major initiative to help drive the global economy towards a low carbon model of business and carbon pricing. simply put is a way of putting a true cost on pollution that term companies, businesses, countries emit. so that when you're buying a product, you don't just pay for the cost, but you at the price actually reflects the cost to every $1.00 else of the carbon emissions, the pollution that it's creating. and economists broadly agree that it's by far, the most effective way of addressing the balance to make sure that the, it always pays to do the right thing. well, that does proportionally affect the poor given there aren't a rival product on the shelves that, well, that's a very good, that's a very good point. and you know, the thing about carbon pricing is it's not new. but one of the reasons that it hasn't really gone as far from the textbook to the statute

book is because of the unintended consequences. because as much as you want to hit businesses that are polluting, there is a possibility that if you put up the cost of gas, say that you also have an unintended consequence of pushing up the cost of heating . and i'll put it in the global south may be pushing up the cost of cooling, where people are dependent on air conditioning, or some places where you have cook staves, that use fossil fuels. you put up the cost of eating. so it's very important that politicians don't just use this as a blunt instrument or just use this as another way to raise tax that they then put into their treasuries back pocket. you've got to make sure that you think through the unintended consequences of carbon pricing, as well as take advantage of the big economic push that it does that it would give

towards the green economy. and what i say in what the carbon pricing leadership coalition has said in a new report that was released over the summer is that there are some very simple ways in which this can be done. but we really need to recognize that each region, each country and is slightly different and unique. they need to come up with their own ways to deal with any of those unintended consequences. yeah, but it's a world bank project. you know, the global south considers the world bank to be a catastrophe when it's come to environmental degradation all around the world with its projects. we don't see an ideological lifetime. it's between, i mean just palm oil in the all right, one destroyer. but he says, ideological, i mean i, i think if you want to talk about historical legacy, i don't think any institution, any country that has been around for decades comes out of this well, initiatives your favorites are ones that are great for entrepreneurs. great for

making money, the chinese communist party. we've had chinese experts on have a much bigger scale attempt, arguably to combat climate change. and it's centrally planned and then goes out to the provinces of china and seems more ambitious, don't you think than these ones in countries that don't favor join. now i have to say all the sages of the, of the global climate. i don't think i put the chinese chinese communist party at the top of my list. the fact of the matter is, china is the world biggest polluter and will carry on being the world's biggest polluter. and for some time to come. and really the successive or failure of the world's efforts all depends on whether or not china steps up to the mark and really start to bring down. it's a massive, massive carbon emissions at a pace in scale that is commensurate with the science. and if they don't be under no illusion, it's not going to be br. is not even going to be the united states as stuff as most,

it's going to be the, the poorest countries of the world that will be hit by china's continuing to burn coal. it will be the poorest countries of the world he'll be hit most by the natural disasters by the rising sea levels. if china continues to fuel their economy using coal and allowing those emissions to go into the atmosphere, they've been trying to oversee as a target of 20 percent to 0 emissions by 20. 60, i don't know whether you think that target is a good idea, but you can't see why. well, in the step in the right direction, it's obviously nothing compared to net 0, which the u. k. and most of the i, c d have signed up to by 2050. so obviously we appreciate that china is coming from a different starting point and but the, but the in the european union, for example, that counts us on that 26 percent of total global emissions now. and the u. k. significantly less the u. k has caught it emissions by over 50 percent since

1990. china still hasn't pete. so china is still going out year on year on year. the u. k now produces less carbon emissions than when queen victoria was on the throne. and as i heard of his, i include the royal navy. does that include? it was all about, is it certain, of course it includes the full name, the i don't think the raw navy is a male. i ask that because one of the biggest hulu, tasman of the house is not very big. i asked that because one of the biggest pollutants is of course the, like the pentagon famously and they usually don't calculate military activities in, in carbon models. and of course china, china is the biggest polluter because it has the biggest population. obviously, china is no and near as bad polluters, the united states. if you divide by the number of people that live virtually, well it does, did it fun enough? the chinese per capita emissions are now significantly higher than europe. so you're right that the you s is still the largest per capita polluter,

but the emissions are coming down significantly. china is, has continued to go in the wrong direction. the reason for that is very simple. cole and why has the u. k. been able to reduce its emission so substantially it's because we've almost entirely got rid of coal from the electricity system, replaced it with clean energy and instead, and if you look what's happened in the u. s. despite the last administration under donald trump's rhetoric, the reality is coal continued to come off the system, china, it still means t and reduce and then eventually eliminate cold production. but it's got such a long way to go for that to happen. how geopolitical, in cold war, 2.0 as it's being talked about, is the whole combating climate change debate? i mean, after all, the, the biden administration is continuing with this pipeline fossil fuel pipeline of

native american lands. i know your company host to john kerry, the usaa climate on why he's been involved in wars, you know, libya, her and so on, which are obviously destroy the environment. how political is all of this. and can you see why? certainly media in the you, in a donation is all about this is masculine, beijing's problem. they are not facing up to the challenge while washington london, brussels is i think actually are coming out from the wrong point of views. climate i think has the potential for being one of the few geo political issues that actually brings nations together. because what is absolutely clear, if we divide ourselves in 2 blocks, we're never going to solve this. it does require a whole world solution. and if you look at what russia has done, it's very, very welcome the fact that her, they've committed to net 0 by 2060. and if you see the,

a innovation and interest that there is in, for example, the climate partnership of russia. i, i think it's very, very encouraging that a country which um has such a legacy of fossil fuels is increasingly turning with real enthusiasm to the low carbon economy. april carroll edge about this. why didn't he come to cobb 26? well, you'd have to ask him that, but the most important things that they deliver on the 2060, on the 2060 pledge and just finally, how do you rate bars, johnson year old colleague, i mean to resume abolish your department. the department of energy and climate change. johnson hasn't got it back again. and i know that you know, a former prince john c. i would want it back in, i think actually for the department of energy and climate change, it was to a certain degree so far as energy is concerned, mission to accomplish what was important was that we now have at the house of government embedded in the economic department of, of bays,

the climate change agenda. and i think boris, i knew spoken to more about this. i worked for boys when he was mer i chaired to london sustainable development commission. i know that he has a personal commitment, an attachment to the natural world. and while there is many things on his plate, and he is nevertheless, i think has a, has a real conviction around climate change. and certainly i don't underestimate the task that the u. k. face is in trying to deliver a sufficiently ambitious outcome to cop 26 in glasgow. but i think it won't be for the lack of effort for the lack of trying. and how important is it even if they don't come to a deal. i mean, the paris still still holds right? well, no degrees the, the only, the only thing is this is slightly did this, this, this conference is rob, different the previous un conferences on climate in the private

sector have almost to me cli, important part to play as sovereign nations. so it's not just about a government's coming in and president signing declaration. so putting their names to treaties is also about the private sector that underpin those economy is equally committing, particularly the hard to abate the very energy in energy intensive, highly polluting industrial sectors of which are group. gala minium is a part that we all recognize that we've all got an obligation. and that's why the m plus group became the 1st company in the global element sector to adopt to net 0 target. and why we have the most comprehensive root map that we published last month on how we're going to deliver it. we have a 2000 companies worldwide listed. public companies have now committed to

a net 0 target, but only about a 180 of them have actually published really clear road maps on how they're going to deliver those reductions. so we don't just need prime ministers and presidents to come along and talk about climate change. we need c s and chairman to step up and show how they're companies, particularly the big companies. the big emitters are actually going to deliver and make it happen in the real economy. lord walker, thank you. after the re nature nation states embrace the crypto cards. the revolution is it time for renewable energy resource, bitcoin to finish off central banks and global neoliberalism. for good, all this of all coming up about to have going on the ground with it's been 30 years since the soviet union collapsed. mom miss got louder,

little chill them on to water palm yet nuclear, you know, talk, so shown where you also trust them. one, all the ukraine was one of the independent states that emerge from the ruins of a super bow avenue. awesome, good. would you also get on the ball? greens? come a little more surely confusing. some of the i can last new lucian, west india, better. one more law totally different. the last one is a, is a social for you to view the citizens responded to scribble for sure with water the past 3 decades been likely ukraine. eye witnesses were cool, the events, this would be more or less. so judiciary was in a deficiency of chipotle. what i knew to know if that order, i'm not sure, but i did that for months with no idea what else and what other forces were at play . you have to do so to me, show see inch in machine those them. you are in the kid what it americans many of the shows us the most of the versions or at least take

a look at ukraine. 30 years after gaining independence, dog via phone with almost unless, unless you mean yet, like unity retorted mostly will waive, but a will. it could be issue. last will still holding for a ah, welcome back. this fight scare stories warning of the energy use of bitcoin is crypto currency. a key issue that will deliberately be avoided at cop $26.00 in glasgow to day is bitcoin a key weapon and dismantling the central bank sponsored neoliberalism. that has seen global temperatures threatening humanity joining me now from the cayman islands. where else is raoul pal, economic historian, and founder and ceo of global macro investor. all thanks so much for coming back on

before we get to crypto saving humanity. am i suppose? i better ask whether we're going to see some kind of bitcoin or crypto spike before the end of christmas, given the chinese communist party seems to have reversed its decision. now they're going to have some kind of referendum really on whether to use bitcoin or certainly allow mining of bitcoin in the largest p p p g d p. country in the world. ah, yes, i think this mass scale adoption going on. so just for people to frame what's really going on here, this is the internet, back of 1997 had a 150000000 users. it was growing that 63 percent a year. it was the fastest adoption of any technology the world i've ever seen. will kind of familiar with that story. crypto current is 150000000 uses. the adoption rate is 115 percent a year. it's basically twice as fast as the fastest adoption of any technology in a recorded history. so it's happening at lightning pace. everybody is coming into

the space, the institutions, the suffering, well funds, retail investors from e t. s. nation states, everybody. and so i do think the price continues to spike significantly, not only in the year end of probably in the 1st half of next year. so right now let's get to the dangers of e t f. x tray, exchange traded funds, which allow people pension funds, all sorts of different normal financial vehicles to invest in it. how dangerous is it that exchange traded funds are involved encrypted currency which are seen by idealists as breaking the power of central banks. given that they're betting on the future price, you might have to explain. i mean, what, what are the company i top level, i don't mind. it's adoption. it's still adoption. it's not in the way that the idealists would believe, which is not your keys, not your coins. i store them yourself much like you didn't go balls,

but it allows people access to this revolution technology in the returns that can come from it. the problem is it was done sub, optimally. it was actually benchmark against a futures contracts. so a futures contract is something that is about the future price of an asset and it doesn't have to stay in line with the actual price of bitcoin. and what happens is when you get a lot of demand for the futures contracts, it trades it a huge premium, which means that you're actually lowering your return. so a lot of people going to come here and say will be cleaned up a 100 percent in the last quarter, and they'll suddenly see that they made 30 percent. it's the same with the you are so oil e t f, it's based on futures contract. so it doesn't actually represent the underlying, so people, even in the se, se is saying they're trying to help people here. they're actually not directly doing the opposite. they're exposing them to risk that better understand which is the premium and discount the futures. contracts can trade that they don't allow

ordinary people trade futures contracts, but they think it's ok to allow them to trade an e t s by some teachers contract to nonsense to me. there's no conspiracy here in a deliberate attempt by the security exchange commission, which would deny that there's anything dangerous, i should say. they haven't, they haven't adjudicated on on this precisely yet. there's nothing in conspiratorial about deliberately creating some kind of an angel vehicle which will burn people, make them make them stop being interesting to see that the cynic in all of us would say that probably aware of some of that. i know it some optimal. but i also understand the fact that the current system, the a, c, c and others don't have to deal with the physical ownership, pos, bitcoin for the t f. is that secure enough? because what would be even worse is if i can make it secure enough and i think it is secure, but it's so it's a false narrative. and that money got hacked, then suddenly to be no money left and everybody can lose everything. i think that's

entirely wrong because this very, very few hacks of any of the major exchanges. everything has changed is not 2017 anymore. oh my god, 2013. but task me would say yes, they kind of understand that people are going to get disappointed. i don't think that that mat cavellia. oh, we can, we can trust the s c c. that's after stop press rope. well, so we can trust them. actually let's talk about the fcc, which worked in idle wrong doing gary gansler, who runs it, said as warned that crypto is like the wild west, i mean unwittingly, that may attract people in the middle america to do it. but there's something political here about statements coming from him and, and others warning people against sport training clearly or sport investments that you can do on the internet. easily possible is he's in his own political battle to regulate this. so what he's doing is shaking the sabre, saying,

somebody needs to regulate this and it's going to be me. at the same time, the c, f t c a trying to do the same. the fate of looking otherwise regulating the osi say . so all of these agencies are fighting who's going to regulate said, why? because they know it's big and is power. so whoever gets it gets all the power. so i think that's fair, i think would. they're also looking at this with the eyes of a 1934 securities law, which is nonsense. what this really is, is real time venture capitalism. for the, for the everyday person, the, every day person's been shut out of the big opportunities because you have to be accredited. you need to go through financial institutions as barrier offered barry off the barrier. so only the rich people get access. this is what has to change within this. this is allowing, if you don't deal with the mass securities, you're going to allow everybody to be able to participate in this kind of early stage be see where the big gains are. i think there's

a big battle that's being drawn up. he is showing the hotline because that's how you negotiate old trade negotiators. everybody does the same thing. no, never, never going to happen. obviously what happens is that they reach against grant comprised there's too much money in the space to me, young voices, and just too much innovation. the space for him to come down and say, we're gonna, we're gonna prosecute all at least hockins as security's. a one's going to prison just never going to happen. so it's setting the battle grounds for the fight. that has to happen. okay. i mean, there are sudden announcements, obviously, when some crypto assets, the take the crypto market by, by surprise, i'll get on to the how even, even the poorest people. and i'm speaking to you from a country with one and 4 children in poverty. how they families like that can somehow participate. i'll get to that in a moment, but not only our ordinary people not allowed to or not been able to

get into this market for so many decades. they've had, they've had to see their own currencies. get more and more the value we know here that the standard of living is set to decrease according to many analysts. could the very same vested interests in nato nations, not deliberately sabotaged crypto by quantitative lee. easy, but to, to buy the market by the crypto market, just as they were, i only return to his fat currency. they will buy ass, they will buy crypto assets of the time. that is going to happen. all they gain to be a large enough participant because that come in so late to be able to manipulate that market or damp in the market like people say that happens with the gold market. i doubt it because there's something as unique. this is a distributed network of owners around the world from a 150000000 people that will soon be a 1000000000 people. so their ability to control it is almost 0. it's a fascinating,

fascinating spice. it is really anti establishment at its core and crates, a new world based around kind of distributed ownership and proven ownership of assets that people can't mess around with. you can't win supply, fearing the loss of power. could the fed in the bank of england not just buy all of it and take the hit of the loss and make the public pay for it? it's potentially feasible if somebody will sell it to them. so it's actually, it's actually pretty hard. if the central bank were found to be trying to pursue a strategy like that, that we can sell them anything. because there is a core belief in this space that this is for the people and not for the governance . people don't mind if the government participates in it, alongside the people. but if the government trying to control it at the expense of the people that will not wash, do you think the bank of england is going to take on the millennial voters now? they're not going to do that. they're going to have to adapt. do they care about

the policies don't seem to. they tend to millennial voters are on the regular no, no, much liking the bank of england, perhaps. i mean, and they don't. but if they go to battle, they will go to battle and, and we saw that recently with the u. s. on it puts regulations in and like millions of people wrote him to congressmen, senators got involved in all sorts of groups. and i think the she was surprised at the strength of this movement and how much money's in it as well. and on the even more macro level for the military industrial complex, they're fine with countries now using it to evade this sanctions. other anecdotal reports of countries buying a humanitarian aid that they say can't be, can't be got through normal means because of nato sanctioned that alone. countries not necessarily progressive like el salvador allowing it as, as a currency. would it be big in the global south? yes, it will be because it does avoid swished. you know,

you can have one nation state saying who is a good i act from bad actor. it's ok if all nations come together and say we made an agreement, somebody's about ok. so that's okay. at least it some consensus, but to be honest is safe and swift to say no, you bad, you good. people don't want that. china doesn't. one said that's what chinese billing had a sense in trying digital currency rails. in fact, the europeans, i wanted their building on the digital currency rails. so all the singaporeans and so all the swedes, so on the danes impact everybody is. so we're moving away from a switch. well, whether they like it or not. and in this world of 3 capital flows, however, except the crypto is, is a coal pot and samples on a great job with that. and i think the middle east will do a similar job. we will see capital flows to them and away from places that don't give it a. yeah, i give it

a good home. so i think it actually works well because it actually changes the entire narrative. run how rules basically rule the system works. and just finally, i mean, what you said clearly means you don't believe it's a pyramid scheme run by a few oligarchs is all often spread as a rumor in the press. very briefly, if you've got 20 b 30 p a week, a how do you, even by a big coin is what they probably think father of it, good of people make it easy. now things like pay popularity, use that. so most people have a pay power at little square at $1.00 of these payment systems revolution. the u. k . is another one. you could just buy that. that's an easy way to start, because it's hard to set up an exchange you to set up an exchange. you know, a brokerage accounts, you could do that way too, or you can buy, you know, each e f is one launching the u k. ah, this one in germany. this one's all around the world, canada, the u. s. so there's plenty ways to participate now. a more and more will come,

but i do urge people to participate just dollar cost average per little bit in a risk too much and use leverage and just participate in something that could be the biggest thing any of us ever seen. i think right now it's a 2 and a half trillion the last class, most of the major assa, close around, well equities bones real estate between 150 and trained from 50 trillion. so i think this goes to 200 trillion in the next 10 years. so it's not 100 expert asset class. mankind has never seen that before. so it's an opportunity for everybody because everybody can own 10 percent of their assets in this, everybody, the richest and the poorest. ok. this is not proper official, their financial advice, because you can sell their own advisors and all the usual caveats. mirabelle, thank you. thank you. so much that's over the show back on wednesday. yes, since us went to the polls in congested election, they had an insurrection in washington, d. c. that killed or injured more than a 140 people in the u. s. parliament building until they keep in touch with social

media and let us know if you will be investing in crypto card. ah ah ah . so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy,

even foundation, let it be an arms race is on offense. very dramatic development. only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very difficult time. time to sit down and talk it's been 30 years since the soviet union collapsed. in new sco logo, literature was the one to walk up on me, yet mcdaniel took so, so show me your score. trust them went through all of them. ukraine was one of the independent states that emerged from the ruins of the super bowl. awesome. good. would you also get on google greens? come a little more surely. confusion from us. they act and less new lucian, west, nor did better langley law did it up or else what is a is a social for the business? is there's a surface, but a teachable for sure. oh, it does. should a for apple,

watch the past 3 decades been likely ukraine. eye witnesses recall the events. this will be a moral issue of judiciary, affinity deficiency, chipotle. what i knew the more familiar with that order. i'm not sure what a good bunch for months with no idea what else and what other pulses were at play. your producer to whom you shows shinla sheila samuel alden, the care what it american soup when you the shows ocean. the moser, the ocean jordan, is take a look at ukraine, 30 years after gaining independence, if the organism you're for theater, but i'm a source for data unless you mean yeah. with unity retorted mostly will move, but a will. it makes you provision opium, luster molded for a

headlines, and i say europe's energy crisis coded and a breakthrough deal on global corporate taxation. all fresh down to the g. 20 summit is now wrapped up in writing, but it wasn't all smiled there with the french president, claiming his australian counterpart was lying about that trouble dale. the submarine i do see when, when we have respect, you have to be too and you have to behave in mine and consistently with people. i do. i don't think i know a world leaders and i when scotland for the you end climate summit with big messages and promises to tackle climate change. but there are some concerns about the tools and i think a lot of my peers are talking about or discussing why this wouldn't have been an online session.