[Script Info]
Title: 
[Events]
Format: Layer, Start, End, Style, Name, MarginL, MarginR, MarginV, Effect, Text
Dialogue: 0,0:00:00.00,0:00:18.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,{\i1}36C3 preroll music{\i0}
Dialogue: 0,0:00:18.90,0:00:24.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Herald: Now we come to Bernhard\NStoevesandt. "Science for future?". Your
Dialogue: 0,0:00:24.58,0:00:26.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,stage - your talk. Here we go.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:26.71,0:00:31.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,{\i1}Applause{\i0}
Dialogue: 0,0:00:31.34,0:00:36.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Bernhad Stoevesandt: Thank you very much.\NOK. OK. This is not just my talk. This
Dialogue: 0,0:00:36.10,0:00:40.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,talk has a history. I have a coauthor,\NMartin Dörenkämper, who is a colleague of
Dialogue: 0,0:00:40.16,0:00:45.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,mine who could not come here, but - so, I\Nwill give this talk by myself, but we
Dialogue: 0,0:00:45.56,0:00:51.83,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,worked together over the year on this talk\Nbecause this talk has a history. And it's
Dialogue: 0,0:00:51.83,0:00:57.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a bit of the history of Scientists for\NFuture, which is an association of
Dialogue: 0,0:00:57.27,0:01:03.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,scientists that evolved this year,\Nbasically with the movement of those
Dialogue: 0,0:01:03.68,0:01:09.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,students and pupils of Fridays for Future.\NAnd there were questions, you know, that
Dialogue: 0,0:01:09.30,0:01:16.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they took to the street and said, hey, we\Nwant a future. We want that things change.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:16.46,0:01:21.82,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And they demanded for politics to change.\NAnd this did not directly happen, but it
Dialogue: 0,0:01:21.82,0:01:26.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,was questioned, so some - well -\Nprofessional politicians said, well, they
Dialogue: 0,0:01:26.72,0:01:31.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,should leave it to the professionals. And\Nthat's the point where actually a lot of
Dialogue: 0,0:01:31.47,0:01:36.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,scientists and a lot of scientists I know,\Nall where really mad at this because
Dialogue: 0,0:01:36.56,0:01:43.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they've been doing science and research\Nfor so many years. I mean, I don't know if
Dialogue: 0,0:01:43.27,0:01:50.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you saw the presentations before, how much\Neffort is being put into this, into this
Dialogue: 0,0:01:50.16,0:01:57.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,research to make better and better, better\Nmodels. And what I will show you, this
Dialogue: 0,0:01:57.66,0:02:03.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,presentation is about the results of the\Noutcome of this and what this means and
Dialogue: 0,0:02:03.30,0:02:08.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,still nothing changes. So they write\Npapers, they write reports and, well,
Dialogue: 0,0:02:08.22,0:02:13.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,nothing happens. And so the only thing we\Ncould say was basically, hey, they are
Dialogue: 0,0:02:13.58,0:02:20.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,right. Things need to change. And that's\Nwhy we got together and formed this
Dialogue: 0,0:02:20.13,0:02:27.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,association. So there's a charta on this,\Nwhich says basically what we do is we go
Dialogue: 0,0:02:27.13,0:02:32.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,out and we try to inform people on the\Nresearch, on the state of the art of the
Dialogue: 0,0:02:32.11,0:02:37.67,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,research and how things are currently. And\Nthat's why I'm here. So that's exactly
Dialogue: 0,0:02:37.67,0:02:43.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,what I'm doing here. So we go out to\Nwherever and you can come to us and ask
Dialogue: 0,0:02:43.13,0:02:51.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,for presentations, for discussions to get\Ninformed on this topic, on what this
Dialogue: 0,0:02:51.61,0:02:58.82,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,climate change issue actually means. And\Nthis is the disclaimer now, I can tell you
Dialogue: 0,0:02:58.82,0:03:09.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this is not a good mood talk, okay? So,\Nyeah. Because the topic is very serious.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:09.58,0:03:14.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So it's a bit different than I usually do\Nit, in the end it will look a little bit
Dialogue: 0,0:03:14.32,0:03:18.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,better than in the beginning, but\Nnevertheless. So where are we currently?
Dialogue: 0,0:03:18.51,0:03:25.82,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So this is the current graph. This is all\Nnot research by myself. This is mainly
Dialogue: 0,0:03:25.82,0:03:32.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,from IPCC reports, and this is from the\Nreport from last year on the 1.5 degree
Dialogue: 0,0:03:32.96,0:03:39.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,report, which was made - basically done,\Nor, put together because in the Paris
Dialogue: 0,0:03:39.62,0:03:48.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,agreement in 2015, it was said, well, we,\Nthe world, or, the governments of the
Dialogue: 0,0:03:48.40,0:03:56.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,world, want to keep the climate change -\Nthe temperature change - to well below 2
Dialogue: 0,0:03:56.52,0:04:00.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,degrees, if possible, to 1.5 degrees, and\Nthe question was, hey, is this actually
Dialogue: 0,0:04:00.90,0:04:07.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,possible? Can we make that? What do we\Nneed to do to do this? And so there has
Dialogue: 0,0:04:07.01,0:04:12.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,been a lot of questions about this and a\Nlot of research. A huge number of
Dialogue: 0,0:04:12.46,0:04:17.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,publications came out on this topic: "Hey,\Nwhat does it mean to have a 1.5 degrees
Dialogue: 0,0:04:17.75,0:04:22.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,warmer earth?" "What does it mean to have\Na 2 degrees warmer earth?" and "Is this
Dialogue: 0,0:04:22.73,0:04:29.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,actually possible to limit climate change\Nto these temperatures?" And this is the
Dialogue: 0,0:04:29.74,0:04:34.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,current state. I really love this graph\Nbecause it contains a lot of different
Dialogue: 0,0:04:34.76,0:04:39.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,things. So what we are talking about. So\Nwe have a pre-industrial period that we
Dialogue: 0,0:04:39.71,0:04:47.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,use as a reference. So that's the period\Nfrom 1850 to 1900 here. This is the
Dialogue: 0,0:04:47.10,0:04:51.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,reference period where we say, OK, this\Nwas pre-industrial temperature and
Dialogue: 0,0:04:51.84,0:04:57.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,everything afterwards, the changes from\Nthat are all referring to this. So 1.5
Dialogue: 0,0:04:57.69,0:05:05.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,degrees or so would be the difference from\Nthis period. And then, what climate does,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:05.41,0:05:10.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it's not always constant. So every year,\Nsometimes it's a bit warmer and sometimes
Dialogue: 0,0:05:10.43,0:05:14.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a bit colder. So what you need to do is\Nyou need to average. This is quite
Dialogue: 0,0:05:14.84,0:05:22.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,important, because, for example, there is\Nthis year of - where is it? here - 1998,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:22.28,0:05:27.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,there was a very warm year. And\Nafterwards, for a long period, there
Dialogue: 0,0:05:27.69,0:05:32.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,weren't so many warm years. And then there\Nwere some people saying: "Oh, yeah, look,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:32.43,0:05:37.33,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the temperature does not change anymore,\Nso everything's fine now". And this, of
Dialogue: 0,0:05:37.33,0:05:42.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,course, isn't true, because you have to\Nlook at average periods. So the red line,
Dialogue: 0,0:05:42.57,0:05:48.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this is the so-called floating average. So\Nyou always average with the years and this
Dialogue: 0,0:05:48.49,0:05:54.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,gives us about the current temperature\Nchange. So this would be like a typical
Dialogue: 0,0:05:54.47,0:05:59.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,climate period with like 20 years. You\Nusually look at 20 years. But the problem
Dialogue: 0,0:05:59.81,0:06:04.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we have currently is, that the change was\Nso drastic, that looking for 20 years,
Dialogue: 0,0:06:04.44,0:06:10.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,then you would always have to go far back\Nto periods when well, there was a big
Dialogue: 0,0:06:10.38,0:06:18.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,difference to today. So, the last changes\Nin this report were taken from this 2006
Dialogue: 0,0:06:18.24,0:06:25.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to 2015 period. And the extrapolation from\Nthis was basically, that in 2017 we
Dialogue: 0,0:06:25.29,0:06:32.09,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,probably reached a 1 degree increase in\Ntemperature on a global scale. That's not
Dialogue: 0,0:06:32.09,0:06:37.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,always the same, and in different areas it\Nmight be warmer and in different it's
Dialogue: 0,0:06:37.06,0:06:46.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,colder, but that's the global increase.\NSo. So this is where we are currently. So
Dialogue: 0,0:06:46.02,0:06:54.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we have an increase from 280 parts per\Nmillion in CO2 to about 410 ppm. This is
Dialogue: 0,0:06:54.63,0:06:59.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,changing. Its not constant, it's a bit\Ngoing up and down but it's about 410
Dialogue: 0,0:06:59.73,0:07:05.15,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in 2019. We have a strong increase in\Ntemperature globally, but the biggest
Dialogue: 0,0:07:05.15,0:07:11.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,increase is actually in the winter. It's\Nin the Arctic. And there's a current
Dialogue: 0,0:07:11.64,0:07:19.55,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,antrophogenic CO2 surplus of about 40\Ngigatons per year. So 40 gigatons - what's
Dialogue: 0,0:07:19.55,0:07:23.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that? That was actually current, this is\Nalready gone because we are now a bit
Dialogue: 0,0:07:23.76,0:07:35.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,higher than that. But this was the average\Nperiod from 2011 to 2017. OK. Now I go
Dialogue: 0,0:07:35.43,0:07:41.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,directly into this IPCC report from last\Nyear. That's 2018. In chapter 2, there's
Dialogue: 0,0:07:41.68,0:07:47.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this table. I love this table. This table\Ncontains a lot of climate science because
Dialogue: 0,0:07:47.64,0:07:56.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it goes into how much actually can we\Nfurther emit to reach which temperature
Dialogue: 0,0:07:56.11,0:08:01.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,change. So this would be here the 1.5\Ndegrees Celsius, this would be the 2
Dialogue: 0,0:08:01.68,0:08:07.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,degrees Celsius. And then you have\Nprobabilities: how likely you can avoid
Dialogue: 0,0:08:07.28,0:08:14.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this, or is it going to come? So if you\Nwant to avoid it with a two sigma, that is
Dialogue: 0,0:08:14.06,0:08:27.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,like a 67% probability to go over 1.5\Ndegrees, we have 420 gigatons to emit
Dialogue: 0,0:08:27.50,0:08:33.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,further additionally into the atmosphere.\N420. As you remember, it's 40 gigatons per
Dialogue: 0,0:08:33.46,0:08:45.09,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,year. And this was I think from last year.\NSo this refers to basically 2017. So it's
Dialogue: 0,0:08:45.09,0:08:51.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,already two years gone since then. And it\Nhas not decreased, but increased actually.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:51.63,0:08:55.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And then there is a lot of difference, you\Nknow, if you go for a 50 percent chance,
Dialogue: 0,0:08:55.68,0:09:00.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you can you can say, ok, it's a bit more\Nwe can emit. And if he goes, well, we just
Dialogue: 0,0:09:00.32,0:09:05.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,want to have a one third chance, then we\Nactually would have double the amount we
Dialogue: 0,0:09:05.63,0:09:13.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,could emit. For 2 degrees Celsius. This is\Nfar more, so it's more than 1000 gigatons
Dialogue: 0,0:09:13.11,0:09:20.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of CO2 equivalents to emit. Now, there\Nare, of course, a lot of uncertainties,
Dialogue: 0,0:09:20.32,0:09:25.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,all kinds of uncertainties that go with\Nthat. And one is, for example, the so-
Dialogue: 0,0:09:25.03,0:09:35.77,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,called Earth System Feedback. The earth\Nitself responds to this emission and also
Dialogue: 0,0:09:35.77,0:09:43.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,emits CO2 and also methane. And this has\Nan also a long term impact. And then there
Dialogue: 0,0:09:43.76,0:09:50.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,are further uncertainties. And these are I\Nmean, this has been also part in the
Dialogue: 0,0:09:50.81,0:09:55.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,previous talks that, of course, climate\Nmodels do have uncertainties.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:55.84,0:10:03.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Nevertheless, if we take this into account\Nand say, ok, we want to avoid 1.5 degrees
Dialogue: 0,0:10:03.21,0:10:10.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Celsius increase in temperature with a 2/3\Nprobability. That they call "likely" in
Dialogue: 0,0:10:10.50,0:10:16.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this report. So it's likely that we are\Nnot exceeding 1.5 degrees. We have 420
Dialogue: 0,0:10:16.37,0:10:23.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,gigatons surplus CO2 to emit into the\Natmosphere in total. 100 gigatons will be
Dialogue: 0,0:10:23.34,0:10:31.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,more or less gobbled up by the earth\Nresponse. This was in the report. Current
Dialogue: 0,0:10:31.48,0:10:36.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,research shows that this is likely a bit\Ntoo conservative. So it's probably more,
Dialogue: 0,0:10:36.50,0:10:45.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but, well. OK. So our emission is about 40\Ngigatons, so the planned CO2 emissions by
Dialogue: 0,0:10:45.29,0:10:53.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,coal power plants that are running, was at\Nthat period 200 gigatons CO2. So they are
Dialogue: 0,0:10:53.81,0:11:01.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,built. They are running. 200 gigatons by\Nthat. And then we have 100 to 150 further
Dialogue: 0,0:11:01.47,0:11:08.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,gigatons for our planned coal power plants\Nand those under construction. As we count
Dialogue: 0,0:11:08.20,0:11:17.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this together, we have already exceeded\Nthe 420 gigatons CO2. And this is, of
Dialogue: 0,0:11:17.18,0:11:20.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,course, one reason why these coal power\Nplants have to be shut down. But they're,
Dialogue: 0,0:11:20.32,0:11:26.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of course, not the only source. They are\Nonly one source of CO2 emissions we have
Dialogue: 0,0:11:26.76,0:11:35.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in the atmosphere. And to make this clear,\Nwhat this means, this is what I go into
Dialogue: 0,0:11:35.48,0:11:44.31,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,now. What does this mean? This difference\Nfrom 1.5 degree to 2 degree, and that's
Dialogue: 0,0:11:44.31,0:11:52.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,been a lot of research on that. OK? Now,\Nthe first one is, for example, on the
Dialogue: 0,0:11:52.06,0:11:56.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Arctic. I mean, there's been a lot of\Ntalks about ice bears and so on. But of
Dialogue: 0,0:11:56.50,0:12:03.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,course, this is not the only thing to care\Nabout. It is quite crucial that there is
Dialogue: 0,0:12:03.10,0:12:08.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,ice there also because the ice, we heard\Nthis before in the previous talks, that
Dialogue: 0,0:12:08.68,0:12:15.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the ice reflects the sun and the less\Nreflection is there, the more warmth is
Dialogue: 0,0:12:15.44,0:12:22.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,being taken up by the earth again. So we\Nhave like a feedback system there. Also,
Dialogue: 0,0:12:22.16,0:12:26.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of course, because of all the... It's not\Njust the ice bear. There's like a whole
Dialogue: 0,0:12:26.60,0:12:33.04,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,biosphere there. And this biosphere has to\Nsomehow survive. Now, the likeliness of an
Dialogue: 0,0:12:33.04,0:12:41.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,ice free Arctic is this graph here of\Ncomparing 1.5 degrees - this is this one,
Dialogue: 0,0:12:41.40,0:12:44.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,or these two studies, these are two\Nstudies here, one with the dotted line and
Dialogue: 0,0:12:44.61,0:12:50.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,another one with the full line - and 2\Ndegrees. And this is how likely it is in a
Dialogue: 0,0:12:50.72,0:12:57.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,certain period of time that this happens.\NAnd so you can see, if we consider again
Dialogue: 0,0:12:57.79,0:13:05.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that it's likely, it's about 45 years it\Ntakes for a 1.5 degrees Celsius increase
Dialogue: 0,0:13:05.89,0:13:11.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that we have an ice free Arctic. So this\Nis actually possible with this increase,
Dialogue: 0,0:13:11.96,0:13:19.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,but it's like once every 45 years. If we\Ngo for a 2 degree increase, this one is
Dialogue: 0,0:13:19.49,0:13:25.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,every 10, or, even with the other study,\Nit's more like once every five years that
Dialogue: 0,0:13:25.91,0:13:29.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this is happening and this is quite\Nfrequent. And this, of course, causes
Dialogue: 0,0:13:29.45,0:13:35.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,quite some impact on everything that lives\Nthere. Now, this is ice and Arctic.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:35.81,0:13:39.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,There's not so many people living in the\NArctic. So there's a lot of further
Dialogue: 0,0:13:39.23,0:13:45.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,studies that have been done. And this, for\Nexample, for Africa I will only ...
Dialogue: 0,0:13:45.18,0:13:52.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,because of limited time. I can do this\Ntalk for many hours, actually. I will only
Dialogue: 0,0:13:52.50,0:13:58.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,go onto this example here. Extreme heat\Nwith record temperatures over close to 50
Dialogue: 0,0:13:58.40,0:14:06.86,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,degrees and actually even increasing that.\NThat has been there in 2009, 2010 in the
Dialogue: 0,0:14:06.86,0:14:11.35,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,months from December to February in\NAfrica. These are temperatures where
Dialogue: 0,0:14:11.35,0:14:20.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,people cannot be outside anymore at these\Ntemperatures. It's just too hot. And then
Dialogue: 0,0:14:20.93,0:14:24.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it's showing these curves and these are\Nprobability density functions. So these
Dialogue: 0,0:14:24.80,0:14:31.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,curves show how often, like, each of these\Nbalconies, I don't know, boxes here are
Dialogue: 0,0:14:31.93,0:14:37.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,showing: How often does this happen? And\Nso here we have "current", the current
Dialogue: 0,0:14:37.49,0:14:43.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,status, that is the temperature from 2006\Nto 2015. That's what they call current. So
Dialogue: 0,0:14:43.45,0:14:48.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,there is already this increase in\Ntemperature under these conditions. This
Dialogue: 0,0:14:48.93,0:14:57.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,happens every well, maybe twice every 100\Nyears. If we go for 1.5 degrees increase,
Dialogue: 0,0:14:57.54,0:15:02.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that's the blue line we can see: This is\Ngoing to happen every more or less third
Dialogue: 0,0:15:02.59,0:15:10.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,year. If we go for 2 degrees, this is\Ngoing to happen even more often. So this
Dialogue: 0,0:15:10.49,0:15:16.07,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is for people living there, it's getting\Nhard to live there. It's just the
Dialogue: 0,0:15:16.07,0:15:24.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,temperature, only that. If we go for, for\Nexample, for Australia as an example, that
Dialogue: 0,0:15:24.72,0:15:30.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we have the same, it's always these\Ncurves, here are extreme warm
Dialogue: 0,0:15:30.99,0:15:36.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,temperatures. Well, that's very easy. But\Nin Australia, what's also important there,
Dialogue: 0,0:15:36.99,0:15:44.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it's the temperature of the water, because\Nof the corals that live there. And hot
Dialogue: 0,0:15:44.99,0:15:51.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,water leads to coral bleaching. So\Nbasically, the corals die. And this all,
Dialogue: 0,0:15:51.47,0:15:56.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of course, as we've seen, the temperature\Nis not every year the same. But there was
Dialogue: 0,0:15:56.90,0:16:02.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this hot summer and an extreme coral\Nbleaching here. Temperature situation here
Dialogue: 0,0:16:02.40,0:16:10.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in the summer, in 2012, 2013. And how\Noften does this happen? And we can already
Dialogue: 0,0:16:10.40,0:16:15.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,see here: This would be the natural. So\Nthis would be the pre-industrial curve
Dialogue: 0,0:16:15.00,0:16:21.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,here, where this very warm temperatures\Nhardly ever happen. While we can see here
Dialogue: 0,0:16:21.22,0:16:25.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,already: This would be every third year\Ncurrently, it would be every second year
Dialogue: 0,0:16:25.74,0:16:32.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in a 1.5 degrees scenario and probably two\Nof three years in a 2 degrees scenario.
Dialogue: 0,0:16:32.32,0:16:36.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And this means, well, what this means I\Nwould go into later. This is an example
Dialogue: 0,0:16:36.66,0:16:42.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,for Europe. well, how often things happen.\NI don't know if you do, but I always
Dialogue: 0,0:16:42.43,0:16:48.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,remember that one, because I well, I was a\Nlot outside during that period. There was
Dialogue: 0,0:16:48.93,0:16:54.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a very warm summer we had in 2003. And a\Nlot of people died of that because of the
Dialogue: 0,0:16:54.72,0:17:02.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,heat. I remember being in Cologne at the\Ntime and laying outside at 40 degrees and
Dialogue: 0,0:17:02.46,0:17:08.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I was ill and so I had 40 degrees. So\Noutside 40 degrees was very warm. And so
Dialogue: 0,0:17:08.43,0:17:15.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,naturally, this can happen. It could\Nhappen like once every hundred years.
Dialogue: 0,0:17:15.00,0:17:20.15,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Currently we have like a situation, well,\Nthis would be like every 4th year. And
Dialogue: 0,0:17:20.15,0:17:27.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this increases then to more than 59% of\Nall the years at 2 degrees Celsius. So
Dialogue: 0,0:17:27.72,0:17:34.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we're gonna get hot summers. This is the\Nprediction of this study here. Well, what
Dialogue: 0,0:17:34.89,0:17:43.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,does this mean? Well, now I go back to the\NIPCC reports and the IPCC reports are very
Dialogue: 0,0:17:43.32,0:17:50.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,diplomatic always. And so they have\N"reasons for concern". And we are all very
Dialogue: 0,0:17:50.36,0:17:55.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,concerned. This sounds very nice, but of\Ncourse, there's some background to this.
Dialogue: 0,0:17:55.68,0:18:01.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So they have. And in the summary of this\NIPCC report from 2018 are there five
Dialogue: 0,0:18:01.79,0:18:07.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,reasons for concern. That's one: unique\Nand threatened systems like corals, or
Dialogue: 0,0:18:07.93,0:18:13.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,extreme weather events. And you can see\Nthat does make quite a difference from
Dialogue: 0,0:18:13.27,0:18:19.83,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,now. And going to warmer temperatures, up\Nhere we have the 2 degrees. So you can see
Dialogue: 0,0:18:19.83,0:18:25.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,between 1.5 degrees and 2 degrees: That\Ndoes make quite a difference. Distribution
Dialogue: 0,0:18:25.48,0:18:34.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of impacts. Basically, this means that\Nthose, who suffer most, have contributed
Dialogue: 0,0:18:34.40,0:18:41.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,less. And that's, of course, bad because\Nthose who contributed most, well, don't
Dialogue: 0,0:18:41.37,0:18:47.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,suffer as much. And then they won't\Nchange. And that's a problem. That's why
Dialogue: 0,0:18:47.74,0:18:54.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they're concerned on this one. Global\Naggregate impacts is basically money
Dialogue: 0,0:18:54.53,0:19:03.92,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,impact. So how much does this cost in the\Nend to to cope with the outcome of this?
Dialogue: 0,0:19:03.92,0:19:12.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And well, it costs billions of dollars in\Nthe end to have a difference between 1.5
Dialogue: 0,0:19:12.66,0:19:19.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and 2 degrees. Every year, just to cope\Nwith the impacts. And then we have large
Dialogue: 0,0:19:19.48,0:19:24.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,scale singular events that could be\Nsomething like de-icing of Greenland or
Dialogue: 0,0:19:24.47,0:19:29.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,something like that. Well, when that's\Ngone, it's just a singular event because
Dialogue: 0,0:19:29.02,0:19:36.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it's gone. This is very abstract. So they\Nget a bit closer to that. So warm water
Dialogue: 0,0:19:36.76,0:19:42.07,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,corals is basically they are having\Nalready a problem. Well, I will show this
Dialogue: 0,0:19:42.07,0:19:47.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,later. Well, they expect about 90 percent\Nwill die off at 1.5 degrees. Well, they
Dialogue: 0,0:19:47.96,0:19:54.22,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,will die out at 2 degrees. Most likely.\NCertain. And this is of course, this is
Dialogue: 0,0:19:54.22,0:20:01.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a... Well, it's important for nourishment\Nand for people who live from the sea, from
Dialogue: 0,0:20:01.14,0:20:07.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,whatever they fished out of the sea,\Nbecause corals that's like the childhood
Dialogue: 0,0:20:07.75,0:20:17.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,bed of a lot of fish. So we do get quite\Nan impact in the end on fishery. This is
Dialogue: 0,0:20:17.03,0:20:22.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,why this is so red. Mangroves also get an\Nimpact on that, there is about the same
Dialogue: 0,0:20:22.28,0:20:28.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,story. So a lot of small fish grow up\Nthere. Well, the Arctic region is getting
Dialogue: 0,0:20:28.62,0:20:34.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,increasing problems with the ice. Well,\Nthese are all kind. I will go into this
Dialogue: 0,0:20:34.52,0:20:42.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,later. Coastal flooding will increase from\N1.5 to 2 degrees. This is, well, flooding
Dialogue: 0,0:20:42.24,0:20:49.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and rivers and so on. Well, and we'll get\Nsome more heat related morbidity. Now,
Dialogue: 0,0:20:49.59,0:20:59.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,there's been a new report this year on\Nland use. And this has been even more into
Dialogue: 0,0:20:59.11,0:21:06.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this. Now, different scale. Please watch\Nthat. So the scale here, it's going up to
Dialogue: 0,0:21:06.87,0:21:15.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,five degrees. And if you look for that,\Nyeah, so it's a bit different. So the
Dialogue: 0,0:21:15.37,0:21:21.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,lower ones, 1.5 and 2 degrees are in\Nthere. But problems they see is a dryland
Dialogue: 0,0:21:21.56,0:21:28.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,scarcity and water scarcity in drylands.\NSo that's desertification, a lot
Dialogue: 0,0:21:28.43,0:21:35.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of that. Soil erosion, which is related to\Nthat, vegetation loss is also related to
Dialogue: 0,0:21:35.36,0:21:44.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that. Yeah, I will come to this later. The\Nwildfire damage, we can see that already
Dialogue: 0,0:21:44.24,0:21:51.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,today. I mean, in the news every time. Now\Nit's Australia and Chile. But before it
Dialogue: 0,0:21:51.02,0:21:57.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,was was more California and so on. So this\Nwill go on. This is no coincidence that
Dialogue: 0,0:21:57.36,0:22:04.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this is happening. We have permafrost\Ndegradation. We have a tropical crop yield
Dialogue: 0,0:22:04.39,0:22:09.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,decline. Crop yield is of course... That\Nhurts because well, this leads, of course,
Dialogue: 0,0:22:09.80,0:22:14.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in the end to food instabilities. And we\Ncan see, it does make quite a difference
Dialogue: 0,0:22:14.57,0:22:19.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,already between 1.5 and 2 degrees. But of\Ncourse, it can get worse. And they... Also
Dialogue: 0,0:22:19.93,0:22:25.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they are more specific on that, what they\Nmean with this. For example, in wildfire
Dialogue: 0,0:22:25.01,0:22:32.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,damage, they expect an increase in fire\Nweather season currently, over 50%
Dialogue: 0,0:22:32.72,0:22:40.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,increase in the Mediterranean area if it\Ngets above 2 degrees and well, if we go to
Dialogue: 0,0:22:40.71,0:22:47.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,4 or 5 degrees, well, they expect, well,\Nhundreds of million at least, or over 100
Dialogue: 0,0:22:47.23,0:22:53.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,million people additionally exposed. In\Nterms of food supply instabilities: Well,
Dialogue: 0,0:22:53.61,0:22:59.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,what we already see is, well, we have like\Nspikes in the food price. This is not so
Dialogue: 0,0:22:59.51,0:23:04.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,important for us usually. But of course,\Nfor people in the world that don't have
Dialogue: 0,0:23:04.16,0:23:12.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,much money and we still have almost it's\Nnot quite 1 billion people in the world,
Dialogue: 0,0:23:12.37,0:23:19.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that live off less than 2$ a day. For such\Npeople, this is, of course, quite
Dialogue: 0,0:23:19.49,0:23:28.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,important. If we go closer to 2 degrees,\Nthey do expect periodic food shocks across
Dialogue: 0,0:23:28.16,0:23:33.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,regions. So basically that. There will be\Nsituations where there will be no food
Dialogue: 0,0:23:33.39,0:23:41.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,available anymore. If we go up to four or\Nfive degrees, this would lead to sustained
Dialogue: 0,0:23:41.11,0:23:53.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,food supply distribution problems on a\Nglobal scale. So this depends on of what
Dialogue: 0,0:23:53.32,0:23:58.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,kind of scenario we are calculating. I\Nwill go into this later. One additional
Dialogue: 0,0:23:58.06,0:24:07.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,thing is also to think off on that, we are\Nnot only talking about the temperature.
Dialogue: 0,0:24:07.25,0:24:12.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Also, the water of the oceans take up the\NCO2, they take up a lot of the CO2, that we
Dialogue: 0,0:24:12.93,0:24:22.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,blow into the air. And this leads to an\Nacidification. And so the pH value of the
Dialogue: 0,0:24:22.99,0:24:30.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,oceans, they decrease and this has an\Nimpact on a lot of animals that build up
Dialogue: 0,0:24:30.89,0:24:38.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,calcium carbonate, so shells basically. So\Nall kinds of bi-valves, all kinds of like
Dialogue: 0,0:24:38.87,0:24:45.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,cancers and all that, they depend on\Nbuilding up this calcium carbonate. And if
Dialogue: 0,0:24:45.79,0:24:49.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they're not able to do this anymore, of\Ncourse, they don't grow anymore. And they
Dialogue: 0,0:24:49.38,0:24:57.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,are pretty much in the beginning of this\Nfood supply, a food chain and the oceans.
Dialogue: 0,0:24:57.38,0:25:05.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Now, I was reading this 2018 report and\Nsomewhere there on page 223, I found them
Dialogue: 0,0:25:05.16,0:25:11.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this year, where they basically say, ok, we\Ndo have this impact and there is this
Dialogue: 0,0:25:11.30,0:25:17.88,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,aragonite saturation, which is well,\Nbasically that's the point, where this
Dialogue: 0,0:25:17.88,0:25:26.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,build up for specific animals is not\Npossible anymore, at this saturation
Dialogue: 0,0:25:26.01,0:25:31.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,point, because the chemical reaction does\Nnot work anymore. And this depends on the
Dialogue: 0,0:25:31.30,0:25:35.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,temperature, this depends on the pressure.\NAnd the higher the pressure is, the
Dialogue: 0,0:25:35.17,0:25:40.35,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,earlier this point is reached. Also, the\Ncolder the temperature is. And so this is
Dialogue: 0,0:25:40.35,0:25:45.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,what you can see on the right hand side.\NThey investigated this mainly from the
Dialogue: 0,0:25:45.00,0:25:54.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,polar regions on. And so that they... at\Nthis point, where this point will reach the
Dialogue: 0,0:25:54.50,0:26:01.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,surface of the ocean from 2030 onwards, so\Nthat they're all these animals on the
Dialogue: 0,0:26:01.03,0:26:06.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,surface of the ocean are not building in\Nthe polar regions, will have problems to
Dialogue: 0,0:26:06.39,0:26:11.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,build up, actually, their shells in. This\Nhas two different impacts, of course, one
Dialogue: 0,0:26:11.52,0:26:17.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,impact, they don't grow anymore. This has\Na big issue on the food chain in the
Dialogue: 0,0:26:17.79,0:26:23.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,oceans. The second impact is actually that\Nthese... This was a one off the carbon
Dialogue: 0,0:26:23.84,0:26:30.81,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,sinks. They took CO2 and with calcium,\Nthey build up these shells and they die
Dialogue: 0,0:26:30.81,0:26:36.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,off at some point and they sink to the\Nground. And well the CO2 is gone. Well, if
Dialogue: 0,0:26:36.69,0:26:41.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this is not happening anymore, of course,\Nthis type of carbon sink does not work
Dialogue: 0,0:26:41.24,0:26:49.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,anymore. Okay. Now, I've talked about...\NThese are further, I will go skip through
Dialogue: 0,0:26:49.17,0:26:55.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this quickly. These are all kinds of\Nthings that happen. So on this 1.5 degree
Dialogue: 0,0:26:55.63,0:27:01.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,report, they compared for a lot of\Nregions, what will happen. So for 1.5
Dialogue: 0,0:27:01.73,0:27:10.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,degree warming or less, of 1.5 to 2 degrees\Nand 2 to 3 degrees. And there's all kinds
Dialogue: 0,0:27:10.74,0:27:15.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of things. This is the big table in this\Nreport in chapter three. Read these
Dialogue: 0,0:27:15.08,0:27:18.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,reports. Please read these reports.\NThey're good! And they're actually
Dialogue: 0,0:27:18.43,0:27:22.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,scientifically good. I mean, this in terms\Nof if you do it. If you do science, it's
Dialogue: 0,0:27:22.12,0:27:28.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,really really good. Because they have so\Nmany so much literature and so many cross
Dialogue: 0,0:27:28.02,0:27:34.77,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,references and how they do it to be very\Nsure to say, OK, this is what we can say
Dialogue: 0,0:27:34.77,0:27:43.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,with this certainty. This is very, very\Ngood science. I think at least. OK. So I
Dialogue: 0,0:27:43.08,0:27:48.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,will not go into all of this. But it has\Nto all kinds of regions severe impacts
Dialogue: 0,0:27:48.53,0:27:55.97,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,like south east, for South East Asia, for\Nexample, they have, you know, this risk of
Dialogue: 0,0:27:55.97,0:28:01.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,increased flooding and they have increased\Nprecipitation events and, yes. And, well,
Dialogue: 0,0:28:01.59,0:28:05.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I think the most significant of this is\Nthe significant risk of crop yield
Dialogue: 0,0:28:05.32,0:28:13.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,reductions, which is avoided, if we stay\Nbelow 1.5 degrees. If we are not staying
Dialogue: 0,0:28:13.61,0:28:22.31,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,below 1.5 degrees, they estimate 1/3\Ndecline in per capita per crop production
Dialogue: 0,0:28:22.31,0:28:32.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,per year, one third less food. That's not\Ngood! And if we go even higher, well, this
Dialogue: 0,0:28:32.79,0:28:40.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is getting worse. For small islands, well,\Nthere's actually the small islands are
Dialogue: 0,0:28:40.19,0:28:44.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,well-known, of course, you know, there the\Nsea level is rising, so they have a
Dialogue: 0,0:28:44.03,0:28:48.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,problem. And actually the main problem\Nthey have is not that just the water is
Dialogue: 0,0:28:48.87,0:28:56.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,going over the island, but that the salty\Nwater is rising and is intruding the fresh
Dialogue: 0,0:28:56.63,0:29:04.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,water reserves they have. So they get a\Nproblem with fresh water. And well, this
Dialogue: 0,0:29:04.21,0:29:10.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is already a problem for them for 1.5\Ndegrees, for two degrees, it's like a very
Dialogue: 0,0:29:10.91,0:29:16.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,severe problem. And that's why they are\Npushing pushing so much for the 1.5
Dialogue: 0,0:29:16.43,0:29:22.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,degrees change maximum. In the\NMediterranean, this is very close to where
Dialogue: 0,0:29:22.16,0:29:28.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we are currently. So they expect a\Nreduction of run-off water, so this is
Dialogue: 0,0:29:28.41,0:29:36.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,rivers, of about 9 percent, it's very\Nlikely. Well there's range given, most of
Dialogue: 0,0:29:36.38,0:29:42.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the time they have this. So there is\Nalready a risk of water deficits at 1.5
Dialogue: 0,0:29:42.45,0:29:49.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,degrees increase in temperature. If we\Nincrease further, we reach about... at up
Dialogue: 0,0:29:49.99,0:29:59.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to 2 degrees, we have about 17% less water\Nin the rivers. This is, of course, not
Dialogue: 0,0:29:59.84,0:30:06.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,good. I mean, I mean, especially I mean,\Nokay, in Germany, for example, there's a
Dialogue: 0,0:30:06.28,0:30:15.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,lot of food coming from Spain. And well,\Nthey do already have a problem with their
Dialogue: 0,0:30:15.01,0:30:24.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,crops, with water for their crops. And\Nthis is getting worse. West Africa and
Dialogue: 0,0:30:24.63,0:30:31.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Sahel. Well, there is a prediction. Well,\Nthere's a prediction of, well, less
Dialogue: 0,0:30:31.30,0:30:43.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,suitable land for maize production by 1.5\Ndegrees already by 40% less land. 40%.
Dialogue: 0,0:30:43.21,0:30:51.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,That's a lot. It's not the region where\Npeople already have a huge surplus in food
Dialogue: 0,0:30:51.01,0:30:59.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,everyday. So there is an increase in risk\Nfor undernutrition already. For 1.5
Dialogue: 0,0:30:59.12,0:31:06.33,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,degrees in. If we increase, well, this just\Ngetting absurd in a way, it says higher
Dialogue: 0,0:31:06.33,0:31:12.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,risk undernutrition, of course, because\Nit's going to get worse. Apart from this,
Dialogue: 0,0:31:12.84,0:31:21.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that it's too hot to go outside anyways.\NWell, for southern Africa, it's similar.
Dialogue: 0,0:31:21.12,0:31:26.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,It's not as drastic. So there is already\Nthe high risk for undernutrition in
Dialogue: 0,0:31:26.01,0:31:31.33,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,communities dependent on dryland\Nespecially. So savanna areas which are
Dialogue: 0,0:31:31.33,0:31:38.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,rather dry. And this is getting worse\Nagain. Well, in the tropics, also, there
Dialogue: 0,0:31:38.25,0:31:43.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is a risk to tropical crop yields. We\Nalready heard that on the other side. On
Dialogue: 0,0:31:43.00,0:31:47.86,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the other side, it's also there, these\Nextreme heat waves they're going to face.
Dialogue: 0,0:31:47.86,0:31:57.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So this is like this was a table and there\Nwas a lot of, well, details of what they
Dialogue: 0,0:31:57.46,0:32:03.26,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,expect from 1.5 to 2 degrees. Now what\Nscientists, scientists are a bit strange
Dialogue: 0,0:32:03.26,0:32:07.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,sometimes because they are also then doing\Ntheir science and they look at different
Dialogue: 0,0:32:07.94,0:32:13.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,things. And one thing they are actually\Nnow worried about, and this is, actually
Dialogue: 0,0:32:13.60,0:32:20.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it is worrisome, very worrisome, is that\Nactually, well, climate change has been
Dialogue: 0,0:32:20.08,0:32:27.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,always there, because that's been like a\Ncycle and this the so-called interglacial
Dialogue: 0,0:32:27.85,0:32:32.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,cycle the earth has been going through.\NThis has to do with the position to the
Dialogue: 0,0:32:32.72,0:32:38.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,sun and a lot of feedback systems that\Nkick in. If you cool the earth, you have
Dialogue: 0,0:32:38.20,0:32:43.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,more ice build up, then you have more sun\Nbeing reflected again. You have less
Dialogue: 0,0:32:43.21,0:32:47.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,energy that stays on the surface of the\Nearth and then it gets colder and colder
Dialogue: 0,0:32:47.62,0:32:51.83,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and colder up to a certain point where\Nthis changes again and goes back. And this
Dialogue: 0,0:32:51.83,0:32:58.78,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,has been going on for hundreds of years.\NAnd the point is, now we've left the
Dialogue: 0,0:32:58.78,0:33:05.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,cycle. And this is the part that's shown\Nup here, that basically we are now on a
Dialogue: 0,0:33:05.56,0:33:09.88,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,completely different trajectory. And\Nthat's the trajectory that is we're
Dialogue: 0,0:33:09.88,0:33:14.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,heating this up and the Earth is\Nresponding. And it's also heating itself
Dialogue: 0,0:33:14.29,0:33:21.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,up. And so we are on the path and it's not\Nquite clear. So they built this. They show
Dialogue: 0,0:33:21.08,0:33:28.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this, this graph here, there is actually\Nthe possibility that the earth will go on
Dialogue: 0,0:33:28.46,0:33:36.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this path to heat itself up without us\Neven. And this is called tipping points.
Dialogue: 0,0:33:36.19,0:33:40.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So there are several things that happen\Nthere. That is, for example, the melting
Dialogue: 0,0:33:40.71,0:33:48.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,or thawing of the permafrost. There is\Nmethane hydrates in the ocean storage that
Dialogue: 0,0:33:48.06,0:33:56.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,might be triggered to evolve. There will\Nbe a reduction of CO2 intake in the
Dialogue: 0,0:33:56.36,0:34:01.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,oceans. Currently, a lot of CO2 is taken\Ninto the oceans, but this will get less
Dialogue: 0,0:34:01.58,0:34:10.09,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and less. the more saturation comes in\Nthere. We have a die-off of rainforests.
Dialogue: 0,0:34:10.09,0:34:15.31,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So. Well, last summer we've seen they have\Na lot of rainforest burning in the
Dialogue: 0,0:34:15.31,0:34:20.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Amazons. But this will also happen by the\Nincrease of temperature without human
Dialogue: 0,0:34:20.99,0:34:28.04,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,impact. And in this paper here by Steffen\Nand some others, they said they estimate
Dialogue: 0,0:34:28.04,0:34:39.72,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,about a rainforest reduction of up to 40%\Nby an increase of of up to 1.5 degrees
Dialogue: 0,0:34:39.72,0:34:47.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,anyways. So we gonna lose rainforest, a\Nlot of rainforest already like that. We
Dialogue: 0,0:34:47.75,0:34:53.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,have a die-off in the boreal forest. This\Nwas this summer in Siberia. Well, they
Dialogue: 0,0:34:53.17,0:35:00.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,just don't die off. They get burned. And\Nthere are other reasons why they die. And
Dialogue: 0,0:35:00.16,0:35:05.92,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,so there's a lot of CO2 going to be\Nemitted from forests that are where carbon
Dialogue: 0,0:35:05.92,0:35:12.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,starts currently into the atmosphere. We\Nhave a reduction of ice and snow. So
Dialogue: 0,0:35:12.13,0:35:18.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,there's less reflection of the sun into\Nthe atmosphere again. And we have a
Dialogue: 0,0:35:18.69,0:35:22.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,reduction of ice warming, so we have an\Nincrease in sea level. And this whole
Dialogue: 0,0:35:22.62,0:35:33.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,thing, this is like a communicating\Nsystem. And one thing triggered, will
Dialogue: 0,0:35:33.45,0:35:42.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,trigger something else. This is sometimes\Ngoes by circulations, also by ocean
Dialogue: 0,0:35:42.58,0:35:48.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,circulation and so on. So one thing can\Ntrigger the next thing and this might
Dialogue: 0,0:35:48.96,0:35:56.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,trigger the next thing and this will go\Non. And if this happens, at a certain
Dialogue: 0,0:35:56.19,0:36:03.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,time, at a certain intensity, then we will\Nnot have as a human beings with the
Dialogue: 0,0:36:03.50,0:36:10.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,current technology and technology we have,\Nwe will not be able to stop that. And
Dialogue: 0,0:36:10.32,0:36:15.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that's what they are worried about, so\Nthese climate scientists, that we should
Dialogue: 0,0:36:15.23,0:36:24.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,not get these tipping points to go too\Nstrong. They are already...This is
Dialogue: 0,0:36:24.52,0:36:30.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,already... These are processes that can be\Nalready seen, but... Well, currently they
Dialogue: 0,0:36:30.39,0:36:37.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,are on a level where it's, well, it's bad.\NThere was actually 4 weeks ago this paper
Dialogue: 0,0:36:37.20,0:36:43.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,published in Nature Climate Change, where\Nthey said, well, we might be wrong with
Dialogue: 0,0:36:43.28,0:36:48.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,our estimation here with this 100\Ngigatons, because these tipping points are
Dialogue: 0,0:36:48.96,0:36:54.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,worse than we thought. So we are actually\Nfurther there more on the upper limits of
Dialogue: 0,0:36:54.49,0:37:06.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the bounds where we thought it would be.\NYes. So these are very worrisome
Dialogue: 0,0:37:06.32,0:37:16.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,situations. Now, this should trigger us to\Ndo something about it, and that's actually
Dialogue: 0,0:37:16.01,0:37:23.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the point. So things need to be done. But\Nup to now, well, things have not been
Dialogue: 0,0:37:23.76,0:37:30.98,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,done. But this is like they see it, the\Nclimate, greenhouse gas emissions curves
Dialogue: 0,0:37:30.98,0:37:39.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,from 1970 to 2010. And we can see that not\Nonly that the curve has been increasing
Dialogue: 0,0:37:39.32,0:37:47.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,more or less the whole period, but also\Nthe increase has increased from 2000 on.
Dialogue: 0,0:37:47.61,0:37:59.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And the main increase here is by CO2. The\Nother gas is here methane. There is a...
Dialogue: 0,0:37:59.54,0:38:07.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,nitrogen gases up here. And well there are\NCO2 from well, agriculture, forestry and
Dialogue: 0,0:38:07.69,0:38:12.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,land use, this is here. They are more or\Nless constant. Sometimes there are spikes
Dialogue: 0,0:38:12.89,0:38:19.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,like this. Most likely this is like\Nrainforest burning. The only year in the
Dialogue: 0,0:38:19.28,0:38:23.04,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,recent years where there has been a\Ndecrease also in the CO2 emissions was in
Dialogue: 0,0:38:23.04,0:38:32.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the economic crisis in 2008. Well, there\Nactually was a decrease by 4 percent.
Dialogue: 0,0:38:32.27,0:38:40.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Yeah. Now, nevertheless, the scientists\Nwent on and said: OK, let's calculate, how
Dialogue: 0,0:38:40.84,0:38:46.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,can we manage to get to 1.5 degrees and\Nthere are different scenarios. Some say,
Dialogue: 0,0:38:46.36,0:38:53.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,OK, let's go to get to 1.5 degrees. Some\Nsay, OK, maybe we need to get to a higher
Dialogue: 0,0:38:53.03,0:38:58.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,temperature and later on change that again\Nto get to 1.5 degrees. So there are all
Dialogue: 0,0:38:58.48,0:39:08.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,kinds of scenarios that you can calculate.\NNow, if we say, we use this CDR, this is
Dialogue: 0,0:39:08.66,0:39:15.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,carbon dioxide removal. We don't have\Nthat. And we say, we use the exponential
Dialogue: 0,0:39:15.27,0:39:23.26,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,curve each year. We do reduce this the\Nsame percentage of our emissions and we
Dialogue: 0,0:39:23.26,0:39:31.35,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,want to get to 1.5 degrees. And this was\Nthe curve from 2018. So we should have
Dialogue: 0,0:39:31.35,0:39:38.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,started this year to reduce our CO2\Nemission by 18% each year globally, 18%,
Dialogue: 0,0:39:38.46,0:39:47.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,if we want to reach 1.5 degrees. If we\Nwant to be, we reach 2 degrees, it's still
Dialogue: 0,0:39:47.91,0:39:57.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,5 percent each year. 5 percent. If we do\Nthis for Germany, by this, and I think
Dialogue: 0,0:39:57.40,0:40:00.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this is the most important figure. It's\Nnot as important like politicians always
Dialogue: 0,0:40:00.50,0:40:06.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,say, are yeah, by this year, we want to\Nreduce our emissions by 50 percent or
Dialogue: 0,0:40:06.02,0:40:10.35,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,something like that. But this does not\Ntell you what happens but 2030, what
Dialogue: 0,0:40:10.35,0:40:18.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,happens until 2030? Right? So it's very\Nimportant to keep in mind that it's likely
Dialogue: 0,0:40:18.37,0:40:24.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we have a budget and this is actually from\Na paper, it's global carbon budgets. They
Dialogue: 0,0:40:24.20,0:40:31.87,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,say they publish each year, how much\Nbudget do we have left to to emit? And so
Dialogue: 0,0:40:31.87,0:40:37.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,if we take this budget and say, OK, this\Nis our budget. How are we gonna spend to
Dialogue: 0,0:40:37.30,0:40:42.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,spend going to spend our carbon budget?\NAnd this is something that we should ask
Dialogue: 0,0:40:42.76,0:40:47.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,all the politicians. What do you think is\Nyour budget? Why do you think this is your
Dialogue: 0,0:40:47.11,0:40:54.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,budget? And there's been actually an\Narticle by by climate scientists Stefan
Dialogue: 0,0:40:54.75,0:40:58.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Ramsdorf in the Spiegel. Where he said,\NOK, let's estimate we have more than seven
Dialogue: 0,0:40:58.85,0:41:04.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,point about seven point three gigatons CO2\Noverall budget to Germany. And we could
Dialogue: 0,0:41:04.21,0:41:10.09,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,say if we want to reach one point five\Ndegrees, this would mean we continue our
Dialogue: 0,0:41:10.09,0:41:14.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,share of emissions, which would be in\NGermany, which is like double the average
Dialogue: 0,0:41:14.91,0:41:20.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,of the rest of the world. And we'd say,\NOK, we have the right to blow out in the
Dialogue: 0,0:41:20.49,0:41:26.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,air twice as much as the average person in\Nthe world. Then we still would have 1.5
Dialogue: 0,0:41:26.27,0:41:31.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,gigatons CO2 in Germany to\Nemit. And how are we gonna do that? That's
Dialogue: 0,0:41:31.51,0:41:36.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the question. Are we do we have this in\Nmind? Of course we can calculate this down
Dialogue: 0,0:41:36.85,0:41:44.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to each person in Germany. So we end up\Nwith about 40 tons per person. So each of
Dialogue: 0,0:41:44.73,0:41:51.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,us can also think of this. I have 40 now,\N90 tons here. Sorry, 90 tons. That is to
Dialogue: 0,0:41:51.03,0:42:01.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,emit. How am I gonna spend this until the\Nend of my life? Now, if we go back to this
Dialogue: 0,0:42:01.32,0:42:08.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,report, then we have different scenarios.\NAnd as you can see, there are different
Dialogue: 0,0:42:08.53,0:42:15.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,ways of doing that. And these are\Ndifferent economic scenarios. So and you
Dialogue: 0,0:42:15.20,0:42:19.07,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,can see already, that most of these\Nscenarios do have negative emissions at
Dialogue: 0,0:42:19.07,0:42:25.98,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,some points. Actually, all of them have.\NSome of them include carbon capture and
Dialogue: 0,0:42:25.98,0:42:32.31,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,storage here shown as BECCS. And\Ndepending on what kind of economic
Dialogue: 0,0:42:32.31,0:42:40.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,scenario you go for, this is more or less.\NAnd here it's like up to about 20 gigatons
Dialogue: 0,0:42:40.62,0:42:48.19,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,per year to be stored in the ground. The\Ngreen part here, agriculture, forestry and
Dialogue: 0,0:42:48.19,0:42:54.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,land use and other land use. This also, of\Ncourse, you can reduce CO2 by planting
Dialogue: 0,0:42:54.11,0:43:00.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,trees. This is actually a very efficient\Nway of doing that. But of course, the land
Dialogue: 0,0:43:00.20,0:43:07.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,land area is limited. And this is also\Ntrue for other things. And of course, the
Dialogue: 0,0:43:07.84,0:43:13.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,land area we can use is decreasing due to\Nclimate change. It could always should
Dialogue: 0,0:43:13.14,0:43:22.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,always keep this in mind. Now. The base of\Nall these scenarios, they put this again
Dialogue: 0,0:43:22.58,0:43:27.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,into a table and and puts and I put some\Npictures to that. So they say: If we want
Dialogue: 0,0:43:27.93,0:43:32.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to reach to 1.5 degrees, what\Nwe have to do, we need a rapid and
Dialogue: 0,0:43:32.45,0:43:40.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,profound near-term decarbonisation of our\Nenergy supply. So basically, we have to be
Dialogue: 0,0:43:40.20,0:43:46.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,very, very quick and change our energy\Nsupply. This has to be. That's the first
Dialogue: 0,0:43:46.38,0:43:51.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,part. The second part, we need greater\Nmitigation efforts and the demand side. So
Dialogue: 0,0:43:51.59,0:44:02.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we have to use less and get smaller with\Nthings. Third part is well we do have to
Dialogue: 0,0:44:02.68,0:44:13.73,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,do this within the next 10 years, so we\Ncannot wait. This is very, very urgent.
Dialogue: 0,0:44:13.73,0:44:18.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Well, this is actually a table that looks\Nlike this is a bit, sorry for that. So the
Dialogue: 0,0:44:18.54,0:44:22.85,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,main thing is that the additional\Nreductions come from CO2 emissions because
Dialogue: 0,0:44:22.85,0:44:28.58,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the other greenhouse gas house gases are\Nalready included in the two degrees
Dialogue: 0,0:44:28.58,0:44:37.40,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,scenarios. We need to invest differently,\Nso investment patterns have to change
Dialogue: 0,0:44:37.40,0:44:44.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,strongly. What we also, they are the best\Noptions actually for one point five degree
Dialogue: 0,0:44:44.41,0:44:52.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,scenarios are the ones that go with the\Nsustainable development, because if people
Dialogue: 0,0:44:52.66,0:44:59.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,don't have food to eat, they don't have\Nthe chance to take care of the climate
Dialogue: 0,0:44:59.27,0:45:07.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,anymore, because first they are trying to\Nsurvive. So we do have to also care about
Dialogue: 0,0:45:07.20,0:45:16.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,how people can live on this planet. This\Nhelps protecting the climate. Well, then
Dialogue: 0,0:45:16.23,0:45:22.30,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they say, OK, we probably have to think of\Nclimate, the carbon dioxide removal
Dialogue: 0,0:45:22.30,0:45:26.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,somehow at the mit summit of the century.\NWhat's the myth of the centuries? So this
Dialogue: 0,0:45:26.13,0:45:31.05,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,has to be implemented now. And what we\Nalso have to do is, we have to switch from
Dialogue: 0,0:45:31.05,0:45:38.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,fossil fuels to electricity and the end\Nuser sector. Now CDR, carbon dioxide
Dialogue: 0,0:45:38.24,0:45:44.31,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,dioxide removal, I will say about that.\NThis is, of course, agriculture, forestry
Dialogue: 0,0:45:44.31,0:45:50.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and land use. That's very easy planting\Ntrees. Then there is BECK. So you use by
Dialogue: 0,0:45:50.75,0:45:58.67,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,basically biomass to produce some some gas\Nand then you capture the CO2 from burning
Dialogue: 0,0:45:58.67,0:46:03.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the gas and press this into ground and\Ncarbon capture and storage. Or what you can
Dialogue: 0,0:46:03.02,0:46:12.05,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,also do is use direct air capture as where\Nyou use it. These are like these machines.
Dialogue: 0,0:46:12.05,0:46:19.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So they take CO2 from the air and then you\Nhave to store it. And you can see it's such
Dialogue: 0,0:46:19.43,0:46:27.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a machine here. This was like a model at\Nthe time. So these are these have been
Dialogue: 0,0:46:27.11,0:46:33.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,already existing models. This. So\Nbasically this can be take 1000 tons of
Dialogue: 0,0:46:33.60,0:46:40.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,CO2 per year. So if we want to go for\Ngigatons, then we would have to build
Dialogue: 0,0:46:40.99,0:46:48.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,millions of these in the end. Problem \Nwith that, it's a bit and discuss
Dialogue: 0,0:46:48.51,0:46:58.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,also in this report. So. So basically. So\Nwe have an energy usage of that by
Dialogue: 0,0:46:58.89,0:47:06.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,12.9 gigajoules per tonns CO2. So\Nbasically, if we want to use put down 15
Dialogue: 0,0:47:06.12,0:47:12.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,tons of 15 gigatonnes of CO2 per year by\Nthis, which was in one of the scenarios, we
Dialogue: 0,0:47:12.57,0:47:19.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,would need about 1/4 of the global\Nenergy supply only for atmospheric waste
Dialogue: 0,0:47:19.44,0:47:25.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,management. It's called like this. And the\Nfunny thing, this was like a professor. We
Dialogue: 0,0:47:25.59,0:47:29.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,had them in our university here in\NOldenburg and he he gave this
Dialogue: 0,0:47:29.68,0:47:34.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,presentation. He said, yeah, this sounds\Nso crazy, but the climate change will hurt
Dialogue: 0,0:47:34.38,0:47:44.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you so much. This will be done. Yeah. And\NBECCs, that's a different way of doing
Dialogue: 0,0:47:44.96,0:47:51.04,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that with a bio gas. So the thing is, if\Nwe want to have that at large scale, it
Dialogue: 0,0:47:51.04,0:48:00.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,requires huge amounts of land use to\Nproduce this amount of biogas. And the
Dialogue: 0,0:48:00.00,0:48:05.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,other drawback is, of course, that you do\Nhave to take care of your storage systems
Dialogue: 0,0:48:05.61,0:48:12.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to avoid the gas to come out because.\NWell, CO2 is hard. Is has a higher density
Dialogue: 0,0:48:12.36,0:48:19.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,than than oxygen. And it goes so, it stays\Non the ground, if there is no wind. And if
Dialogue: 0,0:48:19.47,0:48:26.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,people live there, you don't have anything\Nto breathe anymore. Now, there are, of
Dialogue: 0,0:48:26.14,0:48:30.80,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,course, different sectors. This for the\NEU, for example, where where the
Dialogue: 0,0:48:30.80,0:48:37.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,greenhouse gases come from. So the main\Nparts are, of course, agriculture. There
Dialogue: 0,0:48:37.44,0:48:45.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is transport and the energy industry and\Nthis. But there's also other industries.
Dialogue: 0,0:48:45.27,0:48:49.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And it's important to keep in mind that\Nthis is not equal of all different
Dialogue: 0,0:48:49.16,0:48:55.88,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,countries. But it is also distributed to a\Ndependent strongly on on the income of the
Dialogue: 0,0:48:55.88,0:49:00.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,people in the countries. So the high so-\Ncalled high income countries here, they
Dialogue: 0,0:49:00.59,0:49:06.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,have the highest share in the CO2\Nemissions by the MID. So so-called
Dialogue: 0,0:49:06.91,0:49:15.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,emerging countries, they're almost at the\Nsame level now. While low income
Dialogue: 0,0:49:15.23,0:49:20.27,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,countries. They mainly have a CO2\Nemissions here from agricultural land land
Dialogue: 0,0:49:20.27,0:49:26.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,use. So the question is, can we make it to\None point five degrees? That's a good
Dialogue: 0,0:49:26.34,0:49:33.05,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,question. So there have been a lot of\Nstudies like. Like for Germany and the EU.
Dialogue: 0,0:49:33.05,0:49:41.16,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Either on like energy infrastructure,\Nfor example, or the whole system. There
Dialogue: 0,0:49:41.16,0:49:49.89,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,was one study from this year. They looked\Nfor 95 percent CO2 reduction by 2050.
Dialogue: 0,0:49:49.89,0:49:55.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,There was one study currently just read\Nyou released for the complete EU and
Dialogue: 0,0:49:55.65,0:50:05.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,greenhouse gas neutral EU by 2050. And so\Nobviously, technically there is this
Dialogue: 0,0:50:05.50,0:50:12.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,assumption that this is possible. One main\Nthing of that is, that we have to go far
Dialogue: 0,0:50:12.24,0:50:17.00,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,more efficient. And one thing and that is\Nuse electricity, because electricity is
Dialogue: 0,0:50:17.00,0:50:22.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,very efficient in many things. So\Ncurrently the prime currently prime energy
Dialogue: 0,0:50:22.71,0:50:27.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,consumption in Germany is about two\Nthousand 3200 terawatt hours
Dialogue: 0,0:50:27.32,0:50:31.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,in total. And the assumption \Nfor 2050 where they have this
Dialogue: 0,0:50:31.64,0:50:43.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,100 percent or 95 percent reduction would\Nbe 1300 terawatt hours or by the other
Dialogue: 0,0:50:43.62,0:50:49.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,study was even less than that. That\Ndepends a bit on the mixture they use. The
Dialogue: 0,0:50:49.62,0:50:54.76,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,reason for that is, for example, that the\Nefficiency, for example, of battery driven
Dialogue: 0,0:50:54.76,0:51:01.36,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,cars is much higher than the one, those of\Ncombustion driven or other methods. So it
Dialogue: 0,0:51:01.36,0:51:09.05,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,really depends on which technology you put\Ninto use on how good you get. On the EU
Dialogue: 0,0:51:09.05,0:51:16.64,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,level, that looks a bit like this. So\Nthere demand and supply today. And this
Dialogue: 0,0:51:16.64,0:51:23.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,would be, so the reduction is not quite as\Nlarge, but that would be as they still
Dialogue: 0,0:51:23.44,0:51:30.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,assume that we can reach this type of\Nreduction if we want to. Nevertheless,
Dialogue: 0,0:51:30.46,0:51:40.06,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they are not assuming 100 percent CO2\Nfree. But they calculate with negative
Dialogue: 0,0:51:40.06,0:51:47.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,emissions by agriculture and forestry. So\Nthis is actually in these calculations and
Dialogue: 0,0:51:47.63,0:51:52.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,I really like the one by Robinius and so\Non. That's the lower one because they
Dialogue: 0,0:51:52.90,0:51:59.26,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,actually calculated completely with\Nstorage systems, with electricity grids
Dialogue: 0,0:51:59.26,0:52:02.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,and all that and how much needs to be\Ninvested into this. This is a very
Dialogue: 0,0:52:02.96,0:52:08.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,detailed study. Very, very good one. So\Nthis actually technically possible and
Dialogue: 0,0:52:08.29,0:52:12.78,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,they even calculated this. What happens in\Nthe so-called "Dunkelflaute". That's the
Dialogue: 0,0:52:12.78,0:52:18.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,German word for there is no wind and no\Nsun in the winter for a period of time.
Dialogue: 0,0:52:18.69,0:52:24.42,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And what happens? And this can actually.\NAnd that's what all they assume is that we
Dialogue: 0,0:52:24.42,0:52:29.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,do have a lot of storage for gas and we\Ncan use these curr, current strategic
Dialogue: 0,0:52:29.59,0:52:36.44,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,storage, as for gas in the future to store\Npower to to gas, gas or gas that's won by
Dialogue: 0,0:52:36.44,0:52:44.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,electricity there as a backup. So\Nbasically, technically, this is possible.
Dialogue: 0,0:52:44.49,0:52:52.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So to conclude, so the climate system is\Nalready at a critical stage. The prospect
Dialogue: 0,0:52:52.52,0:52:58.65,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,for a one point five degree warmer \Nearth are already very bitter. And
Dialogue: 0,0:52:58.65,0:53:03.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,while the IPCC reports and all the\Nreports, they are they are they. All of
Dialogue: 0,0:53:03.53,0:53:08.91,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,them go for it. If you would not exceed 2\Ndegrees because we have this thing of the
Dialogue: 0,0:53:08.91,0:53:16.71,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,tipping points. And several reasons\Nwe already have this two degrees. Yeah,
Dialogue: 0,0:53:16.71,0:53:22.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this carbon dioxide removal is presented.\NBasically, this is hard to avoid. But
Dialogue: 0,0:53:22.84,0:53:31.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,there are these critical things concerning\Ncarbon capture and storage. And whatever
Dialogue: 0,0:53:31.34,0:53:37.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we need to do is we have to act fast, and\Nthat's the main thing. This has to be done
Dialogue: 0,0:53:37.01,0:53:49.55,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,very quickly. And I must say I'm very\Nsorry. But our government's. Well, yes...
Dialogue: 0,0:53:49.55,0:53:58.99,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,{\i1}applause{\i0}
Dialogue: 0,0:53:58.99,0:54:04.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,So it is not a technical\Nissue. It is a political one. Yes.
Dialogue: 0,0:54:04.23,0:54:05.20,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Thank you.
Dialogue: 0,0:54:05.20,0:54:08.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,{\i1}applause{\i0}
Dialogue: 0,0:54:08.45,0:54:14.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Herald: Bernhard, I thank you very much.\NWe have eight minutes for questions. So we
Dialogue: 0,0:54:14.01,0:54:17.31,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,have a couple of microhones here and the\Nwhole. Please line up over there. We have
Dialogue: 0,0:54:17.31,0:54:22.49,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,those eight minutes. I'm sure there will\Nbe questions. The signal angel is
Dialogue: 0,0:54:22.49,0:54:29.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,signaling over there, that we have a\Nquestion from the Internet.
Dialogue: 0,0:54:29.45,0:54:34.34,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Question: Do you see nuclear power plants\Nas a temporary solution to slow the
Dialogue: 0,0:54:34.34,0:54:40.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,emission of CO2 and we had quite some\Ndiscussion in the Internet. There was
Dialogue: 0,0:54:40.41,0:54:45.60,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,number one answered. You need more than 10\Nyears to build new nuclear power plants.
Dialogue: 0,0:54:45.60,0:54:50.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And the response was, well, you could we\Nget the shutdown once back on the power
Dialogue: 0,0:54:50.79,0:54:54.05,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,line. So is that the realistic scenario,\Nin your view?
Dialogue: 0,0:54:54.05,0:54:59.15,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Bernhard: Well, there is actually this\Nthis is a current discussion going on. And
Dialogue: 0,0:54:59.15,0:55:05.23,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the issue with that is, it's not that easy\Nto us to get old power plants back into
Dialogue: 0,0:55:05.23,0:55:11.01,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,running. Because, well, they have a certain\Ntype of lifetime. And if you want to put
Dialogue: 0,0:55:11.01,0:55:15.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,them back on into the into the system,\Nthen you somehow would have to exceed the
Dialogue: 0,0:55:15.50,0:55:21.69,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,lifetime. And that are some, of course,\Nsome security issues. And if you want to
Dialogue: 0,0:55:21.69,0:55:27.26,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,avoid them, then you have to put a lot of\Nmoney and effort into getting them to run.
Dialogue: 0,0:55:27.26,0:55:32.74,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,And you need also a lot of time to do\Nthat. And so this the question is, would
Dialogue: 0,0:55:32.74,0:55:40.56,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this be worth it? And I would say probably\Nthey are faster methods to do it. You
Dialogue: 0,0:55:40.56,0:55:46.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,could do it. There are, of course, the\Nrisk and I mean after Fukushima and
Dialogue: 0,0:55:46.41,0:55:54.42,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Chernobyl. Basically, we we've all seen\Nwhat the risks are. So and I would say
Dialogue: 0,0:55:54.42,0:56:00.03,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it's probably not the best and fastest way\Nto do it. There are other ways they could
Dialogue: 0,0:56:00.03,0:56:02.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,be worth doing it.\NHerald: OK. Then we're going to hop over
Dialogue: 0,0:56:02.90,0:56:06.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,to microphone number one.\NMic 1: First, I want to thank you for
Dialogue: 0,0:56:06.84,0:56:11.59,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,your talk. It was very informative. And\Nyeah, my question is as follows. There was
Dialogue: 0,0:56:11.59,0:56:17.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a talk at the university where I study in\NDarmstadt one and a half years ago from a
Dialogue: 0,0:56:17.38,0:56:23.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,person who compared the IPCC predictions\Nwith what really happened with the real
Dialogue: 0,0:56:23.62,0:56:28.51,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,temperature increase and the damage which\Ncauses the climate change. And what she
Dialogue: 0,0:56:28.51,0:56:35.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,found out that the IPCC always, nearly\Nalways underestimated the effect of the
Dialogue: 0,0:56:35.17,0:56:41.33,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,temperature increase and what it causes.\NHave you ever heard of this criticism and
Dialogue: 0,0:56:41.33,0:56:49.35,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,do you think this is still the case?\NBernhard: I hope not. The issue is, of
Dialogue: 0,0:56:49.35,0:56:59.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,course, that the IPCC reports, as always,\Nvery, very carefully taking decisions and
Dialogue: 0,0:56:59.29,0:57:04.63,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,is very carefully looking at this. And\Nthere are more conservative and the rather
Dialogue: 0,0:57:04.63,0:57:11.08,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,are lower than the than the actual\Ntemperatures in the end, probably because
Dialogue: 0,0:57:11.08,0:57:16.25,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,there is, of course, also a lot of\Npressure, political pressure on them. And
Dialogue: 0,0:57:16.25,0:57:21.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,so if they would predict something and\Nthey would over predict, then people would
Dialogue: 0,0:57:21.94,0:57:27.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,immediately say, come and say, hey, you\Nare doing panicking and so on. And so
Dialogue: 0,0:57:27.93,0:57:36.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,that's why it is most likely that they try\Nto be as accurate as possible. But they
Dialogue: 0,0:57:36.13,0:57:42.82,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,rather choose the lower the. The lower\Nestimates.
Dialogue: 0,0:57:42.82,0:57:46.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Question: Yeah. That was the\Nserious thing as well.
Dialogue: 0,0:57:46.46,0:57:50.57,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Bernhard: That's let's say it's a very\Nit's a I mean in the end it's this summary
Dialogue: 0,0:57:50.57,0:57:56.55,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,for policymakers. I showed some slides\Nfrom that. That is actually voted on by
Dialogue: 0,0:57:56.55,0:58:04.13,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the buyer of governmental agents. So they\Nbring this intergovernmental round of the
Dialogue: 0,0:58:04.13,0:58:11.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,U.N. They are a U.N. entity. And so and\Nthe governments actually say you have to
Dialogue: 0,0:58:11.11,0:58:17.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,approve this. And so that's why it's very,\Nvery diplomatic. And the terms of. So they
Dialogue: 0,0:58:17.46,0:58:22.88,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,are doing reasons for concern, you know.\NSo it's I mean, people are concerned about
Dialogue: 0,0:58:22.88,0:58:26.41,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,all kinds of things. Thanks.\NHerald: All right, then we hope over to
Dialogue: 0,0:58:26.41,0:58:29.75,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,microphone two, please.\NMic 2: OK. First, thank you for your
Dialogue: 0,0:58:29.75,0:58:36.14,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,talk. All good mood is gone now. And if\Nit's mainly a political problem, do you
Dialogue: 0,0:58:36.14,0:58:41.94,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,have any idea how we can force politicians\Nto make the right decisions now? Because
Dialogue: 0,0:58:41.94,0:58:45.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,what we are doing at the moment, like\Nprotesting and voting, doesn't seem to
Dialogue: 0,0:58:45.96,0:58:52.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,work.\NBerhard: Well, I {\i1}some applause{\i0} I think
Dialogue: 0,0:58:52.66,0:58:58.10,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,actually I'm very happy because I think\Nprotesting works, but it does not work in
Dialogue: 0,0:58:58.10,0:59:04.12,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the same way that people who usually take\Nit to the streets think it works. It puts
Dialogue: 0,0:59:04.12,0:59:08.61,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,a lot of pressure onto them. But it's one\Npressure on. They also have pressure from
Dialogue: 0,0:59:08.61,0:59:13.53,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,other sites, you know, and then they look\Nat, you know, what are the my voters. And
Dialogue: 0,0:59:13.53,0:59:19.29,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,if their voters, are not the ones that are\Non the streets. Well, they might be not as
Dialogue: 0,0:59:19.29,0:59:26.32,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,important. And so I think the main thing\Nis that needs to be done is to go out to
Dialogue: 0,0:59:26.32,0:59:32.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the people. And thus going to the street\Nis one way of doing that. And tell that,
Dialogue: 0,0:59:32.47,0:59:37.46,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,you know, and talk to the people and talk\Nespecially to those who are not there on
Dialogue: 0,0:59:37.46,0:59:42.37,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the streets yet. Well, the potential\Nvoters of those who think, well, I don't
Dialogue: 0,0:59:42.37,0:59:46.93,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,have to care so much about because these\Nare not my voters. And we just have to go
Dialogue: 0,0:59:46.93,0:59:52.47,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,out and talk. And I think this will put up\Nthe pressure together with taking it to
Dialogue: 0,0:59:52.47,0:59:57.78,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the streets and protesting and doing\Nwhatever talking to politicians. I mean,
Dialogue: 0,0:59:57.78,1:00:02.78,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,we have a you know, Angela Merkel is our\Nour chancellor in Germany, and she is a
Dialogue: 0,1:00:02.78,1:00:08.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,physicist. I mean, she knows I mean, this\Nis she understands all this. You know,
Dialogue: 0,1:00:08.28,1:00:13.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,it's not that she doesn't know. It's just\Nthe pressure from the wrong side yet.
Dialogue: 0,1:00:13.90,1:00:18.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Herald: All right. And we have time for\None last question. Microphone three,
Dialogue: 0,1:00:18.18,1:00:20.96,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,please.\NMic 3: Yes. Thank you very much for my
Dialogue: 0,1:00:20.96,1:00:25.38,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,side, for the informative talk. From the\Ndescription of the talk, I was expecting
Dialogue: 0,1:00:25.38,1:00:30.52,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,more on the, it said something about the\Nresilience, about climate skepticism. Yes.
Dialogue: 0,1:00:30.52,1:00:35.18,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,To be more resilient about their\Narguments. And I was in discussion with
Dialogue: 0,1:00:35.18,1:00:40.88,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,many other people, also climate skepticism\Nand they sometimes said, they didn't
Dialogue: 0,1:00:40.88,1:00:44.97,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,criticize the entropy eugenic. Well, they\Ndidn't criticize the climate change at
Dialogue: 0,1:00:44.97,1:00:49.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,all. But the anthropogenic part of it. And\Nwhat they said that there is like an
Dialogue: 0,1:00:49.50,1:00:54.02,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,increase of solar activity the last\Ndecades, which increases to the
Dialogue: 0,1:00:54.02,1:01:00.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,temperature. And that also like the\Ndiagram is like only from 1860. But if you
Dialogue: 0,1:01:00.54,1:01:06.39,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,consider like the last millennials, there\Nhave been higher values of CO2 in the
Dialogue: 0,1:01:06.39,1:01:10.70,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,atmosphere, but the temperature did not\Ncorrelate. So how do you argue with this,
Dialogue: 0,1:01:10.70,1:01:15.68,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,this kind of argument?\NBerhard: Yes, that's a good one. Yeah. I
Dialogue: 0,1:01:15.68,1:01:25.43,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,didn't go into these these because they\Nare the sometimes the easy ones. But the
Dialogue: 0,1:01:25.43,1:01:38.33,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,thing is that there are... I did this talk\Nthis way because it helps. If you go into.
Dialogue: 0,1:01:38.33,1:01:42.50,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Climate, skeptics say this and they say a\Nlot of different things. If I could do a
Dialogue: 0,1:01:42.50,1:01:50.21,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,whole talk on what climate skeptics say.\NIf you do that, then in the end, people
Dialogue: 0,1:01:50.21,1:01:58.79,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,keep in mind, oh, yeah, this there is some\Nskepticism on this. And this is, I did a
Dialogue: 0,1:01:58.79,1:02:05.66,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,lot of these things because by this now\Npeople can go out and say, OK, this is
Dialogue: 0,1:02:05.66,1:02:10.54,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,currently the state of the art of the\Nresearch. I did not go into the climate
Dialogue: 0,1:02:10.54,1:02:15.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,skeptic detailed answers. Of course there\Nare. I mean, I can make, for example,
Dialogue: 0,1:02:15.48,1:02:20.48,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,thunder radiation is already in the\Nclimate models, the changes in thunder
Dialogue: 0,1:02:20.48,1:02:25.42,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,radiations. The variations of the\Ncenturies before actually being
Dialogue: 0,1:02:25.42,1:02:31.05,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,precalculators in the climate models\Ncurrently, because only if you're able to
Dialogue: 0,1:02:31.05,1:02:37.17,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,run if you if you're able to mimic that in\Nclimate models today, for today, all of
Dialogue: 0,1:02:37.17,1:02:42.90,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,the past. If you're able to do that, then\Nyou're able to do to run it for the
Dialogue: 0,1:02:42.90,1:02:48.28,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,future. And this is how climate models\Nwork. And so all this, all these
Dialogue: 0,1:02:48.28,1:02:53.62,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,variations are taking in. So I'm sorry.\NHerald: Oh, time is up.
Dialogue: 0,1:02:53.62,1:02:57.45,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Bernhard: But we can talk about this also\Nlater on. I didn't get too much to the
Dialogue: 0,1:02:57.45,1:03:01.11,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,climate skeptics now. So much.\NHerald: All right. We don't have time for
Dialogue: 0,1:03:01.11,1:03:06.84,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,any more questions, Bernard. {\i1}Applause{\i0}\NThat's your Applaus, thank you very much.
Dialogue: 0,1:03:06.84,1:03:13.24,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,{\i1}postroll music{\i0}
Dialogue: 0,1:03:13.24,1:03:33.83,Default,,0000,0000,0000,,Subtitles created by c3subtitles.de\Nin the year 2020. Join, and help us!