I’ve probably said many times on this very show that most Americans don’t
0:11:10 care enough about this issue. And that’s a massive political problem for people who do. But am I wrong
0:11:16 about this? I mean, how much do people actually care about the climate according to the data that you’ve seen?
0:11:22 Yeah, so there are a number of international surveys on this where they ask people about,
0:11:26 you know, whether they believe in climate change, you know, is it human caused? You know,
0:11:32 should governments take more action? Do they care about us taking action? And what’s really clear is
0:11:37 that in every country, the majority of people say yes to all of the above. So they think climate change is
0:11:43 happening and they want governments and people to be too. Even in the U.S., there’s a majority, right?
0:11:53 You can also look at the polarization in that, right? So generally, a higher share of people on the left say
0:11:58 yes relative to the right. And that’s the case in most countries. In most countries, that partisan gap is
0:12:05 much, much smaller than people imagine. In some countries, it’s basically non-existent. In the U.S.,
0:12:10 the partisan gap is still large, right? But even on the right, a lot of people do care about climate
0:12:16 change. And actually, if you ask Republicans, they also vastly underestimate how many other Republicans
0:12:20 care about climate change. So it seems to be this kind of underlying secret that, you know,
0:12:24 you don’t talk about climate change, but you do actually care and worry a bit about climate change.
0:12:31 So that tends to be the dynamic. You can then argue whether people care enough, right? And I think
0:12:36 that’s a very relative term, you know, what’s your enough versus my enough. But they generally say they
0:12:41 care about climate change and want to see more action on it. And I think that is not portrayed very
0:12:48 clearly to the public. It’s not portrayed very clearly to politicians or the media. The one kind of key
0:12:53 caveat I would make to that is that, you know, saying you care about climate change does not
0:12:59 necessarily mean you follow through really strongly with, you know, climate-friendly behaviors or
0:13:05 climate-friendly purchases, right? So even if you say you care about climate change, you know,
0:13:10 you might not be willing to spend a ton of money on, you know, a more climate-friendly alternative,
0:13:14 for example. So what I always try to make really clearly there is that people are receptive to
0:13:20 climate solutions and taking action. But what’s really, really key is that the alternatives,
0:13:24 they need to be available for people, and they need to be cheap and affordable for them.
0:13:29 They will generally not pay more for those solutions. And many people cannot pay more,
0:13:32 actually, for the climate-friendly alternative.
0:13:37 Well, that’s a huge point, right? Getting people to stop doing things they like
0:13:44 or stop doing things that they’re accustomed to is hard. It’s a hard sell. But if you can offer them
0:13:53 substitutes for the things they like, instead of asking them to sacrifice, is this part of what makes
0:13:58 you an optimist on this, at least politically, that maybe increasingly we do have the tools to create these
0:14:02 cleaner substitutes and that changes the politics of climate.
0:14:09 Absolutely. So when I was looking at this 10 years ago, even when globally we signed the Paris
0:14:14 Agreement, you know, these really ambitious climate goals, we were in the situation where the alternatives
0:14:21 to fossil fuels for electricity, like solar and wind, were hugely more expensive than coal or gas. And to
0:14:26 me at that time, it seemed totally implausible that the world was just going to pick these really
0:14:32 expensive energy sources in order to solve climate change. What’s happened over the last decade is that
0:14:39 the cost of these substitutes have plummeted, right? So solar has fallen by around 80 to 90 percent,
0:14:46 wind by 70 percent, batteries, which is really key for building out electricity grids, but also really key
0:14:53 for the transition in road transport to electric vehicles has fallen by around 90 percent as well.
0:14:58 And what’s happened is that solar and wind have gone from being much more expensive,
0:15:02 which I didn’t think people would choose, to actually being the cheapest choice, right?
0:15:08 So now your short-term incentives in terms of economics are now also matching up with these
0:15:14 longer-term goals for climate. And politically, that’s a much, much easier sell than trying to tell
0:15:19 everyone there’s this problem that’s coming down in the future, but you could you should sacrifice stuff
0:15:24 today in order to do that. And generally, I don’t think that human psychology lends itself well to
0:15:30 those long-term problems. But now this short-term economics are also matching up with the long-term
0:15:33 climate ambitions that we have.
0:15:52 Support for the show comes from Shopify. When you’re starting a new business, it can feel like
0:15:58 you’re expected to do it all: marketing, design, and everything in between, even if you’ve never done
0:16:03 half of it before. What you really need is a tool that helps you reach your goals without having to
0:16:09 master every skill yourself. For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Their design
0:16:15 studio lets you build a beautiful online store that matches your brand style, letting you choose from
0:16:20 hundreds of ready-to-use templates. You can also set up your content creation by using their helpful host
0:16:27 AI tools. And you can even create email and social media campaigns with ease and meet your customers
0:16:33 wherever they’re scrolling or strolling. See why Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of
0:16:39 businesses around the world. If you’re ready to sell, you can be ready with Shopify. You can turn your big
0:16:46 business idea into a reality with Shopify on your side. You can sign up for your $1 per month trial period
0:16:57 and start selling today at Shopify.com/Vox. Go to Shopify.com/Vox.
0:17:07 Support for the gray area comes from Bombas. The kids are back in school, vacations are over,
0:17:14 and we’re entering into the fourth fiscal quarter, the cozy quarter, which means it’s time to slide
0:17:19 into some Bombas. They have all the comfy socks, slippers, t-shirts and underwear you’re going to
0:17:26 need this fall. It’s always underwear season for me. So I tried Bombas myself and I’m just telling you
0:17:33 the truth. I have been on the Bombas sock and underwear train for a long time now. They hooked me up. I tried
0:17:38 them. They’re my favorites because they’re more comfortable than the other brands I’ve tried.
0:17:43 And I’m just going to keep rocking them until I get out of the sock and underwear business.
0:17:49 Anyway, for every item you purchase, Bombas donates one to someone in need. Plus, they’re available for
0:17:54 international shipping to more than 200 countries, even Wallace and Futuna, in case you’re already
0:18:00 thinking about holiday gifts for that cousin in Matu Utu. You can go to Bombas.com/GrayArea and use
0:18:13 code gray area for 20% off your first purchase. That’s B-O-M-B-A-S.com/GrayArea. Code gray area at checkout.
0:18:21 Support for the gray area comes from found. You know, what’s not fun finances. I’m sure there are
0:18:27 people who disagree with me. I’m thinking about you, Joe, my imaginary accountant, but for most small
0:18:33 business owners, finances isn’t exactly a rollicking good time. That’s why there’s found found is a
0:18:39 business banking platform built for small business owners that can let you track expenses, manage
0:18:44 invoices and prepare for taxes all in one place. Found is a banking platform that doesn’t just
0:18:51 consolidate your financial ecosystem. Found automates manual activities like expense tracking and finding
0:18:56 tax write-offs. Found makes staying on top of invoices and payments easy, saving you the headache. You can
0:19:01 even set aside money for different business goals and control spending with different virtual cards.
0:19:08 And the best part? No hidden fees, no minimum balance, no opening fees, no overdraft charges,
0:19:14 and no maintenance fees. You can open a found account for free at F-O-U-N-D dot com. Found is a
0:19:20 financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services are provided by lead bank member F-D-I-C.
0:19:25 You don’t have to put this one off. Join thousands of small business owners who have streamlined their
0:19:36 finances with found.
0:19:46 Growth and climate action are not opposites. Maybe they were, but they’re not any longer.
0:19:52 It seems like more of the bottlenecks are almost emotional, right? Like we have the means to grow
0:19:57 differently. Just not enough of us believe it yet. How much of a problem is this in your mind?
0:20:04 I think in some, in some countries, it’s more of a problem than in others. I think the U.S. is a good
0:20:13 example where I think the U.S. is, does very much still have this mindset that its growth has been
0:20:19 based on fossil fuels and, you know, drill, baby drill. And that’s how it’s became this economic
0:20:26 superpower. And therefore, you know, going for, you know, the kind of tree hugging green stuff
0:20:32 would be a step backwards. And I think that’s a very, very different psychology from how many other
0:20:39 countries in the world are viewing this. So the contrast there is China, where China, I think, is now
0:20:48 seeing fossil fuels and petrol cars as the technologies of the 20th century. And it wants to build the
0:20:55 technologies of the 21st century. And that is solar and wind and batteries and electric vehicles and
0:21:01 basically electrification, right? So some countries like the U.S. are stuck in this mindset where they
0:21:07 see the kind of green transition as a step back and incompatible with growth because they are used to
0:21:14 growth being powered by, you know, huge energy giants and fossil fuel use. And I think that’s
0:21:20 disconnected from reality. I can see, I can see that starting to shift slightly, but it’s certainly shifting
0:21:24 much slower in countries like the U.S. than elsewhere.
0:21:29 Well, which is baddening, right? Because it’s not like this is an alien concept, but I guess there’s
0:21:32 just a lot of headwinds for various reasons.
0:21:40 The psychology of this is hard. I mean, what a lot of the data suggests is that often to, I guess,
0:21:46 if you want to say win the psychological argument, some of the recommendations there are actually not
0:21:53 to focus on the climate problem, but instead to just focus on the kind of energy, energy security,
0:22:00 innovation technology dimension of this, which for many people seems progressive, right? You know,
0:22:08 moving forward, building new stuff, rather than focusing on the climate problem, which is focusing,
0:22:13 I guess, on the negative, right? And especially in more sceptical audiences, as we said earlier,
0:22:21 you know, the promoting the good stuff tends to work better than really restricting what we would frame
0:22:27 as the bad stuff, like the fossil, basically banning fossil fuels. That messaging tends to not work
0:22:30 very well for particular audiences.
0:22:34 Well, also, it’s kind of stupid, but in American politics, at least, the climate problem is just,
0:22:41 it’s just left-coded. It just is. And so, like everything else, it gets polarized
0:22:46 and split along, you know, ideological lines in that way. It doesn’t have to be like that.
0:22:51 The political situation has shifted a lot in the last year. But if you were to look at
0:22:59 the build-out of renewable power across the US from historical data, you know, the majority of the
0:23:03 stuff was being built in red states, right? Right.
0:23:09 So, and it wasn’t necessarily because they were really focused on getting to net zero or reducing
0:23:14 their emissions. Like, often local air pollution would come up as a key problem, right? So a lot of
0:23:21 people are more motivated by addressing local environmental problems than global climate change.
0:23:29 But also the focus on energy independence for landowners in states along the wind belt, you know,
0:23:34 there’s just an additional source of income, right? So why not put up a wind farm and get some extra
0:23:39 income, generate some clean energy, right? So framing it in that way in red states has actually been,
0:23:47 and especially having a kind of legislative environment that allows you to build stuff relatively quickly
0:23:52 without large bottlenecks has been really, really key. And red states have taken that on and built
0:23:56 a ton of clean energy, regardless of the climate reasons for doing so.
0:24:05 Yeah. Isn’t Texas deploying solar panels faster than California currently? I mean, that’s wild.
0:24:12 Yeah. Texas is going hard on solar power and batteries. And a bunch of other red states have been really
0:24:18 forthcoming with wind. So they’ve built a lot of wind power. So actually the majority of the US’s
0:24:24 wind power is coming from, from red states. That’s wild. I mean, it’s awesome. I mean,
0:24:29 it sounds like the, it sounds like the politics are sort of already changing. Maybe we just haven’t
0:24:34 caught up with it yet, or it’s, it’s changing so quickly. It’s, it just takes some time for everyone
0:24:39 to readjust, but it seems like the political argument is, is almost one here. It’s just a question of,
0:24:43 of, of, of, of how and where and, and, and, and how quickly.
0:24:48 I think in the US, there’s a big difference between the national politics of this and the
0:24:50 state level politics of this. Yeah. What do you mean?
0:24:58 Often what’s been effective, uh, is basically states having the capacity and the power to,
0:25:02 to build what they want to build and set the kind of rules they would like. And that’s kind of naturally
0:25:08 resulted in, uh, lots of states building renewables. Um, so, so if you, I think if you went down to the
0:25:14 state level, lots, lots of, uh, governors and legislators there were very happy to build out
0:25:20 clean energy. Right. Um, but in the last year, definitely the national level, uh, when it comes
0:25:27 to politics, I mean, basically there’s a ban on building new renewable energy products and they’ve
0:25:32 been, uh, really far down the list. So I think there actually is a very clear disconnect there
0:25:38 between what’s now the national, uh, political take on, on building out clean energy and actually
0:25:44 what, at a state level, many people would want to do. Well, on the international level, I mean, we,
0:25:51 we have, we have, or we have had this problem of rich world hypocrisy. You know, you have countries
0:25:59 telling poor nations not to develop in ways that they did. Is that kind of hypocrisy still holding
0:26:05 back the global energy transition or for all these technical, or for all these technological reasons,
0:26:11 is it just not the impediment it was 10 or 20 or 30 years ago? I think, yeah, I think there has been
0:26:19 this rich world hypocrisy where, um, countries like the UK, where I’m from, you know, we have basically
0:26:28 built a prosperity on building energy system running on fossil fuels, right? Um, I have the life I have
0:26:34 today, which is a nice life because my ancestors used fossil fuels to build infrastructure, to build up an
0:26:35 economy. Burned a lot of shit.
0:26:41 They burned a lot, right? To get us to where we are now. And they basically had free reign of that,
0:26:46 where they could do that without any political, uh, global climate agreements or without any countries
0:26:50 telling them, oh, you know, that’ll put you over the carbon budget. You know, there was none of those
0:26:56 constraints, right? So we, many of the world’s richest countries got to do that, you know, without
0:27:03 any limits or constraints. And now we’re in the situation where many of the world’s poorest countries
0:27:07 basically want to do the same, right? They have large amounts of their population living in energy
0:27:13 poverty. Naturally, they want to escape that nature. Naturally, they want to, to, to prosper.
0:27:17 Um, and there is this sense of, you know, but you can’t use fossil fuels to do that. Of course you
0:27:24 can’t use fossil fuels. Now, you know, we have global climate change. Um, and, and, and that hypocrisy is
0:27:30 very, it’s still very, very clear because, you know, even if you were to argue, you know, countries like
0:27:35 the UK or the US, you know, historically we used fossil fuels and now we’re transitioning. But if
0:27:41 you compare the amount per person of fossil, fossil fuels we’re still using, it’s vastly, vastly, vastly
0:27:46 more than the, the, the poorest countries in the world. So even if you look at the situation today,
0:27:51 there’s still a huge inequality in the amount of fossil fuels that different countries are using.
0:27:59 But there has been this, this, this case where rich countries often, um, if there are, you know, uh,
0:28:05 loans or financial agreements to, for poor countries to build out energy systems, um, basically won’t
0:28:10 support anything that includes any fossil fuels at all in, in those agreements. Um, which, which does,
0:28:18 I think, highlight this hypocrisy. Um, I think the, some of the dynamics of that are changing,
0:28:24 where this deadlock is breaking. I think the, you’re starting to see actually quite promising data,
0:28:33 um, where especially countries, uh, like Pakistan, for example, is a good example, or many countries
0:28:39 across Africa, you’ve started to see in the last year or two, quite large exports of solar panels from
0:28:45 China to those countries, actually a quick, quite rapid uptick, um, which is very promising and does,
0:28:51 I think, give some opportunity for those countries to what we would make call leapfrog, um, where they
0:28:58 basically develop an energy system, um, that leapfrogs fossil fuels, you know, the energy sources that
0:29:02 many other countries in the world use to develop and go straight to the, the cleaner sources.
0:29:10 I really like that. You point out that, that a lot of these developing countries, um, might actually
0:29:16 have a head start in the clean energy race, precisely because they are not locked in to the old,
0:29:22 shitty, dirty infrastructure, right? Which it kind of flips the usual story about who’s ahead and who’s
0:29:27 behind and what sort of growth could happen over the next, you know, few decades or so.
0:29:34 Yeah, I think, I think it will take some time for that to play out and see how the dynamics of the
0:29:42 energy systems in those countries, uh, work. Uh, one of my concerns there, I think the, this is generally
0:29:46 quite positive, you know, seeing solar panels being exported from China to, to these countries is very
0:29:53 positive. I still have some concerns about the inequality of some of those dynamics where actually,
0:30:00 for those countries, you would like them to build a centralized grid system that it makes it able to
0:30:07 supply, uh, you know, energy to industries, develop like a, a large national economy, um, make sure that,
0:30:13 you know, everyone has access to, to electricity and low cost electricity. What you’re maybe seeing at the
0:30:20 moment is that solar power going to the richest people within those countries, right? That can afford to
0:30:26 buy solar panels themselves. So I think there is this dynamic, I think that’s, some of that is good,
0:30:31 but I think those countries also need to be able to build out a kind of national level grid to be
0:30:44 able to reach everyone or that inequality, I think in those countries will just widen.
0:30:56 This episode is brought to you by Peloton. A new era of fitness is here. Introducing the new Peloton
0:31:02 Cross-Training Tread Plus powered by Peloton IQ. Built for breakthroughs with personalized workout
0:31:08 plans, real-time insights, and endless ways to move. Lift with confidence while Peloton IQ counts reps,
0:31:16 corrects form, and tracks your progress. Let yourself run, lift, flow, and go. Explore the new Peloton
0:31:18 Peloton Cross-Training Tread Plus at OnePeloton.ca.
0:31:26 Support for this show comes from Wealthfront. It’s always hard to figure out where to put your money.
0:31:31 One option is a Wealthfront cash account with no minimum balance or account fees. Right now,
0:31:38 you can earn a 4% APY. Plus, you get free instant withdrawals to eligible accounts every day. So your
0:31:43 money is always accessible when you need it. No matter your goals, Wealthfront can give you
0:31:50 flexibility and security. Right now, you can open your first cash account with a $500 deposit and get
0:31:58 a $50 bonus at Wealthfront.com/grayarea. That’s Wealthfront.com/grayarea. Bonus terms and conditions
0:32:04 apply. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage, LLC, member FinRecipic, not a bank. Annual percentage
0:32:10 yield on deposits as of September 26, 2025 is representative, subject to change, and requires
0:32:21 no minimum. Funds are swept to program banks where they earn variable APY.
0:32:27 Support for The Gray Area comes from Wondery and their new podcast, Lawless Planet. The global climate
0:32:32 crisis is complex, with front lines on every corner of the planet. And the stories from the crisis are
0:32:38 equally complex, filled with uncomfortable truths and sometimes terrible acts. On Lawless Planet, the new
0:32:44 podcast from Wondery, these stories almost unfold like a true crime podcast. From the depths of the
0:32:49 Amazon to small-town America, host Zach Goldbaum investigates stories of conflict, corruption,
0:32:55 and resistance. Each episode takes you inside the global struggle over our planet’s future,
0:33:01 featuring mysterious crimes, high-stakes operations, billion-dollar controversies that reveal what’s truly
0:33:07 at stake, and the everyday people affected along the way. You can follow Lawless Planet on the Wondery
0:33:13 app or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free right now by joining
0:33:28 Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.
0:33:38 Once you start talking about what to build or what to prioritize politically and otherwise,
0:33:46 it gets you into some, let’s call them contested topics in the climate world. And I just want to
0:33:52 start with nuclear. You call that one of the most misunderstood technologies in the climate debate.
0:33:58 What does the evidence actually say about its risks versus its upside?
0:34:03 I think a lot of people, myself included, don’t really know how to feel about nuclear.
0:34:11 I know it’s clean. I know it doesn’t use up a lot of land, but also it’s perceived with some cause as dangerous.
0:34:19 Yeah, so nuclear, I think historically has been hated by a lot of people with an environmental leaning.
0:34:24 Like it hasn’t been the kind of poster child for environmentalism.
0:34:29 And I think the key reason for that has been the safety aspect, as you say.
0:34:34 So it is a very clean source of electricity. It doesn’t really emit carbon dioxide except in
0:34:39 some of the manufacturing of the stuff in the process. In the first place, it uses very little
0:34:43 land, right? So if you wanted to build an energy system using as little land as possible, you would
0:34:50 choose nuclear power. But when it comes to safety, people are, I think, quite rightly concerned about
0:34:56 the risks of nuclear disasters. But I think what’s really important is to get some sense of
0:35:01 comparative risk to other energy sources. The key point is that no energy source is safe, right?
0:35:07 And I think nuclear has such a deep place in people’s minds as an unsafe energy source,
0:35:13 because you can name specific disasters that have happened, right? So when I say nuclear power,
0:35:16 what do you think of in terms of particular events?
0:35:18 Chernobyl, Fukushima.
0:35:19 You can name them, right?
0:35:20 Explosions, fireworks.
0:35:24 Everyone can name them. They were in the news. They’re in the history books.
0:35:29 You can make, you know, bestselling drama series about these events.
0:35:33 And if you tally up the number of people that have died, so there’s been three big events.
0:35:36 So the Three Mile Island in the US where no one died.
0:35:43 Fukushima was the most recent one in Japan. Again, no one directly died from that nuclear disaster.
0:35:48 You know, you had a tsunami hit a nuclear plant and no one died. And then there was Chernobyl,
0:35:53 who was arguably the worst and caused the most damage.
0:36:01 And estimates vary, but they range from maybe up to 400, up to 4,000 deaths, right?
0:36:06 But if you combine all of the disastrous nuclear events in history, you’re talking about, you know,
0:36:09 thousands of deaths, right? Which is tragic.
0:36:16 But what’s really key here is if you compare that to the amount of people that have died from burning fossil fuels.
0:36:20 And here I’m actually, even if you just take climate change out of the equation, you know,
0:36:26 we have millions of people dying from local air pollution every single year.
0:36:31 And most of that is coming from burning fossil fuels, right?
0:36:35 So you have, and nuclear’s entire history has killed thousands.
0:36:39 Fossil fuels kill millions every single year.
0:36:43 So when you break down the comparative risks there, you’re talking about nuclear being
0:36:50 hundreds to thousands of times more safe per unit of electricity than fossil fuels.
0:36:55 So the notion that we should, you know, ban or close nuclear plants and keep fossil fuel plants
0:36:59 running just doesn’t make sense from a safety perspective whatsoever.
0:37:01 Well, then there’s agriculture.
0:37:09 And you say that we could cut global farmland use by half, maybe even more than half, actually,
0:37:13 and still feed everyone if we got serious about efficiency.
0:37:16 What would that require?
0:37:19 How realistic is it politically or culturally?
0:37:25 Yeah, I think for here, we focused on climate change and we always focus on fossil fuels when
0:37:26 it comes to climate change.
0:37:27 Right.
0:37:33 And I think actually agriculture is a very underrated environmental problem.
0:37:38 In fact, like if you were to take almost any environmental problem where it’s, you know,
0:37:45 land use, biodiversity loss, deforestation, freshwater use, water pollution, agriculture is the leading
0:37:49 cause of all of those environmental problems by far.
0:37:51 You know, it’s not even comparable.
0:37:55 Climate change, it’s responsible for between a quarter to a third.
0:37:59 So even for climate change, it’s a huge contributing factor to the problem.
0:38:03 So, and I think many people vastly underestimate this.
0:38:10 And I think what people vastly underestimate is how much we’ve made the world into a giant farm.
0:38:17 So if you were to look at how much of what we call habitable land, so that’s land that’s not a desert
0:38:24 or it’s not glaciers or that we couldn’t use or other ecosystems couldn’t use, half of that is used for farming.
0:38:28 So we use huge amounts of land for farming.
0:38:34 And what’s really key there is that there are huge differences in the environmental impact of different products.
0:38:44 As a brief summary, animal products tend to use more land, emit more greenhouse gas emissions, use more water,
0:38:50 any impact really, use much more than plant-based products.
0:38:56 And actually, there’s a kind of ranking there among animal products where generally the large animals,
0:38:59 largest animals have the highest impact and the smallest have the lowest, right?
0:39:09 So as an individual, one of the biggest environmental changes you can make to have a positive impact is shift to a more plant-based diet.
0:39:10 That would make a huge difference.
0:39:21 And as you said, if we were to have a hypothetical world where everyone went vegan tomorrow, we would reduce our agricultural land use by 75%.
0:39:25 So this huge drop in the amount of land we’re using for farming.
0:39:30 Those are huge numbers, you know, and I’m, I’m not a vegan.
0:39:36 I still, I still do eat steak, among other things, but I have tried to cut back.
0:39:43 And I think it was such a, a problem that it often got framed sort of in binary terms, right?
0:39:48 Either, either you had to just eliminate meat or, or eat meat all the time.
0:39:56 When in fact, even just eating less could make a substantial difference if enough people did it.
0:40:04 Yeah, I, so I’m a vegan, but I do try to really reiterate this point that this is not all or nothing.
0:40:14 I think for most people, they’re not going to go vegan tomorrow, but many people are willing to think about, or even start reducing the amount of meat they eat.
0:40:28 And the reality is, if you run the numbers on this, you know, we’ll make much more progress if 50% of the population reduce their meat intake a bit, than you would from a few percent going completely vegan.
0:40:31 The last thing I wanted to ask about was, was on carbon removal.
0:40:32 It is not a silver bullet.
0:40:35 We can definitely say that, but it’s also not a fantasy either.
0:40:41 What is the most realistic role that can play in getting us to net zero?
0:40:55 Yeah, so if you look at, kind of, any of our most models of, you know, how globally we get to what we call net zero emissions, which is basically that we’re not adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere than we are sucking out.
0:41:02 The reality is that there’s basically almost no pathway that gets completely to zero without any carbon removal whatsoever.
0:41:07 We’re going to need some carbon removal 20, 30, 40 years from now.
0:41:15 The question is, you know, what are the specific technologies or solutions that are going to have the largest impact?
0:41:17 And there, there are a range of solutions.
0:41:23 There are what we call more natural carbon removal technologies, i.e. trees.
0:41:25 They suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.
0:41:28 The issue often with trees, one is land.
0:41:31 If you want to plant a lot of trees, you need land to plant them on.
0:41:36 And currently, a lot of that land is being used for other causes like agriculture.
0:41:38 And also, you can plant trees.
0:41:43 But if that burns down in a wildfire or someone cuts it down, that’s lost.
0:41:45 But there are other solutions.
0:41:50 Very few of them are at scale at the moment.
0:41:54 Most of them are kind of in the early stage, research and development stage.
0:42:03 And that ranges from, I think, what people envision when they think about carbon removal, which is direct air capture.
0:42:09 It’s basically a giant fan that basically tries to pull carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and store it underground.
0:42:12 The issue there is it uses a lot of energy.
0:42:13 And that means it’s expensive.
0:42:19 So to remove a ton of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is extremely expensive.
0:42:25 And I think there are very few governments or companies that would be willing to pay at the current price.
0:42:31 So a huge part of that is trying to basically bring down the price and make it more affordable and feasible.
0:42:39 To that point, are you expecting, are you hoping for maybe some technological breakthroughs on that front?
0:42:41 Maybe not unlike what we’ve seen with solar and wind?
0:42:45 For direct air capture, no, if I’m honest.
0:42:48 The physics of that is extremely hard.
0:42:53 Even people working on carbon removal, you know, and climate scientists always really reiterate,
0:42:57 carbon removal is only really helpful if we dramatically reduce emissions.
0:43:07 You know, carbon removal is there to try and tackle the last 5% or 10% of emissions that we’re really, really struggling to eliminate.
0:43:11 You know, we need to get rid of the 90% first.
0:43:15 And then that’s when we’ll start to rely on these carbon removal technologies.
0:43:23 Are there things people obsess over right now on this front that really maybe don’t move the needle?
0:43:27 Things maybe we shouldn’t really be worrying about that aren’t all that important?
0:43:31 Yeah, quite a lot.
0:43:33 What sticks out the most?
0:43:40 I mean, I think people focus way too much on plastic from a climate perspective.
0:43:51 Like, I think if you talk to people about environmental problems or what they’re doing to solve environmental problems, the first thing they see is recycling.
0:43:54 I wanted to ask you about that.
0:43:56 I didn’t know if I would, but good.
0:44:04 All right, tell me, is recycling, this is a secular ritual I participate in, everyone I know has participated in, and I have heard from so many people that it’s kind of bullshit.
0:44:05 I still do it.
0:44:11 I don’t know if that’s true or not, but there’s not a better person to ask if that’s true or not than you.
0:44:11 So please.
0:44:12 I still recycle.
0:44:13 Tell me.
0:44:17 And I mean, if you recycle too, you should continue recycling.
0:44:17 Okay.
0:44:22 I think the marginal benefits of recycling, especially materials like plastic, are very small.
0:44:33 And that’s just because in order to recycle stuff requires energy, and the amount of energy required to make new plastics is actually quite small.
0:44:35 They’re really light materials.
0:44:45 So the net benefit there is often quite unclear, maybe marginally on the side of recycling, but it’s not this huge benefit.
0:44:55 And when you zoom out and look at the climate impact of that relative to all of the other behaviors that make up your carbon footprint, it’s extremely, extremely small.
0:45:07 So I often use this example of, I don’t know if it’s a big thing in the US, but in the UK, we have like a, you know, have to, if you go to the supermarket, you have to pay for a plastic bag.
0:45:09 It’s quite cheap, but you have to pay.
0:45:14 But that’s drastically changed the social fabric and expectations, right?
0:45:20 So, you know, if you go to the supermarket and you don’t have a plastic bag, it’s like, why have you not brought your plastic bag?
0:45:20 Right?
0:45:22 Come on, we’re all protecting the environment here.
0:45:23 You have to bring your plastic bag.
0:45:27 So people really, really care and think about the plastic bag.
0:45:35 But the reality is that they then wander around the supermarket, not thinking at all about the environmental impact of the food products that they’re buying.
0:45:48 And if you were to weigh up the environmental impacts of the stuff they’re buying and putting in the bag, you know, it’s probably thousands to tens of thousands times more than actually just the environmental impact of the bag.
0:45:57 So that’s just one example of where, you know, what people are focusing on is really skewed from the reality of what makes the most difference.
0:46:06 As we sort of wrap up here, I wanted to bring this back to the question of what can people do that matters?
0:46:10 What rises to the top of that list?
0:46:14 You know, what institutions, what governments should do, can do is a separate question.
0:46:29 The way we talk about climate and its solutions, I think, really has quite a profound impact on public discussion more broadly.
0:46:37 And I think that filters up to how governments feel about taking action and about how companies feel about taking action.
0:46:48 If you have a populist that is, can see the potential of clean energy, you know, wants to shift away from gasoline cars to electrified transport,
0:47:02 or wants to develop cities that run on public transport, if you have a populist that’s really passionate about that, I think it makes a huge difference to, I guess, you might frame it bravery of the government or willingness of the government,
0:47:05 the incentives for companies to get involved and take action.
0:47:08 And I think that starts with us as individuals.
0:47:17 And I think that means having really honest discussions with others about your willingness to change and the benefits of these technologies in this transition,
0:47:23 and then supporting political parties or leaders that are willing to make that change,
0:47:28 and basically putting your money on the table for companies that are also trying to shift in that direction.
0:47:35 We are circling around a question that’s sort of central to every political project or movement,
0:47:37 which is, how the hell do we motivate people?
0:47:42 How do we inspire people to do something or to change what they’re doing?
0:47:45 I think the narrative component of this is really key.
0:47:54 When it comes to tackling climate change or environmental problems, often the narrative is framed around the danger and the risk, right?
0:48:03 And I think that was really, really successful and important in having people understand the problem of climate change,
0:48:06 you know, want to be able to take action against it.
0:48:09 But as we discussed earlier, most people are convinced, right?
0:48:10 So that job is done.
0:48:16 I think what’s really key from here now is helping people understand the solutions and what we need to do.
0:48:22 And what’s really fundamental is that people need to know that there are ways that we can solve this.
0:48:27 And in the process of solving this, you also bring a host of other benefits.
0:48:34 So that is that positive vision of, in 2050, what do you want the world to look like?
0:48:42 And can you provide a vision and a pathway that helps you get from where we are now to where we are in 2050?
0:48:49 To that end, if we do get most of this right, not perfectly, just mostly, what is that story?
0:48:51 What might the world look like?
0:48:58 So rather than living in a world where a few countries basically have a monopoly on the energy system,
0:49:03 most countries have a large amount of control over their own energy supplies.
0:49:06 And that is not a pipe dream.
0:49:11 There’s definitely a pathway by which countries get there with these new technologies.
0:49:15 The cost of energy is much lower than it is today.
0:49:21 So overall, people are getting more energy services, but they’re using vastly less energy.
0:49:26 And that’s because we build this much more efficient system than we currently have.
0:49:36 You dedicate the book to your niece, who will very likely, unlike me, live to see the 22nd century.
0:49:41 If she, her name is, is her name Maeve or Maeva?
0:49:41 Maeva, yeah.
0:49:42 Maeva.
0:49:52 If she listens to this conversation in 50 years, what do you hope she says about this period and about our generation?
0:49:56 So I think many of these issues were a crossroads.
0:50:03 We’re in a very good position to make the right choice and go down the pathway that not only protects us,
0:50:08 but also protects the future generations and the opportunities that they have.
0:50:11 And there’s a not so good pathway.
0:50:18 So I hope that looking back on this, my niece in 50 years would be proud that we took the better path,
0:50:23 not just for us, but for her and also for the next generation that comes after her.
0:50:31 So I would hope that she would look back and, I guess, be proud and satisfied that we made the right choice rather than the wrong one.
0:50:33 We’re doing it.
0:50:34 We’re totally doing it, right?
0:50:37 Is that where you’ve landed?
0:50:38 We’re doing it?
0:50:38 Yeah.
0:50:39 It’s happening?
0:50:40 We can do it.
0:50:40 I’ll take it.
0:50:45 And I’m trying to do whatever I can to push us in that direction.
0:50:55 As I always say, I always present these kind of more positive visions of the future as an opportunity because they’re not inevitability.
0:50:58 It’s going to take us to actually make it happen.
0:51:04 But my key point is always, like, that option is there and it’s up to us to go and take it.
0:51:14 Once again, the book is called Clearing the Air, A Hopeful Guide to Solving Climate Change in 50 Questions and Answers.
0:51:17 Hannah Ritchie, thank you for coming in.
0:51:17 Thanks, Sean.
0:51:17 Thank you.
0:51:26 All right.
0:51:27 I hope you enjoyed this episode.
0:51:29 I certainly did.
0:51:30 I mean, let’s get real.
0:51:33 Whomstamongus doesn’t need a little bit more optimism in their lives?
0:51:36 But as always, we want to know what you think.
0:51:44 So drop us a line at thegrayareaatbox.com or you can leave us a message on our new voicemail line at 1-800-214-5749.
0:51:47 We’ve gotten some really incredible voicemails.
0:51:48 Please keep them coming.
0:51:49 I love them.
0:51:53 And once you’re finished, please go ahead, rate, review, and subscribe to the podcast.
0:51:55 It helps grow our show.
0:52:04 This episode was produced by Beth Morrissey, edited by Jorge Just, engineered by Christian Ayala, fact-checked by Melissa Hirsch, and Alex Overinton wrote our theme music.
0:52:07 New episodes of The Gray Area drop on Mondays.
0:52:09 Listen and subscribe.
0:52:11 The show is part of Vox.
0:52:15 Support Vox’s journalism by joining our membership program today.
0:52:18 Go to vox.com slash members to sign up.
0:52:21 And if you decide to sign up because of this show, let us know.
0:52:26 This episode was supported by a grant from Arnold Ventures.
0:52:29 Vox had full discretion over the content of this reporting.
0:52:46 Vox.com slash members.
0:00:05 is the epic return of Mayor of Kingstown.
0:00:06 – Warden, you know who I am.
0:00:09 – Starring Academy Award nominee Jeremy Renner.
0:00:10 – Have a sway in these walls.
0:00:12 – Emmy Award winner Edie Falco.
0:00:15 – You’re an ex-con who ran this place for years.
0:00:18 And now, now you can’t do that.
0:00:20 – And BAFTA Award winner Lenny James.
0:00:22 – You’re about to have a plague of outsiders
0:00:24 descend on your town.
0:00:26 – Let me tell you this, there’s gonna be consequences.
0:00:27 – Mayor of Kingstown,
0:00:30 new season now streaming on Paramount Plus.
0:00:32 – You know what’s better than the one big thing?
0:00:34 – Two big things.
0:00:35 – Exactly.
0:00:40 The new iPhone 17 Pro on TELUS’ five year rate plan price lock.
0:00:42 – Yep, it’s the most powerful iPhone ever.
0:00:45 Plus more peace of mind with your bill over five years.
0:00:47 – This is big.
0:00:51 – Get the new iPhone 17 Pro at telus.com/iphone17pro
0:00:54 on select plans, conditions and exclusions apply.
0:01:02 – Most stories about climate change begin in the same place.
0:01:08 With loss, fire, flood, extinction, collapse.
0:01:11 That’s what all the charts and graphs show us after all.
0:01:15 But what if there was a different story to tell?
0:01:18 One that began with what’s working.
0:01:22 with what we’re already building.
0:01:25 One based on a whole different set of numbers.
0:01:29 The ones that show us how far we’ve already come.
0:01:34 – I’m Sean Elling, and this is The Gray Area.
0:01:41 My guest today is Hannah Ritchie.
0:01:43 She’s a data scientist at Oxford
0:01:45 and the author of Clearing the Air.
0:01:48 She calls herself a data optimist
0:01:51 and her work shows that the world
0:01:54 is decarbonizing much faster than we think.
0:01:56 And that the real challenge now
0:02:00 isn’t necessarily the technology, it’s belief.
0:02:02 belief that progress is still possible.
0:02:05 The kind that isn’t focused on shrinking our world,
0:02:07 but expanding what’s possible.
0:02:11 The kind that makes you want to live in the future.
0:02:23 Hannah Ritchie, welcome to the show.
0:02:25 – Thanks very much for having me.
0:02:31 Well you have spent a lot of your time looking at cold,
0:02:36 hard data and somehow, miraculously,
0:02:40 you’ve come out of that experience more hopeful, not less.
0:02:41 – Yeah.
0:02:44 – What changed your mind about the path we’re on?
0:02:47 – The focus of my work is often on environmental problems
0:02:49 and climate change in particular.
0:02:52 And I think before we even zoom in on the climate problem,
0:02:55 I think one thing you get from looking at data,
0:02:58 and specifically data over long timescales, right?
0:03:01 But you know, how have things changed over decades or centuries?
0:03:07 What you tend to find when you zoom out is that humans have made amazing progress in many ways.
0:03:11 Actually, if you look at almost any kind of human development indicator,
0:03:14 whether it’s poverty or hunger or child mortality
0:03:16 or saving mothers or life expectancy, the list goes on.
0:03:20 We’ve made huge improvements over the last few centuries,
0:03:23 and in particular, over the last 50 years.
0:03:29 And I think it’s often hard to get that perspective just following the day-to-day coverage of stuff,
0:03:32 or what people are speaking about happened in the last hour.
0:03:35 We are capable of solving problems and making progress.
0:03:38 And then I think specifically on the environment and climate,
0:03:42 you know, we’re still in a very bad position on that.
0:03:48 You know, progress has been too slow, but we have made progress in many different ways.
0:03:54 And I think some of the very clear data there is on stuff like the price of renewables
0:03:57 or the price of batteries and how competitive they are,
0:04:00 or actually now how quickly we are deploying this stuff,
0:04:03 which again, you just can only see through the data.
0:04:06 You know, you’re just not going to get that in a daily news headline.
0:04:10 You need to step back and look at the data to understand the scale of what’s happening
0:04:12 on these solutions.
0:04:19 I do often feel like we are kind of toggling between dueling climate stories.
0:04:23 There’s either a story about denial or a story about despair,
0:04:27 and not much in between, present company excluded.
0:04:34 Do you think we’re just naturally attracted to extremes because maybe in some ways that’s
0:04:37 just a simpler, neater way to look at the world?
0:04:39 I think so.
0:04:46 I think we’re often more fine-tuned, I think, to be pessimistic about the world in general.
0:04:49 And I think there’s some ingrained psychology in that, that in the past,
0:04:53 it’s definitely more advantageous to think about what’s the next problem that’s coming,
0:04:55 rather than saying, you know, “Oh, look how good we’re doing.”
0:04:59 So I think there’s that kind of psychological part in us.
0:05:06 And then I think most people get their information from the news or from social media.
0:05:11 And I think the reality is that often nuanced stories just don’t do well in the media, right?
0:05:16 Often it is one extreme or the other that gets the attention.
0:05:21 And if that’s where you’re getting your news on what’s happening on climate or any other issue,
0:05:25 then I think you are mostly seeing the extremes in one or the other direction, right?
0:05:30 As you say, either, you know, this climate’s not a problem, we’re doing fine, or the opposite.
0:05:33 You know, the world’s going to collapse tomorrow and we’re all doomed.
0:05:36 And I’ve spoken to journalists in the past about this, right?
0:05:43 And their response has often been, “Well, we kind of want to, you know, produce the more nuanced
0:05:48 stories that don’t have the really click-baity extreme headline, but then no one reads them
0:05:49 and no one clicks on them.”
0:05:54 So I think there is this kind of unfortunate dynamic between the people producing content
0:06:00 and also us as consumers of content that we are drawn more to these kind of interesting extremes,
0:06:02 rather than the kind of nuanced middle.
0:06:07 Yeah, I don’t know how wild the marketing people were here when we came up with the name,
0:06:08 The Gray Area.
0:06:11 We’re going to lean into the nuance.
0:06:18 It’s not the sexiest cell for sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s the wrong way to look at things.
0:06:21 I mean, I don’t know, have you always been pretty level-headed when it comes to this stuff,
0:06:26 even before you dove into the data? Are you just wired for reasonableness?
0:06:31 I mean, definitely not. I’ve changed a lot on this in the last decade or 15 years,
0:06:36 where now I’m framed as the kind of optimistic person on climate. But, you know, 15 years ago,
0:06:41 I was very pessimistic. I was very much in that we’re all doomed because of climate change,
0:06:45 and there’s just no way we’re going to solve this. And I won’t really have, as a young person,
0:06:51 I won’t really have a kind of livable planet to grow up in. So no, it’s definitely not been hardwired.
0:07:01 I mean, I think this has been kind of taught, and a lot of it has come from stepping back to look at the data. And that has actually rapidly shifted my perspective on this.
0:07:14 Yeah, I think I’m about 15 years behind you. I mean, I think you say pretty early in the book that the question you get the most from people is,
0:07:29 are we doomed? You know, I think what people are really asking when they ask that is whether anything we do—innovation, growth, building—really makes a difference.
0:07:36 How do you think about our agency at this stage of the crisis? How much of a difference can we still make?
0:07:43 We can absolutely make a difference. So, if you look at any of the kind of future pathways,
0:07:50 the range of possible climate futures, you know, the trajectory we take is very much determined by
0:07:57 the decisions we make today and tomorrow and the next day. And we’re very much the driving force of the
0:08:04 the trajectory that we take, the final temperature rise that we end up in. I think people have a sense that
0:08:10 there is often some single threshold in the system that once we pass that, it’s over. There’s nothing
0:08:16 we can do to stop this. This is generally not how climate impacts work. What’s really clear is that
0:08:23 the higher the warming, the higher the impacts, right? So, going from 1.5 to 1.6 to 1.7 to 1.—all
0:08:29 of those incremental increases in global temperatures make a difference to the impacts.
0:08:33 So, I think people have this sense of, you know, if we’re past 1.5, you know, we’re done,
0:08:37 we’re doomed. Or if we’re past 2 degrees, you know, we’re done, we’re doomed. That’s not how it works,
0:08:45 right? Even if we’re past 1.5, pursuing 1.6 or 1.7, these all make a difference to the final climate
0:08:52 outcomes that we will have to deal with. So, it’s always worth making the effort to reduce those potential
0:08:58 dangers and hazards as much as we can. Another question I get a lot is, you know, as individuals,
0:09:04 do we have any agency in this, right? And here I often hear kind of polar opposite arguments where
0:09:09 some people are all about individual behaviour change, right? It’s this notion that, you know,
0:09:14 if we all just do a little, you know, we’ll fix this. I think that’s incorrect, you know. It’s not
0:09:20 the case that if we all as individuals do something, we’ll fix this huge global problem. But you also get the
0:09:25 other extreme that says, you know, individuals don’t matter. This is purely about systemic change,
0:09:31 right? So, it’s only on governments and businesses and economic systems to change this. And I think
0:09:38 that’s a false dichotomy. I think both really, really matter here. What’s really key is that governments,
0:09:45 companies, investors, etc., they play a huge role in making the alternatives to the drivers of climate
0:09:51 change. So, fossil fuels, for example, they play a huge role in making good decisions on what energy
0:09:57 sources we build, what products are available. So, you know, an electric vehicle versus a petrol
0:10:03 vehicle or public transport. They play a huge role in making that available, making that easy for people
0:10:09 to switch, and making it cost effective or affordable for people to switch. They play a huge role in that.
0:10:13 But as individuals, you know, if they put in that effort, as individuals, we can’t sit in our hands
0:10:18 and say, you know, we’re not going to move from the petrol car to the electric vehicle or we’re not going
0:10:25 to shift to a more plant-based diet. As individuals, we play a key role in driving the systemic changes that are needed.
0:10:34 One thing that really comes through in your work is that the world is actually improving faster than
0:10:39 we think, than most people think. And yet, for some of the reasons you’ve already mentioned,
0:10:47 the public mood still feels pretty grim. But there is, however, a chart early in the book that shows
0:10:54 that most people underestimate how much others care about climate action, even in the U.S.
0:11:01 And, you know, I confess that I’ve probably said many times on this very show that most Americans don’t
0:11:10 care enough about this issue. And that’s a massive political problem for people who do. But am I wrong
0:11:16 about this? I mean, how much do people actually care about the climate according to the data that you’ve seen?
0:11:22 Yeah, so there are a number of international surveys on this where they ask people about,
0:11:26 you know, whether they believe in climate change, you know, is it human caused? You know,
0:11:32 should governments take more action? Do they care about us taking action? And what’s really clear is
0:11:37 that in every country, the majority of people say yes to all of the above. So they think climate change is
0:11:43 happening and they want governments and people to be too. Even in the U.S., there’s a majority, right?
0:11:53 You can also look at the polarization in that, right? So generally, a higher share of people on the left say
0:11:58 yes relative to the right. And that’s the case in most countries. In most countries, that partisan gap is
0:12:05 much, much smaller than people imagine. In some countries, it’s basically non-existent. In the U.S.,
0:12:10 the partisan gap is still large, right? But even on the right, a lot of people do care about climate
0:12:16 change. And actually, if you ask Republicans, they also vastly underestimate how many other Republicans
0:12:20 care about climate change. So it seems to be this kind of underlying secret that, you know,
0:12:24 you don’t talk about climate change, but you do actually care and worry a bit about climate change.
0:12:31 So that tends to be the dynamic. You can then argue whether people care enough, right? And I think
0:12:36 that’s a very relative term, you know, what’s your enough versus my enough. But they generally say they
0:12:41 care about climate change and want to see more action on it. And I think that is not portrayed very
0:12:48 clearly to the public. It’s not portrayed very clearly to politicians or the media. The one kind of key
0:12:53 caveat I would make to that is that, you know, saying you care about climate change does not
0:12:59 necessarily mean you follow through really strongly with, you know, climate-friendly behaviors or
0:13:05 climate-friendly purchases, right? So even if you say you care about climate change, you know,
0:13:10 you might not be willing to spend a ton of money on, you know, a more climate-friendly alternative,
0:13:14 for example. So what I always try to make really clearly there is that people are receptive to
0:13:20 climate solutions and taking action. But what’s really, really key is that the alternatives,
0:13:24 they need to be available for people, and they need to be cheap and affordable for them.
0:13:29 They will generally not pay more for those solutions. And many people cannot pay more,
0:13:32 actually, for the climate-friendly alternative.
0:13:37 Well, that’s a huge point, right? Getting people to stop doing things they like
0:13:44 or stop doing things that they’re accustomed to is hard. It’s a hard sell. But if you can offer them
0:13:53 substitutes for the things they like, instead of asking them to sacrifice, is this part of what makes
0:13:58 you an optimist on this, at least politically, that maybe increasingly we do have the tools to create these
0:14:02 cleaner substitutes and that changes the politics of climate.
0:14:09 Absolutely. So when I was looking at this 10 years ago, even when globally we signed the Paris
0:14:14 Agreement, you know, these really ambitious climate goals, we were in the situation where the alternatives
0:14:21 to fossil fuels for electricity, like solar and wind, were hugely more expensive than coal or gas. And to
0:14:26 me at that time, it seemed totally implausible that the world was just going to pick these really
0:14:32 expensive energy sources in order to solve climate change. What’s happened over the last decade is that
0:14:39 the cost of these substitutes have plummeted, right? So solar has fallen by around 80 to 90 percent,
0:14:46 wind by 70 percent, batteries, which is really key for building out electricity grids, but also really key
0:14:53 for the transition in road transport to electric vehicles has fallen by around 90 percent as well.
0:14:58 And what’s happened is that solar and wind have gone from being much more expensive,
0:15:02 which I didn’t think people would choose, to actually being the cheapest choice, right?
0:15:08 So now your short-term incentives in terms of economics are now also matching up with these
0:15:14 longer-term goals for climate. And politically, that’s a much, much easier sell than trying to tell
0:15:19 everyone there’s this problem that’s coming down in the future, but you could you should sacrifice stuff
0:15:24 today in order to do that. And generally, I don’t think that human psychology lends itself well to
0:15:30 those long-term problems. But now this short-term economics are also matching up with the long-term
0:15:33 climate ambitions that we have.
0:15:52 Support for the show comes from Shopify. When you’re starting a new business, it can feel like
0:15:58 you’re expected to do it all: marketing, design, and everything in between, even if you’ve never done
0:16:03 half of it before. What you really need is a tool that helps you reach your goals without having to
0:16:09 master every skill yourself. For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Their design
0:16:15 studio lets you build a beautiful online store that matches your brand style, letting you choose from
0:16:20 hundreds of ready-to-use templates. You can also set up your content creation by using their helpful host
0:16:27 AI tools. And you can even create email and social media campaigns with ease and meet your customers
0:16:33 wherever they’re scrolling or strolling. See why Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of
0:16:39 businesses around the world. If you’re ready to sell, you can be ready with Shopify. You can turn your big
0:16:46 business idea into a reality with Shopify on your side. You can sign up for your $1 per month trial period
0:16:57 and start selling today at Shopify.com/Vox. Go to Shopify.com/Vox.
0:17:07 Support for the gray area comes from Bombas. The kids are back in school, vacations are over,
0:17:14 and we’re entering into the fourth fiscal quarter, the cozy quarter, which means it’s time to slide
0:17:19 into some Bombas. They have all the comfy socks, slippers, t-shirts and underwear you’re going to
0:17:26 need this fall. It’s always underwear season for me. So I tried Bombas myself and I’m just telling you
0:17:33 the truth. I have been on the Bombas sock and underwear train for a long time now. They hooked me up. I tried
0:17:38 them. They’re my favorites because they’re more comfortable than the other brands I’ve tried.
0:17:43 And I’m just going to keep rocking them until I get out of the sock and underwear business.
0:17:49 Anyway, for every item you purchase, Bombas donates one to someone in need. Plus, they’re available for
0:17:54 international shipping to more than 200 countries, even Wallace and Futuna, in case you’re already
0:18:00 thinking about holiday gifts for that cousin in Matu Utu. You can go to Bombas.com/GrayArea and use
0:18:13 code gray area for 20% off your first purchase. That’s B-O-M-B-A-S.com/GrayArea. Code gray area at checkout.
0:18:21 Support for the gray area comes from found. You know, what’s not fun finances. I’m sure there are
0:18:27 people who disagree with me. I’m thinking about you, Joe, my imaginary accountant, but for most small
0:18:33 business owners, finances isn’t exactly a rollicking good time. That’s why there’s found found is a
0:18:39 business banking platform built for small business owners that can let you track expenses, manage
0:18:44 invoices and prepare for taxes all in one place. Found is a banking platform that doesn’t just
0:18:51 consolidate your financial ecosystem. Found automates manual activities like expense tracking and finding
0:18:56 tax write-offs. Found makes staying on top of invoices and payments easy, saving you the headache. You can
0:19:01 even set aside money for different business goals and control spending with different virtual cards.
0:19:08 And the best part? No hidden fees, no minimum balance, no opening fees, no overdraft charges,
0:19:14 and no maintenance fees. You can open a found account for free at F-O-U-N-D dot com. Found is a
0:19:20 financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services are provided by lead bank member F-D-I-C.
0:19:25 You don’t have to put this one off. Join thousands of small business owners who have streamlined their
0:19:36 finances with found.
0:19:46 Growth and climate action are not opposites. Maybe they were, but they’re not any longer.
0:19:52 It seems like more of the bottlenecks are almost emotional, right? Like we have the means to grow
0:19:57 differently. Just not enough of us believe it yet. How much of a problem is this in your mind?
0:20:04 I think in some, in some countries, it’s more of a problem than in others. I think the U.S. is a good
0:20:13 example where I think the U.S. is, does very much still have this mindset that its growth has been
0:20:19 based on fossil fuels and, you know, drill, baby drill. And that’s how it’s became this economic
0:20:26 superpower. And therefore, you know, going for, you know, the kind of tree hugging green stuff
0:20:32 would be a step backwards. And I think that’s a very, very different psychology from how many other
0:20:39 countries in the world are viewing this. So the contrast there is China, where China, I think, is now
0:20:48 seeing fossil fuels and petrol cars as the technologies of the 20th century. And it wants to build the
0:20:55 technologies of the 21st century. And that is solar and wind and batteries and electric vehicles and
0:21:01 basically electrification, right? So some countries like the U.S. are stuck in this mindset where they
0:21:07 see the kind of green transition as a step back and incompatible with growth because they are used to
0:21:14 growth being powered by, you know, huge energy giants and fossil fuel use. And I think that’s
0:21:20 disconnected from reality. I can see, I can see that starting to shift slightly, but it’s certainly shifting
0:21:24 much slower in countries like the U.S. than elsewhere.
0:21:29 Well, which is baddening, right? Because it’s not like this is an alien concept, but I guess there’s
0:21:32 just a lot of headwinds for various reasons.
0:21:40 The psychology of this is hard. I mean, what a lot of the data suggests is that often to, I guess,
0:21:46 if you want to say win the psychological argument, some of the recommendations there are actually not
0:21:53 to focus on the climate problem, but instead to just focus on the kind of energy, energy security,
0:22:00 innovation technology dimension of this, which for many people seems progressive, right? You know,
0:22:08 moving forward, building new stuff, rather than focusing on the climate problem, which is focusing,
0:22:13 I guess, on the negative, right? And especially in more sceptical audiences, as we said earlier,
0:22:21 you know, the promoting the good stuff tends to work better than really restricting what we would frame
0:22:27 as the bad stuff, like the fossil, basically banning fossil fuels. That messaging tends to not work
0:22:30 very well for particular audiences.
0:22:34 Well, also, it’s kind of stupid, but in American politics, at least, the climate problem is just,
0:22:41 it’s just left-coded. It just is. And so, like everything else, it gets polarized
0:22:46 and split along, you know, ideological lines in that way. It doesn’t have to be like that.
0:22:51 The political situation has shifted a lot in the last year. But if you were to look at
0:22:59 the build-out of renewable power across the US from historical data, you know, the majority of the
0:23:03 stuff was being built in red states, right? Right.
0:23:09 So, and it wasn’t necessarily because they were really focused on getting to net zero or reducing
0:23:14 their emissions. Like, often local air pollution would come up as a key problem, right? So a lot of
0:23:21 people are more motivated by addressing local environmental problems than global climate change.
0:23:29 But also the focus on energy independence for landowners in states along the wind belt, you know,
0:23:34 there’s just an additional source of income, right? So why not put up a wind farm and get some extra
0:23:39 income, generate some clean energy, right? So framing it in that way in red states has actually been,
0:23:47 and especially having a kind of legislative environment that allows you to build stuff relatively quickly
0:23:52 without large bottlenecks has been really, really key. And red states have taken that on and built
0:23:56 a ton of clean energy, regardless of the climate reasons for doing so.
0:24:05 Yeah. Isn’t Texas deploying solar panels faster than California currently? I mean, that’s wild.
0:24:12 Yeah. Texas is going hard on solar power and batteries. And a bunch of other red states have been really
0:24:18 forthcoming with wind. So they’ve built a lot of wind power. So actually the majority of the US’s
0:24:24 wind power is coming from, from red states. That’s wild. I mean, it’s awesome. I mean,
0:24:29 it sounds like the, it sounds like the politics are sort of already changing. Maybe we just haven’t
0:24:34 caught up with it yet, or it’s, it’s changing so quickly. It’s, it just takes some time for everyone
0:24:39 to readjust, but it seems like the political argument is, is almost one here. It’s just a question of,
0:24:43 of, of, of, of how and where and, and, and, and how quickly.
0:24:48 I think in the US, there’s a big difference between the national politics of this and the
0:24:50 state level politics of this. Yeah. What do you mean?
0:24:58 Often what’s been effective, uh, is basically states having the capacity and the power to,
0:25:02 to build what they want to build and set the kind of rules they would like. And that’s kind of naturally
0:25:08 resulted in, uh, lots of states building renewables. Um, so, so if you, I think if you went down to the
0:25:14 state level, lots, lots of, uh, governors and legislators there were very happy to build out
0:25:20 clean energy. Right. Um, but in the last year, definitely the national level, uh, when it comes
0:25:27 to politics, I mean, basically there’s a ban on building new renewable energy products and they’ve
0:25:32 been, uh, really far down the list. So I think there actually is a very clear disconnect there
0:25:38 between what’s now the national, uh, political take on, on building out clean energy and actually
0:25:44 what, at a state level, many people would want to do. Well, on the international level, I mean, we,
0:25:51 we have, we have, or we have had this problem of rich world hypocrisy. You know, you have countries
0:25:59 telling poor nations not to develop in ways that they did. Is that kind of hypocrisy still holding
0:26:05 back the global energy transition or for all these technical, or for all these technological reasons,
0:26:11 is it just not the impediment it was 10 or 20 or 30 years ago? I think, yeah, I think there has been
0:26:19 this rich world hypocrisy where, um, countries like the UK, where I’m from, you know, we have basically
0:26:28 built a prosperity on building energy system running on fossil fuels, right? Um, I have the life I have
0:26:34 today, which is a nice life because my ancestors used fossil fuels to build infrastructure, to build up an
0:26:35 economy. Burned a lot of shit.
0:26:41 They burned a lot, right? To get us to where we are now. And they basically had free reign of that,
0:26:46 where they could do that without any political, uh, global climate agreements or without any countries
0:26:50 telling them, oh, you know, that’ll put you over the carbon budget. You know, there was none of those
0:26:56 constraints, right? So we, many of the world’s richest countries got to do that, you know, without
0:27:03 any limits or constraints. And now we’re in the situation where many of the world’s poorest countries
0:27:07 basically want to do the same, right? They have large amounts of their population living in energy
0:27:13 poverty. Naturally, they want to escape that nature. Naturally, they want to, to, to prosper.
0:27:17 Um, and there is this sense of, you know, but you can’t use fossil fuels to do that. Of course you
0:27:24 can’t use fossil fuels. Now, you know, we have global climate change. Um, and, and, and that hypocrisy is
0:27:30 very, it’s still very, very clear because, you know, even if you were to argue, you know, countries like
0:27:35 the UK or the US, you know, historically we used fossil fuels and now we’re transitioning. But if
0:27:41 you compare the amount per person of fossil, fossil fuels we’re still using, it’s vastly, vastly, vastly
0:27:46 more than the, the, the poorest countries in the world. So even if you look at the situation today,
0:27:51 there’s still a huge inequality in the amount of fossil fuels that different countries are using.
0:27:59 But there has been this, this, this case where rich countries often, um, if there are, you know, uh,
0:28:05 loans or financial agreements to, for poor countries to build out energy systems, um, basically won’t
0:28:10 support anything that includes any fossil fuels at all in, in those agreements. Um, which, which does,
0:28:18 I think, highlight this hypocrisy. Um, I think the, some of the dynamics of that are changing,
0:28:24 where this deadlock is breaking. I think the, you’re starting to see actually quite promising data,
0:28:33 um, where especially countries, uh, like Pakistan, for example, is a good example, or many countries
0:28:39 across Africa, you’ve started to see in the last year or two, quite large exports of solar panels from
0:28:45 China to those countries, actually a quick, quite rapid uptick, um, which is very promising and does,
0:28:51 I think, give some opportunity for those countries to what we would make call leapfrog, um, where they
0:28:58 basically develop an energy system, um, that leapfrogs fossil fuels, you know, the energy sources that
0:29:02 many other countries in the world use to develop and go straight to the, the cleaner sources.
0:29:10 I really like that. You point out that, that a lot of these developing countries, um, might actually
0:29:16 have a head start in the clean energy race, precisely because they are not locked in to the old,
0:29:22 shitty, dirty infrastructure, right? Which it kind of flips the usual story about who’s ahead and who’s
0:29:27 behind and what sort of growth could happen over the next, you know, few decades or so.
0:29:34 Yeah, I think, I think it will take some time for that to play out and see how the dynamics of the
0:29:42 energy systems in those countries, uh, work. Uh, one of my concerns there, I think the, this is generally
0:29:46 quite positive, you know, seeing solar panels being exported from China to, to these countries is very
0:29:53 positive. I still have some concerns about the inequality of some of those dynamics where actually,
0:30:00 for those countries, you would like them to build a centralized grid system that it makes it able to
0:30:07 supply, uh, you know, energy to industries, develop like a, a large national economy, um, make sure that,
0:30:13 you know, everyone has access to, to electricity and low cost electricity. What you’re maybe seeing at the
0:30:20 moment is that solar power going to the richest people within those countries, right? That can afford to
0:30:26 buy solar panels themselves. So I think there is this dynamic, I think that’s, some of that is good,
0:30:31 but I think those countries also need to be able to build out a kind of national level grid to be
0:30:44 able to reach everyone or that inequality, I think in those countries will just widen.
0:30:56 This episode is brought to you by Peloton. A new era of fitness is here. Introducing the new Peloton
0:31:02 Cross-Training Tread Plus powered by Peloton IQ. Built for breakthroughs with personalized workout
0:31:08 plans, real-time insights, and endless ways to move. Lift with confidence while Peloton IQ counts reps,
0:31:16 corrects form, and tracks your progress. Let yourself run, lift, flow, and go. Explore the new Peloton
0:31:18 Peloton Cross-Training Tread Plus at OnePeloton.ca.
0:31:26 Support for this show comes from Wealthfront. It’s always hard to figure out where to put your money.
0:31:31 One option is a Wealthfront cash account with no minimum balance or account fees. Right now,
0:31:38 you can earn a 4% APY. Plus, you get free instant withdrawals to eligible accounts every day. So your
0:31:43 money is always accessible when you need it. No matter your goals, Wealthfront can give you
0:31:50 flexibility and security. Right now, you can open your first cash account with a $500 deposit and get
0:31:58 a $50 bonus at Wealthfront.com/grayarea. That’s Wealthfront.com/grayarea. Bonus terms and conditions
0:32:04 apply. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage, LLC, member FinRecipic, not a bank. Annual percentage
0:32:10 yield on deposits as of September 26, 2025 is representative, subject to change, and requires
0:32:21 no minimum. Funds are swept to program banks where they earn variable APY.
0:32:27 Support for The Gray Area comes from Wondery and their new podcast, Lawless Planet. The global climate
0:32:32 crisis is complex, with front lines on every corner of the planet. And the stories from the crisis are
0:32:38 equally complex, filled with uncomfortable truths and sometimes terrible acts. On Lawless Planet, the new
0:32:44 podcast from Wondery, these stories almost unfold like a true crime podcast. From the depths of the
0:32:49 Amazon to small-town America, host Zach Goldbaum investigates stories of conflict, corruption,
0:32:55 and resistance. Each episode takes you inside the global struggle over our planet’s future,
0:33:01 featuring mysterious crimes, high-stakes operations, billion-dollar controversies that reveal what’s truly
0:33:07 at stake, and the everyday people affected along the way. You can follow Lawless Planet on the Wondery
0:33:13 app or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free right now by joining
0:33:28 Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.
0:33:38 Once you start talking about what to build or what to prioritize politically and otherwise,
0:33:46 it gets you into some, let’s call them contested topics in the climate world. And I just want to
0:33:52 start with nuclear. You call that one of the most misunderstood technologies in the climate debate.
0:33:58 What does the evidence actually say about its risks versus its upside?
0:34:03 I think a lot of people, myself included, don’t really know how to feel about nuclear.
0:34:11 I know it’s clean. I know it doesn’t use up a lot of land, but also it’s perceived with some cause as dangerous.
0:34:19 Yeah, so nuclear, I think historically has been hated by a lot of people with an environmental leaning.
0:34:24 Like it hasn’t been the kind of poster child for environmentalism.
0:34:29 And I think the key reason for that has been the safety aspect, as you say.
0:34:34 So it is a very clean source of electricity. It doesn’t really emit carbon dioxide except in
0:34:39 some of the manufacturing of the stuff in the process. In the first place, it uses very little
0:34:43 land, right? So if you wanted to build an energy system using as little land as possible, you would
0:34:50 choose nuclear power. But when it comes to safety, people are, I think, quite rightly concerned about
0:34:56 the risks of nuclear disasters. But I think what’s really important is to get some sense of
0:35:01 comparative risk to other energy sources. The key point is that no energy source is safe, right?
0:35:07 And I think nuclear has such a deep place in people’s minds as an unsafe energy source,
0:35:13 because you can name specific disasters that have happened, right? So when I say nuclear power,
0:35:16 what do you think of in terms of particular events?
0:35:18 Chernobyl, Fukushima.
0:35:19 You can name them, right?
0:35:20 Explosions, fireworks.
0:35:24 Everyone can name them. They were in the news. They’re in the history books.
0:35:29 You can make, you know, bestselling drama series about these events.
0:35:33 And if you tally up the number of people that have died, so there’s been three big events.
0:35:36 So the Three Mile Island in the US where no one died.
0:35:43 Fukushima was the most recent one in Japan. Again, no one directly died from that nuclear disaster.
0:35:48 You know, you had a tsunami hit a nuclear plant and no one died. And then there was Chernobyl,
0:35:53 who was arguably the worst and caused the most damage.
0:36:01 And estimates vary, but they range from maybe up to 400, up to 4,000 deaths, right?
0:36:06 But if you combine all of the disastrous nuclear events in history, you’re talking about, you know,
0:36:09 thousands of deaths, right? Which is tragic.
0:36:16 But what’s really key here is if you compare that to the amount of people that have died from burning fossil fuels.
0:36:20 And here I’m actually, even if you just take climate change out of the equation, you know,
0:36:26 we have millions of people dying from local air pollution every single year.
0:36:31 And most of that is coming from burning fossil fuels, right?
0:36:35 So you have, and nuclear’s entire history has killed thousands.
0:36:39 Fossil fuels kill millions every single year.
0:36:43 So when you break down the comparative risks there, you’re talking about nuclear being
0:36:50 hundreds to thousands of times more safe per unit of electricity than fossil fuels.
0:36:55 So the notion that we should, you know, ban or close nuclear plants and keep fossil fuel plants
0:36:59 running just doesn’t make sense from a safety perspective whatsoever.
0:37:01 Well, then there’s agriculture.
0:37:09 And you say that we could cut global farmland use by half, maybe even more than half, actually,
0:37:13 and still feed everyone if we got serious about efficiency.
0:37:16 What would that require?
0:37:19 How realistic is it politically or culturally?
0:37:25 Yeah, I think for here, we focused on climate change and we always focus on fossil fuels when
0:37:26 it comes to climate change.
0:37:27 Right.
0:37:33 And I think actually agriculture is a very underrated environmental problem.
0:37:38 In fact, like if you were to take almost any environmental problem where it’s, you know,
0:37:45 land use, biodiversity loss, deforestation, freshwater use, water pollution, agriculture is the leading
0:37:49 cause of all of those environmental problems by far.
0:37:51 You know, it’s not even comparable.
0:37:55 Climate change, it’s responsible for between a quarter to a third.
0:37:59 So even for climate change, it’s a huge contributing factor to the problem.
0:38:03 So, and I think many people vastly underestimate this.
0:38:10 And I think what people vastly underestimate is how much we’ve made the world into a giant farm.
0:38:17 So if you were to look at how much of what we call habitable land, so that’s land that’s not a desert
0:38:24 or it’s not glaciers or that we couldn’t use or other ecosystems couldn’t use, half of that is used for farming.
0:38:28 So we use huge amounts of land for farming.
0:38:34 And what’s really key there is that there are huge differences in the environmental impact of different products.
0:38:44 As a brief summary, animal products tend to use more land, emit more greenhouse gas emissions, use more water,
0:38:50 any impact really, use much more than plant-based products.
0:38:56 And actually, there’s a kind of ranking there among animal products where generally the large animals,
0:38:59 largest animals have the highest impact and the smallest have the lowest, right?
0:39:09 So as an individual, one of the biggest environmental changes you can make to have a positive impact is shift to a more plant-based diet.
0:39:10 That would make a huge difference.
0:39:21 And as you said, if we were to have a hypothetical world where everyone went vegan tomorrow, we would reduce our agricultural land use by 75%.
0:39:25 So this huge drop in the amount of land we’re using for farming.
0:39:30 Those are huge numbers, you know, and I’m, I’m not a vegan.
0:39:36 I still, I still do eat steak, among other things, but I have tried to cut back.
0:39:43 And I think it was such a, a problem that it often got framed sort of in binary terms, right?
0:39:48 Either, either you had to just eliminate meat or, or eat meat all the time.
0:39:56 When in fact, even just eating less could make a substantial difference if enough people did it.
0:40:04 Yeah, I, so I’m a vegan, but I do try to really reiterate this point that this is not all or nothing.
0:40:14 I think for most people, they’re not going to go vegan tomorrow, but many people are willing to think about, or even start reducing the amount of meat they eat.
0:40:28 And the reality is, if you run the numbers on this, you know, we’ll make much more progress if 50% of the population reduce their meat intake a bit, than you would from a few percent going completely vegan.
0:40:31 The last thing I wanted to ask about was, was on carbon removal.
0:40:32 It is not a silver bullet.
0:40:35 We can definitely say that, but it’s also not a fantasy either.
0:40:41 What is the most realistic role that can play in getting us to net zero?
0:40:55 Yeah, so if you look at, kind of, any of our most models of, you know, how globally we get to what we call net zero emissions, which is basically that we’re not adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere than we are sucking out.
0:41:02 The reality is that there’s basically almost no pathway that gets completely to zero without any carbon removal whatsoever.
0:41:07 We’re going to need some carbon removal 20, 30, 40 years from now.
0:41:15 The question is, you know, what are the specific technologies or solutions that are going to have the largest impact?
0:41:17 And there, there are a range of solutions.
0:41:23 There are what we call more natural carbon removal technologies, i.e. trees.
0:41:25 They suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.
0:41:28 The issue often with trees, one is land.
0:41:31 If you want to plant a lot of trees, you need land to plant them on.
0:41:36 And currently, a lot of that land is being used for other causes like agriculture.
0:41:38 And also, you can plant trees.
0:41:43 But if that burns down in a wildfire or someone cuts it down, that’s lost.
0:41:45 But there are other solutions.
0:41:50 Very few of them are at scale at the moment.
0:41:54 Most of them are kind of in the early stage, research and development stage.
0:42:03 And that ranges from, I think, what people envision when they think about carbon removal, which is direct air capture.
0:42:09 It’s basically a giant fan that basically tries to pull carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and store it underground.
0:42:12 The issue there is it uses a lot of energy.
0:42:13 And that means it’s expensive.
0:42:19 So to remove a ton of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is extremely expensive.
0:42:25 And I think there are very few governments or companies that would be willing to pay at the current price.
0:42:31 So a huge part of that is trying to basically bring down the price and make it more affordable and feasible.
0:42:39 To that point, are you expecting, are you hoping for maybe some technological breakthroughs on that front?
0:42:41 Maybe not unlike what we’ve seen with solar and wind?
0:42:45 For direct air capture, no, if I’m honest.
0:42:48 The physics of that is extremely hard.
0:42:53 Even people working on carbon removal, you know, and climate scientists always really reiterate,
0:42:57 carbon removal is only really helpful if we dramatically reduce emissions.
0:43:07 You know, carbon removal is there to try and tackle the last 5% or 10% of emissions that we’re really, really struggling to eliminate.
0:43:11 You know, we need to get rid of the 90% first.
0:43:15 And then that’s when we’ll start to rely on these carbon removal technologies.
0:43:23 Are there things people obsess over right now on this front that really maybe don’t move the needle?
0:43:27 Things maybe we shouldn’t really be worrying about that aren’t all that important?
0:43:31 Yeah, quite a lot.
0:43:33 What sticks out the most?
0:43:40 I mean, I think people focus way too much on plastic from a climate perspective.
0:43:51 Like, I think if you talk to people about environmental problems or what they’re doing to solve environmental problems, the first thing they see is recycling.
0:43:54 I wanted to ask you about that.
0:43:56 I didn’t know if I would, but good.
0:44:04 All right, tell me, is recycling, this is a secular ritual I participate in, everyone I know has participated in, and I have heard from so many people that it’s kind of bullshit.
0:44:05 I still do it.
0:44:11 I don’t know if that’s true or not, but there’s not a better person to ask if that’s true or not than you.
0:44:11 So please.
0:44:12 I still recycle.
0:44:13 Tell me.
0:44:17 And I mean, if you recycle too, you should continue recycling.
0:44:17 Okay.
0:44:22 I think the marginal benefits of recycling, especially materials like plastic, are very small.
0:44:33 And that’s just because in order to recycle stuff requires energy, and the amount of energy required to make new plastics is actually quite small.
0:44:35 They’re really light materials.
0:44:45 So the net benefit there is often quite unclear, maybe marginally on the side of recycling, but it’s not this huge benefit.
0:44:55 And when you zoom out and look at the climate impact of that relative to all of the other behaviors that make up your carbon footprint, it’s extremely, extremely small.
0:45:07 So I often use this example of, I don’t know if it’s a big thing in the US, but in the UK, we have like a, you know, have to, if you go to the supermarket, you have to pay for a plastic bag.
0:45:09 It’s quite cheap, but you have to pay.
0:45:14 But that’s drastically changed the social fabric and expectations, right?
0:45:20 So, you know, if you go to the supermarket and you don’t have a plastic bag, it’s like, why have you not brought your plastic bag?
0:45:20 Right?
0:45:22 Come on, we’re all protecting the environment here.
0:45:23 You have to bring your plastic bag.
0:45:27 So people really, really care and think about the plastic bag.
0:45:35 But the reality is that they then wander around the supermarket, not thinking at all about the environmental impact of the food products that they’re buying.
0:45:48 And if you were to weigh up the environmental impacts of the stuff they’re buying and putting in the bag, you know, it’s probably thousands to tens of thousands times more than actually just the environmental impact of the bag.
0:45:57 So that’s just one example of where, you know, what people are focusing on is really skewed from the reality of what makes the most difference.
0:46:06 As we sort of wrap up here, I wanted to bring this back to the question of what can people do that matters?
0:46:10 What rises to the top of that list?
0:46:14 You know, what institutions, what governments should do, can do is a separate question.
0:46:29 The way we talk about climate and its solutions, I think, really has quite a profound impact on public discussion more broadly.
0:46:37 And I think that filters up to how governments feel about taking action and about how companies feel about taking action.
0:46:48 If you have a populist that is, can see the potential of clean energy, you know, wants to shift away from gasoline cars to electrified transport,
0:47:02 or wants to develop cities that run on public transport, if you have a populist that’s really passionate about that, I think it makes a huge difference to, I guess, you might frame it bravery of the government or willingness of the government,
0:47:05 the incentives for companies to get involved and take action.
0:47:08 And I think that starts with us as individuals.
0:47:17 And I think that means having really honest discussions with others about your willingness to change and the benefits of these technologies in this transition,
0:47:23 and then supporting political parties or leaders that are willing to make that change,
0:47:28 and basically putting your money on the table for companies that are also trying to shift in that direction.
0:47:35 We are circling around a question that’s sort of central to every political project or movement,
0:47:37 which is, how the hell do we motivate people?
0:47:42 How do we inspire people to do something or to change what they’re doing?
0:47:45 I think the narrative component of this is really key.
0:47:54 When it comes to tackling climate change or environmental problems, often the narrative is framed around the danger and the risk, right?
0:48:03 And I think that was really, really successful and important in having people understand the problem of climate change,
0:48:06 you know, want to be able to take action against it.
0:48:09 But as we discussed earlier, most people are convinced, right?
0:48:10 So that job is done.
0:48:16 I think what’s really key from here now is helping people understand the solutions and what we need to do.
0:48:22 And what’s really fundamental is that people need to know that there are ways that we can solve this.
0:48:27 And in the process of solving this, you also bring a host of other benefits.
0:48:34 So that is that positive vision of, in 2050, what do you want the world to look like?
0:48:42 And can you provide a vision and a pathway that helps you get from where we are now to where we are in 2050?
0:48:49 To that end, if we do get most of this right, not perfectly, just mostly, what is that story?
0:48:51 What might the world look like?
0:48:58 So rather than living in a world where a few countries basically have a monopoly on the energy system,
0:49:03 most countries have a large amount of control over their own energy supplies.
0:49:06 And that is not a pipe dream.
0:49:11 There’s definitely a pathway by which countries get there with these new technologies.
0:49:15 The cost of energy is much lower than it is today.
0:49:21 So overall, people are getting more energy services, but they’re using vastly less energy.
0:49:26 And that’s because we build this much more efficient system than we currently have.
0:49:36 You dedicate the book to your niece, who will very likely, unlike me, live to see the 22nd century.
0:49:41 If she, her name is, is her name Maeve or Maeva?
0:49:41 Maeva, yeah.
0:49:42 Maeva.
0:49:52 If she listens to this conversation in 50 years, what do you hope she says about this period and about our generation?
0:49:56 So I think many of these issues were a crossroads.
0:50:03 We’re in a very good position to make the right choice and go down the pathway that not only protects us,
0:50:08 but also protects the future generations and the opportunities that they have.
0:50:11 And there’s a not so good pathway.
0:50:18 So I hope that looking back on this, my niece in 50 years would be proud that we took the better path,
0:50:23 not just for us, but for her and also for the next generation that comes after her.
0:50:31 So I would hope that she would look back and, I guess, be proud and satisfied that we made the right choice rather than the wrong one.
0:50:33 We’re doing it.
0:50:34 We’re totally doing it, right?
0:50:37 Is that where you’ve landed?
0:50:38 We’re doing it?
0:50:38 Yeah.
0:50:39 It’s happening?
0:50:40 We can do it.
0:50:40 I’ll take it.
0:50:45 And I’m trying to do whatever I can to push us in that direction.
0:50:55 As I always say, I always present these kind of more positive visions of the future as an opportunity because they’re not inevitability.
0:50:58 It’s going to take us to actually make it happen.
0:51:04 But my key point is always, like, that option is there and it’s up to us to go and take it.
0:51:14 Once again, the book is called Clearing the Air, A Hopeful Guide to Solving Climate Change in 50 Questions and Answers.
0:51:17 Hannah Ritchie, thank you for coming in.
0:51:17 Thanks, Sean.
0:51:17 Thank you.
0:51:26 All right.
0:51:27 I hope you enjoyed this episode.
0:51:29 I certainly did.
0:51:30 I mean, let’s get real.
0:51:33 Whomstamongus doesn’t need a little bit more optimism in their lives?
0:51:36 But as always, we want to know what you think.
0:51:44 So drop us a line at thegrayareaatbox.com or you can leave us a message on our new voicemail line at 1-800-214-5749.
0:51:47 We’ve gotten some really incredible voicemails.
0:51:48 Please keep them coming.
0:51:49 I love them.
0:51:53 And once you’re finished, please go ahead, rate, review, and subscribe to the podcast.
0:51:55 It helps grow our show.
0:52:04 This episode was produced by Beth Morrissey, edited by Jorge Just, engineered by Christian Ayala, fact-checked by Melissa Hirsch, and Alex Overinton wrote our theme music.
0:52:07 New episodes of The Gray Area drop on Mondays.
0:52:09 Listen and subscribe.
0:52:11 The show is part of Vox.
0:52:15 Support Vox’s journalism by joining our membership program today.
0:52:18 Go to vox.com slash members to sign up.
0:52:21 And if you decide to sign up because of this show, let us know.
0:52:26 This episode was supported by a grant from Arnold Ventures.
0:52:29 Vox had full discretion over the content of this reporting.
0:52:46 Vox.com slash members.
The story we tell about climate change is mostly a story about loss. But look to the data, and that story starts to fall apart. Emissions are peaking in key sectors. Clean energy is scaling faster than anyone predicted. Real progress is happening. It’s just not happening in the way we imagine it.
Sean’s guest today is Hannah Ritchie, Deputy Editor at Our World in Data and author of Clearing the Air: A Hopeful Guide to Solving Climate Change. They discuss why our picture of the planet is so distorted, why despair can be as dangerous as denial, and what a truly energy-abundant, livable future could look like.
Host: Sean Illing (@seanilling)
Guest: Hannah Ritchie, author of Clearing the Air
We’d love to hear from you. Tell us what you thought of this episode at thegrayarea@vox.com or leave a voicemail at 1-800-214-5749. Your comments and questions help us make a better show.
And you can watch new episodes of The Gray Area on YouTube.
Listen to The Gray Area ad-free by becoming a Vox Member: vox.com/members
This episode was supported by a grant from Arnold Ventures. Vox had full discretion over the content of this reporting.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.