go to school, the we as blind because the education makes the world the more just the make up your own mind. made for mines. the well mother nature's warnings are becoming increasingly drastic. what we used to call extreme events. suddenly the norm and furnace in western canada with temperatures never before registered were shocked and horrified. but we always had things managed to turn away. devastating storm damage in europe, 2 and more denials. so on to the point we ask climate catastrophe. will we ever change our ways use

yeah, thank you very much for joining us on the show with us in the studio is pater kinslow and journalist with the humbug based weekly site. she's convinced that we will change our ways and life will be better. also with this is claudia camphor, from the german institute for economic research. she argues that climate protection means freedom across to generations of fossil free life is not about going without . it's about living a full life and a warm welcome to, to angelica, i'm a christian who is worse than that. cato institute also, headquartered here in berlin and angelie say, use for the global. so it's all about reconciling di compensation with justice and poverty alleviation. okay, thank you very much for all for for 3 of you for being here today. i'd like to take the 1st question to claudia. it's got to do with the united nations,

which is calling the climate change. the defining crisis of our time. indeed, un secretary general antonio good carriage, says climate change called the climate emergency is a race we are currently losing. however, he insists it is a race we can when you share his ought to be. yeah, i share his optimism because we are now at a tipping point. also in discussions we as a tipping point related also to social participation on the topic we. we have fridays for future movement all over the globe. we have the rulings, for example, in germany, from the general court, but also in other countries. as we see, we see step by step, much faster action than before. and we have lost a lot of time with war discussion for last 15 years. but now we have reached a tipping point where we can change, but we have to now we cannot postpone it to the future. fascinating. and so great

stuff to begin to show with a fair amount of information optimistic information to pay through. you wrote a book about how you and your family of 4 tried to adopt a carbon neutral lifestyle. how did it go? what did you learn? so we didn't succeed next. if you failed miserably, we tried the thing. if you try, you fail and you try again. we didn't say on all accounts. what we did was, was actually happened out of frustration. we were frustrated with the politicians that didn't really act on the facts that we all saw. climate change is effect. we feel it now in canada, if it in germany was all over the world. so we tried to find it. we personally can do. and we went through a whole year and checked every account of a personal lives. so clothing traveling, the food we eat, the way we live. and we lowered our c o 2 emissions from around 11 tons to 7, which is not actually really good because we need to go down to,

to couple of things that you can change because you live in a society, you can rebuild your house from scratch. but we were very good way you, you said in your statements and stuff to show you, we will live a better life and that, you know, the optimism that you see were sharing and maybe you share it to is fascinating to me. what does that optimism come from? because i experience as personally my life is better now that was before, for example, we had a car, we don't have a car now. we live in a city, so it's actually easier than when you live on somewhere in a remote area. but it took me about 2 or 3 months to automatically go from when i go to work to, to use the bike and the car, you need a certain time to, to, to, to, to, to really get used to the different way of live. and now i don't need to go to a bus to do any longer because i bike to work and i back backwards. so i have the sport every day in my life, which makes my life better. cool, wonderful angelie. i know it's a big chance, but try and give me

a summer if you can, of how this whole climate debate is impacting india. i think it's pretty relevant in india as it is anywhere else in the world. and i think it's pretty, it's a very, very strong conversation that takes place. and i think it's also reflected in the, the sort of the pledge that india made in the past 2015 agreement. and it was, it was achievable and it can go bit further. but the thing is, what goes back and what maybe restricts the extent to which and guess able to sort of commit or be able to make the extra effort is other priorities that sort of india is right now leading to achieve with a growing population with economic growth, not yet, i could speak, it's got a lot of space where it's going to confuse more, it's going to admit mall. and the ideal sort of a sweet spot would be able to achieve that incremental growth of incremental consumption. but not the additional emission that the images we tend to see from india for can smoke intel in extreme stuff. you don't come from delhi, do i do?

i wasn't born there, but i spent majority of my dad's life in delhi and i think it went for a couple of years. you know, it's as bad as the things the whether the air is foggy. the air is it is hazy, it's not clear. it's the news does not sort of give a false impression of how pathetic the situation is and, and that has to be that for this, not that people aren't doing anything. the government is not up to it that our dog gets. there are objectives that are laid down, there are schemes, but it takes a little more than, you know, i think it's a play. it's the demand type play as well as a splice i played. and i think that moving forward. i mean, we're not in a comfortable situation anymore. it's sort of getting to the red line where, you know, we need to really act and we need to really put, put oil here. and i think sort of, we're still finding the sweet spot. we're able to levy a cost on the extra pollution that's been done, but at the same time not put consumers in a position where they can live

a happy life. so i think it's a great example daily. i remember that one of the german chances a long time ago made a campaign where he's actually set the guy by the rule to be should be blue again. and it's an area which was afraid to live with lot of cold and coal mining and coca cola plants there. and he actually made the plight we, i want the people to to have good air quality. so switching from cold to renewables is a good way to increase the to, to, to, to lead, to leave the people the better life i completely agree with. yeah, i completely agree with you, but me on some of these communities agreement because the vest, the 3 of you and i some of our, of us what states and they're going to say they've all got the same mindset here. alter the me to probably. yeah. and that mindset is that climate change is a very real challenge. there are other people around the world and there are plenty of them. i think it's all made or it's all harmless. claudia,

what do you say to people like that? so the denial is yeah. script, well, it's not the science. what those people refer to because the scientific facts are clear and since that decades clear that the human induce climate change is ongoing . and we already see that by now with the extreme events. for example, in canada, i was in russia was phoning for us in finland right now. and the climate ologist tell us that's, that's what we will face in the future. much more than that we are seeing right now, though they are scientific findings. and the skeptics are also driven by p r. campaign waste also from the fossil fuel lobby scientific studies showing that they are fueling, these p r campaigns in denying and merchants of power. so to, to see out is their business model. and we have to look to the facts, i'm a scientist, we are scientists, the scientific facts clear,

even without believing in climate change. look at delhi to breathe. good aaron delhi. even without believing and the type of climate change you want better difficult to look the other way. but i think, i mean, deli, of course, i mean it's definitely not easy to be going to walk everyday, given the attitude surrounded with. and i think the situation sort of, you could find examples of london and singapore where they've had congestion pricing in beijing. and i mean the solution there are solutions existing across the board. the rest of these have face maybe to not be extent to which spacing, but sort of been there and you know, how have efforts and policy measures that have been put in place. and i think it's a bit of both. you have someone who is say that it's on the government, the other ones have to make the effort and make sure the, the right policy is um, put in place. we can be changing our lifestyle for the routines and bad weather. the other side, it's, you know, there is a little bit of responsibility and it falls and the kids you must make the right

choice. that is the deli, metro cycling is particularly not an option. give it, it's not lean driving. you don't have bike lanes, but it's not something you can you can think of that are from the metro station to the office. if you have bikes being provided, you have to make sure you have multiple boards of transport apart from private transport. but i think, i mean, there are, there are many other systemic changes that needs to come up before we. so we leave would be effort of the blame on just the government and or just the consumer can combine all this. i mean, you can combine also with climate policy. climate policy creates freedom for many countries for the future generations. climate policy also creates the welfare of all the people and increase as well as well. and climate change is not. it's not the subject of believe it's really a scientific fact. and as a side this, i always have to say that there's not believing into something. it's not a religion, it's facts, it's science and that's where we are all clear on time a policy help a lot. now let's look now at one example of how into connected our environments

habitat. so now our lives have become and that example is domestic build up of plastics in the world's oceans and rivers. a vacuum cleaner is not enough to combat plastic waste on south africa beaches. millions of tons of plastic particles are now deposited on beaches all over the world. the rivers are in fact the arteries of these countries that transport the waves from the cities. this also applies to the nile and the egypt. here volunteers are also trying to stem the tide of plastic. the fishermen are directly affected because then i see a lot of plot by the name of the plastic bottles and also can all of the trashes ruining my net. and at the same time, it's killing the piles of garbage or accelerating species, extinction and climate change. some material takes several 100 years to decompose

and will probably never break down completely. meanwhile, awareness is growing about the threat disposal to humanity. recycling plants do exist, but they can only recycle a fraction of the ways to produce this is exacerbated by a throwaway society that has become accustomed to having your needs met everywhere at any time. inconvenient packaging should be learned to live without plastic the old. well, that's the question peter, i'd like to just put it a different way. i mean, we through throw huge quantities of stuff, especially plastics, into our oceans, in our rivers. what does that tell us about mankind? human kind. it tells us that we have a problem. this much larger than climate change is a part of the problem. is this the way we deal with the world? we think the world is just something we can consume and we don't have to get back. we don't have to preserve and we can have ever more. and i think this is a misconception. to certain extent, we have to kind of step back and think what we really need for for 18 months. now,

my newspapers, i've been reading to, there's going to be a big rethink, a big reset because of the panoramic and it's changed the way we think. and the way we see is the, the world, especially the klein, attention to how things are going to happen. yeah, i think there are tendencies and showing that a lot of people think overall, whether the strategy of just always more and more and more, and also harming the climate, harming the environment is not a great strategy and we should move away. and now we are learning the video conference as we are learning more cycling. but always, i mean it's not only a matter of lifestyle, it's also a matter of transformation which brings a lot of challenges. but brings also a lot of chances to all of us. but also to the industrial, to the system itself and a lot of new jobs and system where capitalism versus climate. yeah. so it's not versus it's both together. so in the original form, the economy can do

a lot and really classical social associates. it cannot make them a logical make, make it together in a certain way, social ecological economics and say, say that way is an issue which we can do. but we have to prize in the governmental damage as we have to price and also the climate damages. and we have to transform and that brings a lot of challenges, but also a huge economic chances. just let me, let me show the pro, to slogans, to green revolution the growth well, i mean, best, they both are the right seminar, logy right now, given become a good estimate. but speaking globally, i think that the road to something that needs needs of wider audience needs a wider discussion, needs a wider platform. and right now if it hasn't happened yet, no, definitely not. it hasn't happened yet. i think we're still sort of mulling over it . that is a huge class of scientists,

a political scientists that have consider going forward with it in the research, but the real implementation of it. i don't see the politics denita picking it up to the extent that it needs to. but if you look at the go, the south where you know we're not to. she is right now still applauds have not been we've not been in the position in terms of standard of living in terms of well being in terms of growth where we can look at the growth. but you still have tried out. india are giving carbon neutral dockets by 2050, 2060 despite the fact that it was really less than 22 decades ago that we had a chance at, at reaching the court. but i mean having said that, i'd also, i also think claudia said it's not capitalism or climate. and i think it sort of working hand in hand because to be able to address the kind of issues we need money and be have fossil inductive which has the money. so we cannot be walking towards solutions by putting them down. and, you know, be like, we need the, we need the oil under the ground beneath the gun. yes, we need, but we can't isolate them in our fight. and i think it has to be sort of, you know,

a play together and how to best find a solution to be able to see harness. if it's, if it's renewable energy, if it's alternate or to the pricing. if it's carbon pricing, we need the other players on board as well. so we're hearing things. the dirty things need to be gross. the good things need to grow and that's, that's the mental issue here. i completely agree. capitalism could kick in in a good way, is financial markets now more, more leading to change because we don't want to turn the assets. you don't want to put you into a coal mine these days because you don't know within 20 years, it will be able to, to, to, to be run. but who's going to bad the cost to send it to the government right now in the developing nations have the, the, the, the willingness and the financial sense to be able to bad the cost of standard assets. and they have other development and national priorities coming to play. so i think that the fact that there's still a lot of pages, a lot of dogs that are given by the needles and to go this out is, is enough to say there is an intention, but the has to be attacked on for they has to be a financial support coming, coming at the same time to be able to make those policies reality well in the

battle to keep a global warming below 2 degrees. we've touched on this already. we must slash global emissions of carbon dioxide by about 45 percent before 2030, quite soon. that is all with the aim of reaching 0. net emissions by 2050. the big question is, how 10 years ago, shortly after the reactor accident and fukushima japan, the german government decided to take all german nuclear power plants off the grid and switch primarily to renewal by energy sources. german nuclear power will be phased out in 2022. but the dismantling process is a difficult one. the fuel rods need to be called for years to come, and some radioactive substances will have to be stored safely for thousands of years. at this point in time, there are only interim storage facilities. other countries are pushing for a revival of a controversial technology. after numerous accidents and old american nuclear power plants, the bite and ministration plans to build smaller modern plants, france,

russia, and china, in particular, also want to use nuclear power to satisfy part of their enormous energy needs. the advantage, unlike combustible substances, like coal, natural gas or oil, nuclear power plants are largely c, o 2 neutral, and therefore more climate friendly, at least from this particular point of view. do we need nuclear power to stop global warming? sorry, but i think it's the closest low carbon option, extra renewables in terms of providing access to everyone. and yes, there are a lot of reservations that is acosta associated with it. that is high risk. but i think that that is a very less understanding of the deck know, economic effects over or over the public perceptions or the lobby perceptions of the potential that renewable can actually have a larger share as a low carbon system degree. i disagree strongly disagree because the potentials of renewable energy are really large,

especially also for india and we know solar energy has large potential energy by him as well. so we don't need nuclear nuclear. i said this too risky. extremely costly. one generation you, this is nuclear power, both parties, health and generations have to take care of the weights. and that's not what we should put to the future generation. one. wish i would, we be looking for the right mix for the right for the new technologies where 100 percent renewable energy world and several studies are showing this already. that's also in the u. s. a. europe can do it. i know the r p. r campaigns in favor of the small, medium reactors which is coming from a start up wants to create these reactors. it's a power point technology knowing since the fifty's is not working, it's not economically. it's creating more risk. and also the military issues here and point. but the, the answer is renewable energy is the answer and the potential is always neglected

and ignore it is simply by the so p r campaign and india has so large potential. so i would say nuclear is just a quick enough to build all these power plants you need time and we need to fight climate change for years. so you can put a saw that everywhere in the remote areas in africa. sola can be of the solution wouldn't and a g s way. the technology is quite easy for me, can put them wherever, wherever we need them. and with the, with, with nuclear it's, it's the other way round is it's not quick, it's expensive and you know, country has yet managed to deal with the, with the, with the leftovers. just one question paper, i mean, would we need the perspective of the younger generation and i and i, and i was thinking about, i read about your son who complains you. he got annoyed with you because he said that you've, you come from a generation that has trouble the world and enjoy doing so. and you, we now have completely different expectations about what i presume. this is

generation. i think this is where the question of, of justice kicks and it kicks in the generations in between the north and the global south. and there is a huge issue that we haven't sauced yet. it's not the seller that has to go forward . it's the nurse in its own ration of generation because we need to, to, to let something over when we, when they need to have the possibility to inherit something from this word. and i think it's absolutely right. you know, optimistic. the guardian newspaper only recently had a big headline, sort of, we had 6 decades of these war makes, but we have, we have who hated the, haven't felt the issue. now we feel it, we feel it in germany. we feel it. and canada, we feel that everyone and i would say mankind is able to, to quickly when, when the problem is that one strong argument, what i just said, also in the beginning we add a tipping point because of the civil society. and here's the difference on the picture. what we see right now, the civil society has changed,

and this is what we see in the rulings of the federal courts also in germany and the netherlands, and the u. s. everywhere the civil society can and is pushing for change peoples because we all fear that there is the last future and we should change right now and i think that is a tipping point. now, i agree that i mean that is the, the gen, the gen x and why that is, that is sort of questioning why is that we have to push back our ones and desires to travel to, to consume a little more. but i think that at the same time that is a lot of awareness in the generation on what, what you're going to be heading towards. and is this the like that the one for ourselves in the next 4050 years? i think a lot of information and understanding has sort of trickle down to schools in the syllabus into putting into the the, the matter that there's the need at school. so there is going to be a bit of pushback because you're essentially limiting the battery of how much can you really want and go out. but i think the generation is a lot more aware before they take their choices, that they get options. you have

a lot of this younger generation or maybe the, the twenties and thirties, we who have accepted to make the change in terms of the transport that they use in terms of the diet they have in terms of how much they can view. what kind of housing, where are they going to live? how much to the travel in the, you know, and i mean, a lot of it has to do mike speed. and so 5 been european experience to me. and in india there isn't enough to sort of complain because it's not like it's, it's beyond control that you know, every month someone's outside. so it's, i wouldn't see that there is so much of a pushback from the generation. i think there's a lot of acceptance. it's going to take time change. there is a bit of sort of a sort of an annoyance that, you know, we've come so far, yes, 60 years. nothing's happened. but i'll be waiting for it to reach in a situation to act. but something is going to happen in this country in the next couple of months where we have the general election there very, a watershed election. i would suggest that the end of september, half a minute from each of you. what advice would you give to the incoming german

government, on the climate issue? to go forwards quickly because there's lots of markets for the german industry if we now switch into to green economy. if we are able to provide green products and debate, we need to, we really need an honest debate about the chances, but also about the transformation not only determined goals, that's good. they all confirm, but we need measures to go there and to there's some kind of dishonesty in the whole debate they can do better on the job and the issue, i mean guess it's still an unmet return. so me what exactly you mean? i don't know. we go for a little time, but when you said they can do better, i mean, i think the reader for unit that's being set right now is not the limit to which we actually need to be able to reach me at utility or to be able to reach the to the remark, but 2015 by mid century elevators at the very find very well, i'm just saying whether it as a line prizes increasing by whatever 5 cent or so and the debate is over. so the

price is really good measure. but in reality, the politicians cannot make it really happen and that's the main problem was it? i think we need is a whole mix of matters that absolutely agree. but the moment most important thing is that they start to put into place measures, and it's not just about perez and atlanta goes any longer. it's not time to think that the engineer is absolutely right. and we have the things we have the measure, the technology, we can go forward and shoot shot. so we really need to talk. electra complained about the chance as we have the opportunities galore. we have learned we've been talking about the, the climate catastrophe. how to avoid the catastrophe that is already arrived. we're in a good mood. we're hopeful for the future. and we'd like you to join us again to

the the news. the news. the news. the news.

the news, the news ah. reading our operating system is brutal. you can't pay the price to get the drugs and side effects and

the goal was right in front of them. they gave it there. then suddenly, we agreed to postpone the or olympic games that tokyo with $22021.00 thrown off course during the qualifying rounds or not for sports hero. i'm fired up and ready to count down during last the lucky, roach, and told you starts july 19th on p. w. in december 2019, and the european council's new president show me shows embarked on a ground breaking mission. i have a clear door to me 0 the 1st time jones on the planet by twins. if not all member states support it and some persuasion is required. a surprising glance into the very heart of

our hostess who will win the game. diplomatic poker. treat power plays and alliances behind the scenes of the summit starts august 5th on d, w. i was

the love and respect me the ah, the w news. and these are our top stories. the government of haiti has asked the united states to send troops protective crucial infrastructure after the assassination of president jovan and the us and columbia, that there investigators would travel to haiti to help probe the killing. 17 suspect have been.