in their lifetime. and i think there's two situations here. one if you look at the big farm, industrial farms, that's what is causing a lot of your statements that come, say, oh, we should reduce beef in our diet. because most people don't have the opportunity to raise small animals and have small farms. i think of, hey, if you put hay on the field and it's eaten by a cow and comes out methane gas that's going to be producing the same amount as if it's eaten by a rabbit as if it's left in the field to rot. i feel that the best process is to return all these farms to small ranches because the small rancher, what they do is they make did viable for the cow to survive and then the milk or the

meet et cetera it's all very clean. if you don't take care of the animal you can't return the cycle full saoeurbgl. let me start again. if you don't take care of what the animal is eating that brings us down to the grass. if we don't take care of the grass, then we're all going to find ourselves with emissions that are produced by cards. everything -- it just goes into the atmosphere. so if we look at other ways to return the carbon from the air back in the soil one of the number one things you can come upon -- as a cow or rabbit eats grasses this is a root shoot ratio. when they eat a grass the root, the shoot is shorter. all the carbons that comes from the air they take the carbon

dioxide and turn it into liquid carbon and then an animal eats it and knocks off their part of their roots and becomes in the soil and feeds the my kroebs and you return carbon to the soil. if it goes deeper into the ground you sequester it for long periods of time, carbon storage. but the first way to get there, the same with memory, you can't remember something long term if it doesn't go into short term-term memory memory. if we can get into the short cycle of of getting carbon back into the soil and get it further then we're starting to help the picture. so, i'm being told i need to close up here. my take home message is i strongly feel if we

can look to other farmers that have done the same thing not just providing the mete meat, but by taking small farms you and distribute their poop or man manure over large lots of land, you're increasing the soil's viability and helping with the plants, the more plants you get the bigger and the more roots and the more carbon you put back in the soil. they did a wonderful project out in california. they took great plots of land and returned dry grasslands back to viable land and they in turn found that by putting one year of commercial dairy maneuver

spreading it out over the field, they increased by 40% their carbon return to the soil. if you find the big industrial plants i think that the dar you /* waste is a huge problem. if it's all confined it's waste. if it's all spread out if becomes a fertilizer and a good fertilizer, not one that kills all the mike crobes. so we'll continue this discussion with you if you like to join us later at lunch and also with the panelist from this next pan would like to join us and discuss this transformation

of agricultural and we'd love >> a final discussion from the american renewable energy summit in aspen, colorado. this is a little over an hour and a half. hour and a half. >> can y'all hear me? thank you folks for hanging in there. all morning with the exception

of the comments about the extinction process have been largely focusing on the domesticated world. and of course it's terribly important because there's 7, 8, 9 billion people that need to be tended to that need food, cover, water or space and everybody buys it and we secure those things by domesticating the planet. this panel will drift back in the thoughts of wild self willed nature. because that has to be part of the great transition too that we continue to value wild self willed nature we make a place on this planet for wild self willed nature as we imagine a great transition and of course that's the overarching theme for this morning. it's my great honor to be joined

on stage with three good thinkers. we'll start with the director of development for the carbon war room and fold by randy hayes and then randy will be followed by the co-founder and executive director of women's earth and climate action network. they have some prepared comments and then we're going to discuss hopefully involving you because the minds in this room are more powerful than the four of us here. with that as a very brief introduction, ann, you're up. >> wonderful. i really want to thank the gentleman doing the i.t. today because i am challeneged a bit i'm afraid. just briefly about the -- first of all very briefly i do as always want to thank chip and sally for the invitation. they're always so gracious.

[applause] >> the forum that the information was strode fairy. we are an ngo founded by richard branson. we find market driven solutions to a low carbon economy. we have our five operations up there. i'm not going to talk to two of them. my colleague, susan hunt who is the operation hunter will be here tomorrow visiting on. that i'm about to visit quite deeply on island. we have to look at bio diversity from what we're doing in terms of conservation. but what also we're doing from stopping the degradation from

happening. when i talk about market barriers what i'm saying when you look at shipping efficiency, the shipping owners or the building owners do not pay for the fuel or pay your utility bill as a tenant or shipper. they're not motivated to give you a shift that's more fuel efficient and energy efficient. ships alone are the 6th worst polluter between germany and japan. basic retrofits to a ship, a paint that is left porous or the engine to make it more efficient can save 20% of fool costs and emissions and more importantly they can stop the degradation. how do we motivate the owner of a ship to make it more fuel or energy efficient?

we find a private banger that's willing to do third party financing and that's been the big part of the work. you'll see that. that way we're able to deploy private capital and lower carbon emissions or work with emissions moving quickly right along. you probably heard a little bit about the ten island challenge. in 2011 we realized in the carbon world that there was a lot of degradation happening. it was all fossil fuel. besides what you can just think the things of the negativity of fossil fuel think of what it is when a ship has to come into an ail loaned and drop off this fuel. we saw it as an opportunity. the first thing we did i want to make sure i give it to you in the right order we realized -- we started with aruba.

you have a very motivated prime minister. we chose rio plus 20 to announce it. you'll see current president and former president of costa rica are doing the announcement. richard and mike from aruba and then the troublemaker who runs as you well the unccc. we thought we were taking one island off fossil fuel and how about ten islands and about 2015. >> the ten island challenge was born because richard branson said we're in. so there you go. that's how we started. coincidentally if there are any tnc and the tiffany foundation convened a half dozen heads of state in may of 2013 to any, get them to commit to addressing the energy issues on their islands.

we at that moment combined our effort and moved and determined to move forward. we then determined we would only do ten islands in the caribbean. that would be our first and then we'll visit in other areas and start moving across the globe if you will. we started the process on richard's island is now 80% renewables. recently and most successfully we started an extra taoepblg strategic alliance where we put on a creative climate in february. we brought the islands together from the caribbean and ceo's of businesses who are interested in doing the work on these islands and the development and from that we were able to lunch the ten island challenge and identify certain islands to work with. the issues as i'm saying islands

are largely dependant on imported fossil fuel. one island has 1 ten cents a kilowatt hour but the average is 65 aruba alone has 100,000 people. three months out of the people they have a million. just thinking about the towels and the intercontinental and the strain on tourism and water and transportation and just for that period of time we are only want to work with the 3 or 4 buffalos that are leading. those are the pioneers and the ones we believe are successful

and everybody else will follow. again it's to enhance the economic and the social and of course the environmental well being. again, i'm not going to -- i i really wanted to stress that the notion of the islands is for them do this and for us to work with them on it. you heard of other successful -- you heard of machine 90 just sort of disappearing. what we are careful about with our partners is to be certain that the islands are engaged extra tremendous transparent pro ises. we want a commercial viable process that is completely open to competitive process and that's the most important thing to us and that's what we see is the opportunity. the services that we'll offer i think are fairly straightforward starting with the marketing and both sort of reaching out to the communities so they can understand but also hearing what's important to them the biggest piece is the technical.

what you find with a lot of these islands they don't of the expertise. we are bringing in a team of experts who think about transportation planning and the grid, hospitals, et cetera, food and all the pieces and how to move forward. global partnerships. we work with groups which is the consortium. we identify existing technology. >> we want the islands we want to know where they want to start. we're not forcing a vision on them. we're finding out what they really want. again, locally driven and all very much makes sense of the

these are the island where we started. i'm not going to go through any specifics but during the q & a i'm happy to answer. these are our partners that were working with and again happy to visit on any of the partnerships appropriate and wonderful folks from rocky mountain institute who i'll be relying on as well. our notion is we can scale it not just in the caribbean and but an i cross the globe in a group of different islands. with that i leave it. thank you. >> it should be apparent from ann's comments that in this humanized world islands are vulnerable. but they always have been.

you go back to the 19 seventies, robert macarthur and ed wilson put forth a notion the island of bio geography. islands are difficult places to make a living. space works against you. well increasing the world is defined by islands. our great forests have been extensively fragmented. with that, randy if you could speak about forests and climate change and the great transition, please. >> when i graduated college i left oh high skpoe started -- ohio and started heading west. i decided to go to graduate school but it was a rather unique graduate school. i spent the next ten years being

secretary and chauffeur to the hopi elders. at the end of the ten years i decided to start the rain forest action network and jump into the forest issue big time. i needed to go out and make a tropical rain forest. to make a long story short, i said well, they invited mow to come out to the research situation, but the plane that i was supposed to fly out there on and land on this little grass runway and try to stop the plane before you hit the ocean it crashed and so i had to take a bus to the most remote little town and then hitchhike on logging roads as far as that

would get me and walk with one other friend of mine, an australian, south african friend of mine and walk for the next two days across the peninsula to get out in the rain forest and see a tropical rain forest. long story short. it was night fall and the monkeys were going off. they're just scary sounding creatures. they sound like they're about this tall and they're yay tall. you're out there and the sounds are going off. i had a sprained ankle and walking on a stick and we just realized we were out of food and treated water. we were not lost in the sense we knew what direction but we didn't know how far along the path we were and we were going have to to walk through all night through the rain forest. my friend sloshes across the river we had to cross many times through the course of the day

and the night, but i didn't want to walk true the night with wet boots so i take off one of my shoes and i'm about to take the other one and i look over my shoulder was standing an illegal gold miner with a raised machete. we stumbled on his illegal gold mine and i'm thinking oh, shit. and the monkeys are going on and my friend is on the other side of the river. his spanish was better than mine. i can't think of a damn thing to say. he's not saying anything. and this raised machete to have come down on me in a second, and i don't know what to do so i start with my hand over here to reach out as if i'm shaking hands and as i move it sort an inch his direction i notice his machete drops an inch.

we do this dance seems like 20 minutes and of course it was probably 20 seconds. he reaches out and we shake hands. my friend comes across the river and he says we're lost. he said you getter camp with me for the night. then it turns into tropical paradise and that's my first trip into a tropical rain forest to really visceral way to understand that quality and how we need to protect the rain forest. there are only four great for rest left on the planet. you got the amazon and pacific northwest into hralalaska and siberian forest and the mighty congo. we have to save the world's

forest if we stay under the average temperature rise and even that's a scary scenario. in the climate change circles it's often kind of defined as a fossil fuel problem, but depending on the study you look at 15-18% of the animal emissions comes from deforesttation. but i want you to bring up we have to halt did he for estation worldwide. and the cathedral forests are part of your own evolutionary history. we are creatures of the forest. that's part of i think our affinity to these cathedrals.

>> the machete was a manifestation of potential violence. men have largely run the shop. that's not been shy about violence directed to one another and nature. that is largely the pattern that defined the human existence for entirely too long. if you imagine a vital plant that's part this have great transition it has to involve a larger role for women. with that, please talk to us about what it will mean for a more peaceful and prosperous planet with more women involved. >> thank you both and randy as well. i want to reflect also to words

randy said. the protection of the forest is one of the most important things we can do and at the women's earth and climate network. one of the questions that we asked was what is an area that you think we can have the most impact that you're most interested in and protecting rain forest and the force of the world was something that came up and one of the top three things i want to bring up a few points and then i have a short fix that i want to show from our recent training. the two points i want to bring up one is that the oh oat congo basin is the second largest rain

forest in the world after the amazon and the other two are indonesia. very important also to mention these for rest needs to remain intact. we can't keep dividing them up. when they are continuous for rest they provide a huge amount of carbon material and we want to make sure we protect that. the other thank that's really important is that indigenous people comprise 40% of the world's population and 20% of the land surface. they maintain 80% of the planet's bio diversity and 85% of the world's protective areas. we're also talking about indigenous people and so the way in to working the amazon and

these different regions is through indigenous people who are the natural custodians of the land. they have done a great job of protecting these forests up until now. the group we're working with we have a wonderful partner, she's a force of nature herself. amazing powerful woman i love her so much. we worked with her on a shoestring budget. this happened over the last 3 or 4 months and amazing what we can do on very little. i wanted to share that story with you because this is not something highly funded but a group of of woman just deciding what are we going to do to have the most impact we can on the budget we have with our resources.

we started out with an online webinar training who would then go into the forest and work with the pig my women and we found out some of the most difficult things in that region that's what we focused on and seeing that one of the things a lot of the people are facing they themselves are having to cut down the trees from firewood because they're displaced from their original land. so much of our economy is based on an end whres economic growth model and they're devastating bio die swrersty and we don't have time to go into that topic

but i think it's essential that we continue to talk about the type of economy we had and models of economy we had and how they're impacting our bio diversity internationally. this is a film that they produced. it's not -- there's lots of words misspelled and it's raw. this came to me two days ago and i just wanted to share it because i think it's good to see what people are the ground are doing without our influence. please go ahead. thank you. ♪[singing]♪

♪[singing]♪ [speaking in a foreign language]

[speaking foreign language]

[applause] >> we had a cancellation but i

understand suzanne taylor is in the room that might be able to say a few words on this topic as well. ; is that correct? is suzanne with you? perhaps she can grab a mic and share some thoughts about the initiative. i can't see because of the lights. >> he's coming. >> oh, very good. thank you. i hate to put you on the spot. >> that's okay. my name is suzanne taylor and i was on the board since the late 90s. right after 9/11, obviously in 2001, i had the opportunity with sally cox to meet with joseph who became the president of now the elected president and then the appointed president of the

congo. leadership is what it really takes. he was 29-year-old when he took over the country. his father had been assassinated. we met him right after those events. and sally has been working in the congress go deep in this region where they live. they are the last primate species to be discovered. they're the most like humans in every way and they're a flagship species when they lose their habitat we will lose them. they're the last eight to be discovered and the first ones to be extinct. the two species only found in

the congo and the ba tphoeb bows and the acopy. species only found in the congo and the ba tphoeb he carved this huge second lung of the world and say we're going to preserve this. this was in the face of the war was just coming down and the logging concessions were coming up. and money was on the table. and the congo having gone through 35 years was totally broke. this was a bold decision. and i think that it's a great leadership -- i'm not saying everything they've done was perfect but at a was the first bold environmental thing and gets no credit for it whatsoever and through sally's work setting up a wonderful model where they listened first and acted later, and acted with them creating models that have gone on and book that's been written about them that was discussed last year about this great model if we lose the congo we lose a lot.

everybody who works in the congo even though we don't see it and it's pan of your daily news anymore, it is part of our daily breathing. >> thank you so much. [applause] >> you did well with that impromptu challenge, so thank you. i want to go back to the film we watched before opening this up to questions and discussions and i was intrigued that the one officer, the one gentleman in uniform said tell our government i need to tell our said tell our government i need to tell our government to make the decision. it was said earlier this morning by the gentleman sitting here when the scientists were on the panel that i know you have to abide by some level of

objectivism as a scientist but what about politics? and he made reference to the gubernatorial campaign in colorado. well, i hope you certainly understand politicians don't have to be anything less than objective. i've spent a career in the restoration of colleges. i'm a scientists. i'm also a politician. i'm not a objective when i enter the capital building in montana. you guys don't have to be as you fight for the great transition. i promise you on all theish shies that are being considered today, the fanths are on our -- facts are on our side. so don't think that -- that elected officials some how should be let off the hook of being objective.

that's not a matter to everybody. so if that is a setup, we're here. you're there. ask questions. we can discuss as we go as well. there's a question here upfront. thank you. i think she needs the mic. and surely we have more in the room, don't we? we have two. that's good. >> thank you. i thank you all for your incredible and important work. i've been hearing, you know throughout the course of this conversation today and yesterday illusions to the fact that we need to better value the resources that are not currently being accounted for in our economic system and i think grant is doing some work on this. it feels that that should be central to the conversation, speaking of eloquence in the room we're talking about him in that session but why or what's it going to take for you to

bring that discussion -- because it's a design question. and once we get the design right, then everything else falls into place? >> i know you spent time with senator gore when he was working so thoughts of our economic compass and how it may leading us in the right direction. >> sure, sure. i'll be happy to. i think that's rachel sitting next to you, isn't it? hi. rachel and i were in boss wana at a conference put on by conservation international where a half does leaders of nations came together to look at justice issue of how we actually value -- how we put a financial -- put an economic value on forests and other natural resources. i think the dialogue is starting

to move forward. i -- i -- a lot of it is actually -- and we were talking about it earlier in our political leadership. we're all sort of pushing ourselves from here to get to the cause and friends next year. but what we really need be doing is figure out the pieces of it. from my perspective this is one of the pieces that we should actually be addressing more. i think we're at the educational stage right now. i think we're at the point right now where communities, we need to actually be educating our legislature about how to do this and figuring out how to -- how to actually move it forward because i think we have been sort of talking about. it's certainly something that we've been visiting for a long time. that's what we were trying to do in botswana then we would

actually have a lot more capacity to bring it forward. >> you had some thoughts? >> yeah, the word "value" does not automatically mean financial value except in some circle. and increasingly larger and learge circles jump the financial value. do you value your beating heart? well yeah, you value your beating heart. that's not a financial sense of the word though. i think we have to make that distinction and be clear with our language when we're talking about financial valuation as opposed to just valuing. the chief looking horse the bad lands of his tribe and the ancestral territories. that's a spiritual value with a great consequence. it's an important arena. and payment for consistent services is another way to

express the general contact in god-awful acronym. i think that it has a role. it's a potential tool it's another sort of nool the tool shed. but it behooves people that it's getting the job done. mon tiesing nature and creating marks around nature, hey, if it buys a lot of time and getting the job done, i can hold my nose and put up with it. it is not my favorite strategy. i say to know that really want to go that direction be clear that you've got some examples that you can show success with it. and then let's continue to explore it. but i ask a lot of people and there are a few and far between of these examples of where it's really doing heroic things to protect nature. so i'm not ready to throw it out of the toolbox but i'm

suspicious around that. let's make a clear dinks between putting a price on an ecological bad as opposed to putting a price on an ecological good. the carbon market is a kind of paying for ecoservices arinne ooh of activity. and that's different than the polluter pay principle. the polluter pay principle is really trying to employ responsibility. the free market likes freedom. but we don't want irresponsible freedom. we want responsible freedom. and the polluter pay principle to me, it's still a market mechanism. it's a market tool but it's one the carbon tax is a polluter pay principle and it's a market mechanism to solve a problem. there are few of us in this room that want to throw carbon tax

out the door as a tool. so let's be clear on our ditstinkses between a payment for ecosystem services which i still hold as a suspect strategy but let's continue to explore it vs. the polluter payment principle which is a very powerful strategy that we can employ and we know how to. >> anything else? >> we have two or three minutes of a question or two and i see a hand. >> i'm sorry. >> salley cox is here. she just has, you know, altitude sickness. if you want to see her around, you'll see her. she did make it from d.c. >> there was a hand up. there's a hand over there. >> you have a hard time. ok. we've got a mic thank you, go ahead. my question is is -- what are

dwhash can we do as individuals to help this problem and do you think that animals can adapt how they've adapted in eating the farmland blow instead of living in the jungle? and what can we do as individuals to help this problem? >> would you like to take a run at that good question? >> i think that's a great question. and i think one of the most important things especially for young people is around education and to really learn how our earth works and what the animals need, what the plants need to learn about the ecosystem and the cycles of the water, the cycles of the ocean and have anna really intimate time with nature and to learn from nature. first and most important thing that we can all do because it's really hard to tell what a solution is when you don't really know what you're talking about. and i think that's one of the

most important things that many of us need to take more time in nature to understand the cycles of nature to understand the science. i think this conference is a really good way to get educated. i really am an advocate for school system having a lot more education programs in college. there's so many answers to your wonderful question but it's hard to care for things that we don't know anything about. what we're really missing many times is that love and care for the natural world because we're not connected to it, not in our modern day world. over half the world's population lives in an urban environment. i think one of the things we can do very personally is to get educated. right now people know there are some statistics that you can ask children or adults about all the different commercial products and you just show them the icon or the low go from a commercial product and they know what it is. but if you ask them to go toupt

front door whether you're in the country or the city and ask them to identify 10 animal species, they can't do. -- they can't do it. so i think there's a lot to offer in edge cafplgse >> i would -- offer in education. >> the sign reads "please end" so i will end. no, some species will not adapt. some species will disappear forever. it's not a bright future for most species unless we add very quickly very certainly now. thank you, folks. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.visit ncicap.org]

>> ok. the remaining elephant in the room is our final panel between now and lunch. and the organizers of this conference hrks in fact, don't want to avoid the elephants in the room and so set up this explicit panel on the subject. we've heard illusions to a couple of the elephants in the room in some of the earl crer panels. one was addressed around lifestyle choices through our diet and consumerism in that sense what kind of food do we consume and what are the ecological ramification and the climate change ramification those food choices and they are of great consequence but there are other consumer issues. and while -- please, please, come up. and our own sally reigny is

going to commandeer this panel. and i'm going to turn this conference to her as people get miced up. salley? >> i think that this is probably one of the most important conversations that we're having during this conference, the reason being is that both excessive consumption in population can undo everything that you've heard about thus far and will hear about. and these two subjects are often not addressed because they're sensitive, they're touchy. populations being more so than consumption but both of them because they fly in the face of the status quo and also some really serious idologies that

are prevailing -- ideologies that are prevailing in the world today. i want to briefly introduce and i mean briefly because in your program, everybody's bio but lester brown, you know who he is. so i'm not going to -- policy institute. but i will say lester is probably the mind, the one mind on the planet who has been looking at climate change, sustainability, the vital signs of the planet from a comprehensive viewpoint perspective for decades and he's written over 55 books. the new one which is coming out in october, november it's called "the great transition" actually. mark ezaroff is a pioneer iner

ecofashion -- in ecofashion which is driving fashion forward and co-founder of the institute of integrative nutrition and i am enlightened creations. she's on the board of the trade association, fair trade u.s.a. and she has received a plethora of awards including right here in aspen from the aspen institute the henry crown fellowship. marilyn pam she has a variety of credentials really applied to this conversation today is she was the c.e.o. of aveda. she was president of reebok apparel and retail group and vice president of nike. and she was awarded the reebok human rights award from 2004 and 2008 and she also as you learned

the other day she was advisor to the bhutanese government from their transition from royalty to a parliamentary system. eric snow is the founder and c.e.o. of medibrand. he pioneered the usda organic stamp soda, ice tea energy drink markets in this country. he also received the socially responsible business award from the natural products industry in 2007. and he's also the husband of marcy. so with that we'll start. i -- i've got to get mic'ed here. so as we -- you know, this is a huge conversation, population

and consumption. i'd like to start and what happened in the last -- or what was -- the discussion was in the last conversation about forests and impacts on forests extend beyond that locality because a lot of those products from around the world are for the rest of us. and i want to give you some statistics just to set the stage here. and before i do that also there is -- there are two groups of thoughts around these two subjects one is that population is the number one issue that we have to address if we're going to be sustainable. there's another theory that overconsumption is the number one issue. so keep that in mind as we go

through this panel. so the world's richest 7% are responsible for 50% of all the co2. co2 of an american how much land you need for food, water clothing, the essentials for one american is 9.5 hexars. for someone in africa it is way under a hexar. what's happening in their country particularly the rich countries one america's

emissions equals four chinese. 20 people from india 250 ethiopians. and the intergenerational legacy on america -- and i'm choosing america because we're the number one. we really are the number one consumers. the intergenerational legacy is -- i just read a study the other day is that down the line a child born today in america will have seven times the carbon footprint that an american has right now. so obviously this gets into a lot of different perspectives on what we're doing. trillions of dollars between 1900. that was about $1.2 trillion that was consumed.

in 1928 it was 24 trillion and since then it's almost doubled. so with that i'm going to start with lester because i asked lester to give us the profile of population and how that relates to consumption. >> can you hear me? >> keep talking. >> no. move it up. >> is it ok now in --? what i thought it would do is use the food economy to compare population growth and rising ainfluence. it's sort of the simple model but it gives us a sense.

the world's population is growing by 80 billion a year. that means there will be 216,000 people at the dinner table tonight who are not there last night. so this is a very substantial -- it's a couple of stadiums full of people we're adding each day an we've been doing it for not just years but decades now. so it begins to put pressure on water resources or forests as we were discussing earlier land resources. the growth of the population the 1.1 per center each year is the $80 million. but we also have rising ainfluence and with the average person i would use the grain

recurrence ladder. this measures animal protein. the average person in india consumes about 400 pounds of grain per year. it's about a pound a day. in this country we consume about 1600 pounds of grain per year per person four times as much. on that 1600 pounds, we consume maybe 150 pounds directly as breakfast searle. the great bulk of that will be consumed indirectly in the form of animal protein. the problem with that is to get another pound takes about seven pounds of grain. to get another pound of growth in the -- takes about three pounds of grain.

chickens closer to two pounds of grain per pound of live weight so they're depending on which meats we con assume -- consume, which meets we choose to consume is where we are on the grain requirements ladder. in looking at the growth in world demand delrg 80 million people translates to about 24 million tons of grain against a gobal hard vet of two billion tons of grain. we were learning on constraints to keep up with population growth and the rising ainfluence at the same time. it becomes 2%.

we have seen the situation where the annual growth for grain to feed cattle, poultry has been somewhat larger in world demand from population growth. so this is kind of a historical shift that we've -- they're very close. we're producing -- we're using almost all the land in the world today that should be used for agriculture. and that doesn't include clearing the amazon rain forest. so we're pretty much against the limits on land. then with water -- i think water is submerging as the principle constraint on efforts to expand world food production. and then we drink four litters

of water a day. but the food we consume each day takes about 2,000 litters of water to produce or 500 times as much. stated simply, we eat 500 times as much water as we drink. so how much we drink is trivial. it gets lost in the rounding. it's imbodied in the grain that we consume and the meat which is really the big factor. so we have land not expanding anymore. we have dwrover pumping the water in many places in the world. someone refered to texas and oklahoma and the aquifer. but that's pretty small for us. we don't have much irrigated grain production in the united states. most of our grain is produced in the corn belt. and just to give you sense of how important that agriculture real estate is, the state of iowa produces more grain than canada and more soy beans than canada at the same time.

this is high value real estate, very, very productive. so we -- but as a general manager, land and water are emerging as constraints. we're overpumping in china under the north china plain. in india where farmers have invested, you don't have to have a license to dig an irrigation wells and as a result they have 260,000 irrigation wells. this is serious overpumping but no one's in charge. you don't have to have a license so anyone can drill an irrigation well. but at some point, the world bank estimated that 175 million people in india are being fed with grain produced by overpumping water. you can overpump in the short

run. but by definition not in the long run. and that's where we're seeing some dramatic adjustments, probably the most dramatic in the world would be the arab country, syria iraq. those four countries have all overpumped their aquifers. they've experienced water and have all experienced big grain. this is the first glare the world, first region where we have seen grain production declined and as a result translated into peak grain. we've been looking at rising -- let me mention one other thing -- one is climate change. it's very difficult. we know what the effects of water shortages are. climate change is very difficult

to assess. we know that a one degree rise in temperature, one degree celsius rise reduces grain yelled 17%. one degree reduces grain yield 17%. the projected rise is up to six degrees celsius. try to run that arithmetic through. imagine the sort of problem we're going to face if we stay on the current path in terms of increasing carbon emissions so climate's a big issue. back when i was farming in the 1950's, we had fluctuations in weather. we might have a drought one year which would reduce the tomato crop but we didn't worry too much because next year things would go back to normal. today there's no norm to go back

to. the whole climate system is influx and farmers can't anticipate it. this is a very difficult time to be a farmer because you just don't know how it's going to happen, how fast and when. what are the consequences of these constraints to make it more difficult to expand production is will food prices doubled in the last decade or so? now, it doesn't reather bother us too much if world grain prices double. we buy loaf of bread for $3. it has maybe 15 cents of wheat. we just -- we're so isolated with tall processing and markets and so forth in between. but if you look at new delhi and you go to the market each day and you buy wheat each day to make chopati, the price of them

double. we really don't feel it very much. they do. one of the consequences of this and this is my final point is that we have -- i've join the center so i've been working of the agricultural trends. we've seen the one-meal a day in low income societies. now we're seeing something beyond that in a number of countries. nigeria for example. 22% of all families now plan foodless days. it's not are we going to eat once a day. but some days we're not going to eat. the same thing is true for ethiopia indian, bangladesh, peru. a large percentage of families

usually around 20 -- 24% now plan foodless days. they know they can't afford to eat every day. we should be able to eat five days a week. so we'll skip wednesday and saturday. this is new. we've not had this before where people realize they simply cannot eat every day and it becomes part of their lifestyle. it's been so recent that we don't really have much research on the consequences of what this means particularly for young people and their physical and mental development. but it is one of the most, i think one of the most serious issues that we face today but it is not yet been recognized as such. >> thank you. thank you, lester that sort of sets the -- the ground floor here because food and water are the twreel essentials. i'm going to go to marilyn next.

and i'm going to put her a little bit on the hot slot. she was c.e.o. as i said of aveda. she's also been on the board of nike and reebok as well. nike is one of the seven companies that have been tarted not to buy from because not because of their human rights protocols or how far you come in in that direction but because coca-cola is another one but because of overconsumption excessive consumption of various products is creating the situation that you're talking about. along with population. but as far as changes in temperature and changes in water are coming from carbon emissions. so i would like you to tell us a little bit about what you were on the inside of these companies

. aveda is a little bit more conscious, i would think than nike. but if you would just tell us a little bit from the consumption side of this. >> thank you. >> thank you. it's a great way to start by saying, okay, i've been in the hot seat. that's great. [laughter] >> because i have good answers and that's what's a relief. when i was at nike a little less than two years, and philosophically we had a lot of differences but i won't go into those now. subsequent to that i had my own company and then i went to reebok. the thing i did at reebok which i couldn't get enacted at nike is what sally is talking about. at reebok we were able to go back to something i'll show you in a little while from my own personal experience about the

whole consumption cycle. i come from hong kong and understanding and seeing what it's like have to nothing or very little. and then how does the person like that come to running a major international corporation responsible for a lot of the consumption that is taking place, including where they're using excessive resources. what we were able to do at reebok was go back through the whole supply chain down to where we buy the initial raw materials. it's a re matter of reviewing the whole supply chain and not just saying we're making this most efficiently and are we choosing -- but right down to oh--oh oh right down to how it's being produced. part of the situation they got into the situation is because

reebok showed them as an example of how it could be done and still be relatively successful. so i guess that he a way of saying it's not my fault but truthfully it's bigger than that and about understanding that it's all our fault because we are part of the consumerism that is including where happening right now. so, i'd like to share with you, if it this works, could somebody put up my slides, please. this first picture is of the harbor in hong kong when i was a child in the 'sixties. these are fisher people and lived on boats and ate on the boats and fished from the boats and the children took care of each other and of course they

threw everything that was excess into the ocean. so it was a completely good system but they were very low impact as far as the environment. i was in that area for several years living in the area so i really got a direct perspective on how people lived in a different way. also in the same area were lot of fabric and garment factories and at the end of the processing of whatever it was they were processing, the water with the dye stuff or whatever we were doing, stone washing or garment washing, all of that just went directly into the river and into the ocean. so it's not a perfect system. but it gave me an understanding of what happened. now several years later maybe 15 years later in the 80s hong kong became much more affluent and those areas -- this is the same area.

it doesn't even look like -- because so much of the land was refilled. they call it reclaimed. they bulldozered the mountain and filled in the ocean. those people who were the fisher people were displaced obviously and they moved into these areas. if you want to talk about per capita consumption of course it went up and the children went to school and happening they were more into the whole system, but garment manufacturing and all that still went on and this is where i was now working. it went into places like china where the dye stuff went into the river and places like bangladesh where they had a small operation where they dye and the children were working on this. so the situation didn't get better. it just got moved and this is what i think she was talking about. the of an influence goes up and it moves the production cycle to other places where we're

polluting and we're polluting it because it's our consumption that is demanding all this. and then what is the responsible way for us to market our products because if there's no demand there is nothing to be made. it's ultimately us as consumers and also responsible via marketers how they tell you what it is that you need. are you listening. fir one is to go back to the source of raw material and i'm using i using aveda where we went to brazil and worked with the indigenous people to go back to growing indigenous plants so

that we can have what we in the western world want which is color cosmetics and air color et cetera. it's not easy because these people are displaced twice. once when rubber growing came in and then synthetics came more important to so that became -- they got displaced from that again and moreland got clear cut for cattle growing for our hamburgers. going back to reclaim some identity to grow back the indigenous plants takes education and patience and money and takes fortitude for us as manufacturers. you can support that whole process if you get educated in what who is doing this kind of work. because ultimately it's not just for them but for us. you also want organic and healthy products to put in your

body and ingest in your body so it's a win-win for everybody. the other one is review the whole supply chain. we talk about organic being the standard. i want to question that. organic is maybe not the standard. maybe you don't need it at all. maybe you don't need to have that second or third or fourth whatever it is you're buying. and if you do, what are the options are there because cotton is a very thirsty plant. it demands a lot of california. we grow a lot in california and parts of the world where they're having water problems. do we need cotton even if it's organic? can we use another fabric. can we use hemp or recycled wool or a lot of synthetics. i've been working with some manufacturers on water bottles

to be made into clothing, these are ways to look at the whole supply chain to reduce our footprint. these are the things for us to think about maybe organic is the gold standard. what is the source of material it might not be cotton. another issue for manufactures as well as for us is packaging. and a lot of times now in california where i live, a lot of places are enacting the fact that you cannot get a bag from the grocery store. you may think it's a small thing. my little store in my neighborhood i asked them since this law came into effect this year i said how many bags have

you saved. they said we've been saving a million and a half bags in my little store because people bring it in. if you get a bag from the store they sell you one for $0.10. it changed behavior. can we do that without charging $0.10? this is the court of thing we can think about. in shipping and packing where your goods come from is it better to buy local and organic or better to buy local and inorganic or it is better to buy something from peru or new zealand? we can be aware of that as well as the manufacturers can be aware of that. how can we be more direct refuse introducing the number. consumerism is more really more? that's something we have to think about. what do we really a

million and a half bags in my little store because people bring it in. if you get a bag from the storeneed? the more stuff we get doesn't make us happier. that true happiness has to come from inside and that way we'll reduce consumerism. i want to show you a picture. it was probably less than $600, probably $400 a year. if you see on the far corner there is a coca-cola and tpapbt at a sign. they went to that area and

talked to me people into putting up the signs because they pay for the rest of the sign that says the store's name. store never had a name before because everybody knew the rest of the sign that says the store's everybody. what do you really need? all we really need to drink the whatter but now we think we need soft tkreupbts or whatever it is we need and the body is only asking for water. i just want to show this as what's happening. think about this is a marketing concept that we are as

manufacturers perpetuating. it's up to you to think about do you want to buy into that and you have the vote. you are the ones who decide what gets made because you have the dollars. so i would say the first thing is reduce your consumption, reuse what you have and recycle. so with that thank you. [applause] >> couple points i would like to pick up on. advertising. advertising has -- we have 450 shampoos in the drugstore. do we really need that? the answer is no, we don't. i have a little place in argentina where i live off the

grid, live on horseback and have two little solar panels and live on horseback on the property. if you go to see your neighbor you get on your horse you and don't use any of this stuff and guess what? you don't need it. you really don't need it. the other point i want to make is sustainability labelling which is something that's come up in political discussions is would people change their behavior if there was sustainable labelling on where did all the ingredients come from in a product. the answer is probably yes. that's one way people -- people don't want to use palm oil that's in oreos and girl scoot cookies at the expense of indonesian forests and the orangutan. if they know argentina where they go, i don't want to do that. so, to get on the radical side of that, boycotting is one of it. the more demands through the advertising, through the

promotion of these products, the more production, the more production the more extraction. so really it's about saying no, like all the clothes i have on right now are from consignment. all of my clothes are on consignment. most of the furniture in 3450eu house is on consignment or really really old. we don't to have buy new. there is enough in the world we can recycle, recycle, recycle. the other point that i want to make and i'm just going to share some really quick figures here because i want to get into ethical consumption. but there's luxury versus necessity. and in america we are really luxury driven. and values this. gets into what are our real values which they

touched on in the last panel. we -- this is globally, we spend almost $18 billion on make-up. reproductive healthcare for all women would be $12 billion. pet food $17 billion. elimination of hunger and malnutrition about the same. perfume, $15 billion. universal literacy, we spend little under $5 billion. ocean cruises $15 billion. clean drinking water for all, under ten. ice cream in europe $12 billion. immunizing every child, less than $1 billion. and then you could do -- could you also look at this in

relationship to what is the bekwetsdz bekwetsdzed value of forest and rivers and there are economists looking at that and far outstrips what the value is of a tree taken at this moment in time to make a reproduction out of mahogany of an antique so somebody can buy it in north carolina. those are the kinds of thing. now ethical consumption and what is that and what does it look like? you have been a pioneer in eco fashion and sourcing at an organic level and promoting this and you've been very successful. please tell us about your work. >> okay. so i have a couple -- i like to speak visually and it's inherent in what i do.

but i won't go too deep on the topics but i'm just going to give you just a sound byte or taste of why i have committed my life and my passion to revolutionizing the fashion industry. first of all i'm a dot connector and i came out of the organic and natural food industry. skweu% of a cotton plant ends up in the food system. when i start looking at the interconnection and the magnitude and multitude of impacts in the fiber world and fashion world it became unbelievably overwhelming to me that this was an industry that we could not ignore any longer. it started for me in cotton coming out of food and when i learned that less than 3% of agriculture is cotton but 25 of the most harmful pesticides are

used on the cotton industry it became clear that we had to look at a new paradigm for cotton. we could say no longer consume cotton but between bedding and bath and clothing that's not very likely, so it's now about shifting the paradigm of cotton and looking at how do we address something that's one of the leading causes of air and water pollution which most people think it's a natural fiber but they have no idea when you pull the curtain back on the cotton industry not only do you have all the chemicals but also have added form mall da hide and bleaches and heavy and heavy metals. the global textile industry uses 10% of the world's carbon

impact, so over a trillion kilowatt hours a year are coming out of the global textile industry for production, dieing finishing and it is when you look at water and waste and of course chemical use social standards as well as energy and carbon footprint we have to create a new fashion industry. so we started with whole foods with my company to connect the dots and show you don't have to give up style quality, color, fit, comfort. we lunched the first organic cotton program for target. break every stigma. i's not about this or that but about that this and that. when we look at positive consumerism we have to look at good business and good products, better products, ethical products and shop with our dollars and -- vote with our

dollars and no longer support the companies that are depleting and destroying but those building a better tomorrow and even the hotel and spa does true. everybody here travels and you can see the impact on textiles in that industry. using organic cotton over convention alcott ton can make a significance difference. we're very big on collaboration and heed indication and inspiration. educating the media about why it matters is hugely important and a lot of people -- everyone in this room and everyone on this planet we are late to textiles yet very few start to think the impact of the textiles how they're having an impact on the plan set and future generations. every product matters.

you don't have to give up anything. you get more. it's value values is the new model for business and about win-win and one plus one equals 11 and 1 of the reasons i'm here today we have to connect the dots and all of us are out there trying to create a better world and a more sustainable planet and humanity. when you look at the textile industry as one of the worst we all can play a role in making it different there. whether we're leveraging celebrities to get the word out and textiles whoand collaborating with educateers and so we can tell our stories together, and then looking at how we can align with all the ngo's that are

starting to shift this paradigm in fashion. one of the things i'm optimistic is looking at the next generation. i have two teenagers and these kids are growing up where natural foods and whole foods and organic foods are in their supermarkets and cities and yoga is in their gym. they're growing up more consciously. when i spoke about eco fashion years ago people looked at me craze country as a paradoxical world really and those two worlds were die cot musts. it wouldn't fit with people who are looking at fashion about material and all about the surface pwufplt today that next generation when you say echo fashion there is an attention to

it. a lot of these designers -- emerging designers they want to incorporate and have sustainability imbedded in their designs. and looking at invasion. i there is an organization called the sustainable apparel coalition which represents 85% of the world apparel manufacturers that are coming together to join forces and look at how can we measure those impacts in the supply chain. we have to look at the raw materials we're using and ask the question about how much energy are we using and how much water, who is making our clothes and where are they being made. whether it's cradle to cradle to launching to eucalyptus which is a solution to cotton.

it's grown without water and manufactured in a close loop system. whether it's recycled polyor some of these innovative fibers there are many solutions and many more coming. when you look at bangladesh and what happened in april 2013, of course 1133 people lost their lives in a single day because of the working conditions in the fashion industry, lack thereof. but one of the encouraging things in terms of consumer motivation. this year on april 24th, 2014, 58 countries around the world came together to start what's called fashion revolution day that is honoring these april 2013, of course 1133 people lost their lives in a single day because of the victims and now and i'll just -- by saying that this is a sign of what's to come in terms of consumer engagement. fashion as it was is not sustainable. we have to create a new fashion industry and engage people to collaborate all over the world

to shift the paradigm. this is where you can buy eco fashion and more being born constantly and together we can create a new reality in fashion. [applause] >> i just want to say one thing, women in the global north command 80% of all the purchases made. it's up to us to make the right choices or not to choose at all. >> we're not going to have time to do slides today because i've been watching. i'll pick up where my esteemed panel members left me. i'll tell you my story. i'm an entrepreneur. i decided to make a difference

in my life and through maybe my very short story you can see the work i'm trying to do. i represent the beverage industry in the world. and we are probably one of the greatest over consumers here in america. there is no reason people need to drink a 100 million bottles of soda or beer and no reason. it's insanity ity. it seems insane that the world allows this to go on. it's insanity. it's only going to change, not from the people at coca-cola or pepsi or the larger companies that are victims and now afraid to make the decisions but the consumer demanding it and the retailers supporting it. briefly how i got into this was from authentic upbringing. i was raised in the hippie household in the seventies. i learned as a very young kid

pesticides and herbicides weren't good for your body. we didn't believe in factory farming and raised in an eco-friendly household. thanks to jimmy carter my dad put three solar panels on the roof much the next he showed how we saved 30% and everyone said we should do that too. as a very young kid these were belief systems instilled in me. so get into the beverage business and just real brief, i figured i could take on the big companies and show them that a little company could care. when we started steve's we were the first certified soda company in america. and next thing we did was a fair trade certified company. we cared about the farmers and land and