The Real Role Model Challenge

That's really interesting James, makes me think we should turn the cameras on Jeff and help him to reduce his carbon addiction! But what would you do then? It's all very well being moral and upstanding but what about action? And isn't the purpose of documentary film making to explore the truth, to expose the realities? I always speak truth to power - wether they like it or not!

@vinod_kumar_v Please check out my website www.ecoxeno.com. I have a solution to what you mentioned before.

🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌

Well - I didn't see that coming! Thanks to all the support from the 'we don't have time' app users on this one. Clearly - how this translates for people on the ground is important. I've received that same feedback in an other post on this app. People are deeply concerned, they want to act, but the number of consumer choices is so numerous that it's difficult to know which way to jump. It address the question 'what does a carbon neutral lifestyle look like?' and I expect this is going to look very different for people in different locations across the world. Thanks for your support with this Alice, thanks to app users for their support and to Jeff for his ongoing interest in this sphere - our interstellar pursuits are no use without a home world, bursting with life and biodiversity.

Thanks for the update Adam. Let's see if the BDM team feel it would contribute to their strategic development.... Although it's impossible to see how documenting sustainability efforts wouldn't contribute to a company of this size!? All the best Paul

This is kind of an exciting development Adam. Looking forward to the new year... Perhaps we will hear that the proposal has been earmarked for production.... 🤞 Fingers crossed that 2021 is a safer and more environmentally conscientious year for people and planet. Cheers Paul

Hi Adam, was there any feedback from the business development team at Amazon on this? Ortugen (the rising generation) are getting interest from other quarters but are happy to give Amazon first refusal on this idea. Kind regards Paul Krogh MSc, BA Hons, BIPP

Good luck with this App Antonio, I hope you find the people you need......

Thanks Jehannes, Now that is sincerely an interesting perspective. You're correct of course..... To challenge the status quo or not? Fascinating - the wealthiest around the globe could easily solve the climate issue if they collaborated and focused efforts around the SDGs... The nuclear question is massive externality issue - the half life of nuclear waste is frightening....

@paul_krogh fear is an enemy, not science. Be it nuclear or other.

@jehannes_ros on that we can Agree!

@jehannes_ros You could say that about climate change. That'd be Trump.

Why not use that money to develop graphene solar panels?

@Callistemon we must stop going for newer tech, we should have been implementing solutions in the last 3 decades much more.

@Callistemon https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/wealthy-investors-get-serious-about-climate-change-without-politics.html

@jehannes_ros https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/11/an-expert-explains-how-to-turn-carbon-into-useful-building-materials/

@jehannes_ros So is mining uranium or pulling carbon out of the air better? Yes, we waited too long, but building new nuclear is also a very expensive and time consuming process that isn't super fast to pay off (money or carbon). https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Arandis_Mine_quer.jpg

@Callistemon I disagree an that is on science. It is costly not expensive, per GW it's costly upfront, per GWh delivered it is cheap. And you can't have an energy transition without reliable clean energy. Uranium is a by product now and we have enough left to use. From seawater is actually a passive process. The material per GWh are less the that of solar and wind. I never say don't build other clean sources build all of them. But nuclear is better at scale. Build time can be 2-5 years depending on there size. We are indeed so deep into it we need it all.

@jehannes_ros I didn't say the last comment was scientific. The science is that it is radioactive for billions of years and cannot just go away. If the solution to the waste is 'maybe sometime later', that is too reliant on future technology, like saying 'later' for climate change is too reliant on technology. Think of all the lives that will be lost in future meltdowns. Think of all the diesel and explosives used to excavate and blast out mountains for waste storage. Why would people choose to compost food scraps when that creates some CO2 when they could seal it in a plastic bag and throw the forever waste in a landfill? Pro-gas people say we can't have a transition without natural gas, and if nuclear is truly for a transition, it is far too costly for that. 'Transition' and 'costly but not expensive' contradict.

@Callistemon you say that with confidence, but you are not right on what nuclear radiation and waste is. It is not possible to explain the science in a few sentences. That's why it is very often a point of debate, it not a subject that condenses easily. But we know it very well and can handle it. If patience and trust in science and engineering is given. Which is also often the case with other clean techs. Ps:l long duration materials are in general least problematic for people.

@jehannes_ros Link? Governments often say they know climate change very well and can handle it if patience and trust is given.

@Callistemon link to information about what part?

This is an interesting debate and just goes to show how difficult the science and policy tightrope is for government decision makers. Please find a link to the nuclear association that gives some interesting data and historical context for Sweden (just as an example). The energy mix of many countries includes nuclear (such is the demand for electricity) but the waste from nuclear is a growing issue. This waste is not costed into the price of nuclear (just like the oil and gas sector) and large questions remain around the long term safety of disposal sites for nuclear - we don't even know what language people will speak in 1000 years from now, so how can we warn them about a radioactive disposal site? You might need to imagine alternative events occurring to comprehend this possibility properly (think of the dark ages). https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-o-s/sweden.aspx I'd love to hear what you have to say about role models and the possibility of sharing low carbon experiences around the world? Debate is healthy.... Don't let me stop you....

@jehannes_ros A link to the science that cannot be explained in a couple sentences.

@paul_krogh Just the barrels of nuclear waste, they rust after a few thousand years. The concrete part lasts longer, but concrete (and steel, but large amounts of thick concrete are used) is very carbon intensive. Even concrete cannot be expected to last millions of years.

@jehannes_ros Extracting uranium from seawater requires producing plastic chains that weigh 1 kg per 2-3 grams of uranium and sending them out in boats for 60 days. The plastic can only be reused 6 times, and some likely end up in the ocean (as with all plastic). It is also 10 times more expensive than open-pit mining. All so that a meltdown can occur and require building thousands of massive mined-steel tanks.

@Callistemon I had to read up on what you were describing. I found it a bit misleading to describe nuclear as a renewable technology. We can agree that 'we are in deep' into the problem of climate change as @jehannes_ros points out but there must be better natural solutions? https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-seawater-extraction-makes-nuclear-power-completely-renewable/?sh=7c45a0e5159a

@Callistemon the science woujld be from an engineering degree. But as that is not really fair I would start by the entire site of it is based more around the limited USA nuclear world. www.whatisnuclear.com And everything on https://www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/how-does-a-nuclear-reactor-work.aspx Some introduction lessons from https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYcMUdmtJe6tet8c1wLzLjW8-PN1HkNtL

@Callistemon really, extraction has not even be commercially approached, its just basic research. So some extra information would be nice. Before we just go further into speculation. .

@paul_krogh the 2/3 types that can provide reliable energy are nuclear geothermal and hydro. Hydro has huge local and methane issues in the first decades, is today's largest clean energy source in the world I believe. Geothermal is possible at many sites if you can go deep enough. Nuclear is possible everywhere. And has the highest energy density of everything. Compared to fossil fuels that is between 1-3.000.000 times. And that translates in material needed and size. We need all sources to be build out to achieve the replacement rate, away from fossil quick enough in these next 3 decades.

@jehannes_ros thanks! My MSc related to energy (which you could not have known), focused mainly around geothermal energy. Iceland, NZ, ... Are doing great work in this area. It's fair to say that we will need many options in the mix to realistically make the transition to low carbon alternatives..... We are terribly locked into the infrastructure of the age of the oil and gas Barons of a bygone era! A legacy we need to transition away from ASAP...

@paul_krogh Iceland an nz are 2 that could have all the base energy on geothermal, is that true for nz.

@jehannes_ros geothermal energy is Interestingly available in more locations than we might think. Heat maps are the best source of indicator. It kind of depends if you are referring to base electrical energy potential or in terms of available heat? The types of technology available are interesting if you like engineering options. The up front capital expenditure is expensive to install but the payoff is that it lasts a longtime and has limited externalities. In terms of the social aspects of energy, people can transition from the oil sector to geothermal very easily. Italy has I believe the oldest deep geothermal power station. Space Heating you will recall is a huge source of energy demand.... But I'd recommend the best form of learning is self directed... I supply a good starting point from this government website for NZ; https://nzgeothermal.org.nz/geothermal-energy/

@paul_krogh It completely ignores the nuclear waste when boasting about how renewable the source is. "when will the source of uranium for our nuclear power plants change from mined ore to seawater extraction?" Probably once solar panels switch to graphene and lithium ion batteries switch to hydrogen.

@jehannes_ros Same with graphene. By the time we have seawater extraction commercially approached, there could also be graphene solar panels.

@jehannes_ros are you aware of green hydrogen and the many forms of energy storage? Liquid air (search Highview energy storage), green hydrogen (see Bright Green Hydrogen), gravitational storage (search Gravatricity), the number of innovative solutions emerging is incredible! New Zealand is about to tap extinct volcanoes on the south Island. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/scientists-hope-to-drill-500m-deep-exploration-wells-into-dunedin-volcano/UL67SQSPKTCUROHK7ELVL4MIJA/ But you don't have to go that deep to benefit from geothermal energy, ground temperature can remain constant at shallow depth a lot less than the 5km (+) depths you need to tap high temperature water for turning electrical turbines.... Heating and cooling is our greatest challenge!

@paul_krogh yes, but it's added to the life cycle co2 output of variable renewables. Because they demand allot of it. Plus building more RE capacity on top of it too energize them. And for hydrogen it's in competition as a source for processes in industry that can only use hydrogen to step of fossil fuels. Like making of iron. Also nuclear can help with that, through electrolysis. But even better with high temperatures, in the form of steam electrolysis. The main thing is that we do it all together, against fossil.

Thanks for this critique Sam. I'm well aware that infrastructure and system change are necessary. But in order to eradicate confusion in the wider citizenship of our global community, people need to be able to make informed decisions about their everyday choices so they can be confident that the alternatives they select are appropriate are don't have unintended consequences! Not everyone has a degree or master's degree in life cycle analysis, carbon accounting or agricultural production methods! Even people that do struggle to maintain a halo all the time. So this about education as entertainment (aka storytelling!). System change requires bottom up and top down processes. If you've read 'soft systems management' you'll know you need 'buy in' my friend....

Sam, I think the other thing that a serries like this might do is spark and ignite the creativity and passion of a range of other people from all over the world to generate their own startups when they see all the pinch points in local markets creating more competition for big business - what Schumpeter referred to as creative destruction. Big incumbents will need to react to survive....! I will leave you to fill in the remainder of the equation....👍 Race to zero... But I will say more social enterprise is needed globally (for the sake of fairness).

Hi Sam - it's been a while since this post reached 100+ agrees thanks to great turnout. Any response from Bezos or his team so far?

@paul_krogh Hi Paul! We've not received any reply yet, but we're working on it! Have a nice day! :)

@Greenheart great! I read the earlier response too. Looking forward to hearing how things progress and to the traction-action this generates 💚👍