Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
[00:00:00] The Why Curve, with Phil Dobbie and Roger Hearing.
[00:00:03] World experts meeting in Baku in the latest summit to tackle climate change.
[00:00:08] But the consequences of that change are already here.
[00:00:11] Scenes of devastation from flooding in Spain that killed hundreds.
[00:00:15] Almost routine deadly wildfires across North America, Australia and Europe.
[00:00:20] So are the authorities being slow to adapt to all this?
[00:00:23] Can we build better and safer?
[00:00:25] Can we get ready for what seems now unavoidable?
[00:00:28] What needs to happen to prepare for stormier, more dramatic weather as our climate inevitably changes?
[00:00:33] The Why Curve.
[00:00:37] I wonder, are we at the stage now where we're just saying, you know, climate change, we're never going to fix it.
[00:00:43] So we've just got to deal with, you know, what we're going to get.
[00:00:46] It's a bit of realism, isn't it?
[00:00:47] I mean, I suppose you'd probably say both should go on at the same time.
[00:00:50] But the fact is, we've got to accept that we are seeing wilder weather than we did.
[00:00:55] And having to deal with the consequences of it.
[00:00:57] And Valencia is the obvious example recently.
[00:01:00] But also the wildfires that swore across Europe and Australia and America.
[00:01:05] You know, you've just got to do build in a certain way, I suppose, or put in safeguards that we didn't used to need.
[00:01:09] I guess we're, I mean, I do feel as though in the UK we're a little bit lucky that, I mean, we have had, obviously, up north, we've had some pretty bad storms.
[00:01:18] And flooding, you know, which seems to be more common these days than it used to be.
[00:01:21] But we're certainly not getting ravaged to the same extent, are we, in the UK?
[00:01:25] So maybe we get a bit blase about it.
[00:01:27] Well, I think we do.
[00:01:28] I mean, I remember the floods was in 2012.
[00:01:30] I think they were really, really bad.
[00:01:32] I mean, we've had some bad weather.
[00:01:34] But it's going to get a whole lot worse.
[00:01:35] That's essentially what we're being told.
[00:01:37] So unless we actually spend the money, which I suppose is key, in sorting it out in that way, in building the right things, in building the right way.
[00:01:44] But what are the right things?
[00:01:47] And do you over-engineer?
[00:01:49] Do you, or do you, you know, do we under-engineer?
[00:01:51] In which case, you know, you're not prepared.
[00:01:54] How do you know?
[00:01:55] You know, how do you take the gamble on where to spend the money?
[00:01:57] And who spends the money?
[00:01:58] Is it me dipping into my pocket?
[00:01:59] Or do I insist that the government does it?
[00:02:01] More taxes.
[00:02:02] Insurance companies, yeah, does it come out of tax?
[00:02:04] Well, no one wants to pay any more tax.
[00:02:05] We're having to pay more tax now to cover the National Health Service before we start looking at climate.
[00:02:10] And that's the other thing.
[00:02:10] It's not really number one, is it?
[00:02:12] It's not our number one focus.
[00:02:13] No, no.
[00:02:13] Well, we have to work out what it is we're fighting against, what it is that might be coming over the horizon, and try and find some way of affording it.
[00:02:21] Maybe, you know, world finance can sort that out.
[00:02:23] We'll see.
[00:02:24] But let's hear someone who's studied all this in some detail.
[00:02:27] That's Ilan Kelman.
[00:02:28] He's Professor of Disasters and Health at the Department of Risk and Disaster Reduction at University College London.
[00:02:34] He joins us now.
[00:02:34] So, Ilan, in your mind, have we just given up on the idea of trying to fight climate change and now we need to just plan how we're going to cope with it?
[00:02:43] Absolutely not.
[00:02:45] There are so many exciting initiatives around the world, recognizing that there's a lot that we are doing and a lot more that we could be doing in order to stop us changing the climate.
[00:02:55] We do know, though, that a lot of the impacts are locked in.
[00:02:58] So, even if we were able to stop human-caused climate change overnight, there would still be a lot of heat increase, which would lead to increasing intensity of storms, which means that we do have to deal with these impacts.
[00:03:11] But how do we deal with them?
[00:03:13] Because that's the problem.
[00:03:14] It seems as if, right now at least, no one has taken this into account.
[00:03:18] I mean, you look at what happened in Valencia.
[00:03:20] They weren't expecting a storm and rain of that kind.
[00:03:24] Clearly, they hadn't built in the right way to deal with that.
[00:03:27] So, the suggestion is really that nobody has learned so far what they need to do.
[00:03:32] That's where we can be inspired by examples which did work.
[00:03:36] And ironically, despite the horrible tragedy which should never have happened in that area, the city of Valencia is actually a good practice example.
[00:03:47] So, Valencia was very badly hit in 1957 by a major flood.
[00:03:51] In response, they diverted the main river going through the city center.
[00:03:56] So, it goes through the outskirts.
[00:03:58] And they do have a sort of river-better channel that goes through the city center, which is a recreational area.
[00:04:04] When it rains a lot, the water is diverted to the river away from the city center.
[00:04:09] And even when some accumulates near the city center, actually there's not a lot of flood damage.
[00:04:14] What was horrific is that most of the devastation happened just outside the main city.
[00:04:20] And those areas absolutely were not ready.
[00:04:23] So, we need to learn the lessons from Valencia and many other places around the world to recognize that even as the weather is changing,
[00:04:30] there's so much we could and should be doing to stop a flood from becoming a flood disaster.
[00:04:36] But I mean, that's expensive, isn't it?
[00:04:38] And you have to plan for, presumably, a million and one variables because you don't know how the weather is going to strike,
[00:04:45] where it's going to strike, how quickly and what form.
[00:04:48] I mean, you know, taking all of that into account, there's a million and one scenarios,
[00:04:52] which if you were to say, well, okay, let's counter each one of those, it would cost millions, billions.
[00:04:56] It would be far, far cheaper than experiencing any form of disaster.
[00:05:01] Over 200 people were dead.
[00:05:03] It cannot cause that.
[00:05:05] And is it possible to project?
[00:05:06] I suppose that's the other thing.
[00:05:07] Can you actually say, well, you look at somewhere like Spain,
[00:05:10] and we're used to hearing of the opposite problem in Spain,
[00:05:13] of drought affecting considerable parts of the country.
[00:05:18] But can we project enough to know what it is we're fighting against?
[00:05:21] And in fact, long before this devastation, long before this disaster, people were studying this.
[00:05:27] So, there was one paper in 2016, which was specifically about flash floods in the Valencia region.
[00:05:34] Another one in a journal called Landscape and Urban Planning from 2012, so we're talking 12 years ago,
[00:05:41] actually named the area's worst hit as being the most vulnerable to flooding.
[00:05:47] So, there's so much that we can and should be doing.
[00:05:50] And all this was actually known.
[00:05:53] Now, what happened in terms of, say, the lack of preparedness, why things went wrong,
[00:05:59] is because this knowledge was not taken into account.
[00:06:03] Because of, presumably, because of the cost of it.
[00:06:05] It's actually politics.
[00:06:07] So, the current government within the Valencia region decided last year to remove a regional emergency unit.
[00:06:17] It could have provided warning.
[00:06:19] It could have provided response.
[00:06:20] That regional emergency unit had been set up by the previous government.
[00:06:24] And politics dictated, oh, well, the other government did it, so why should we support it?
[00:06:28] So, there is absolutely that blame in terms of the regional emergency unit, which could and would have helped,
[00:06:36] except that for political reasons, it was removed.
[00:06:39] But politics is obviously all very short term as well.
[00:06:42] And that's part of the problem, isn't it?
[00:06:44] Because if you're having to put public money into mitigating against future disasters,
[00:06:52] you know, that's public money that, you know, could have been spent on hospitals
[00:06:55] or could be used to reduce taxes.
[00:06:57] There's, you know, that short term view of governments is part of the problem, isn't it?
[00:07:01] Well, then that's up to us.
[00:07:02] We need to vote for governments to understand it's not about trade-offs between hospitals
[00:07:07] and reducing flood risk.
[00:07:09] They actually support each other.
[00:07:11] It's up to us to determine that we actually want to invest,
[00:07:17] which means that we save costs and taxes will be lowered because of the investment.
[00:07:22] You're talking logic and how we vote.
[00:07:25] I mean, we don't vote logically.
[00:07:26] That's the sad thing.
[00:07:27] Well, I think it varies.
[00:07:29] So people do vary.
[00:07:30] They are different.
[00:07:32] And some people will say that they're voting ideologically
[00:07:35] and they really don't care what the consequences are.
[00:07:37] Others absolutely recognize that we can save lives.
[00:07:40] We can support livelihoods.
[00:07:41] We can improve our health.
[00:07:42] And we can have green spaces in the middle of urban centers,
[00:07:45] which are wonderful for reducing air pollution,
[00:07:48] for physical health, for mental health,
[00:07:50] which then reduces the number of people going to hospitals,
[00:07:53] which means we're spending less on health care.
[00:07:56] Some people recognize that.
[00:07:58] And I think that what we can do, and thanks for all your efforts in this,
[00:08:01] is get the message out there so people can realize how much money we can and should save
[00:08:07] by avoiding disasters, which then can be used for education, for hospitals and for lower taxes.
[00:08:12] All right.
[00:08:13] But what about those disasters that you referenced there?
[00:08:15] Because a lot of people will be thinking, I guess,
[00:08:18] looking at some of the gloomier prognostications,
[00:08:21] throwing their hands up and saying, well, there's not much.
[00:08:22] You know, it's going to be fire, wildfires everywhere.
[00:08:25] We're going to have massive floods.
[00:08:26] We're going to have all kinds of things that we would find it very hard to deal with,
[00:08:31] enormous hurricanes.
[00:08:32] And saying, well, we simply can't deal with these.
[00:08:34] We don't have the capacity to deal with all these things.
[00:08:38] Do you think we do?
[00:08:39] That's absolutely where we can look at the good practice examples.
[00:08:42] There are so many places where one house implemented measures against a vegetation fire.
[00:08:49] Another house did not.
[00:08:51] A fire then raced through.
[00:08:53] The house which did not have the measures became ashes.
[00:08:56] The house which did have the measures was basically inhabitable a few days later.
[00:09:01] Same with floods.
[00:09:02] We can go from places like Bangladesh all the way to Toronto and Canada,
[00:09:06] where for decades they've implemented measures to ensure that when it rains a lot and floods,
[00:09:13] there isn't a major disaster.
[00:09:15] So we need to learn from it and it is a long-term investment.
[00:09:19] If it sounds hopeless, let's be inspired by the places that didn't have disasters.
[00:09:23] And as horrific as it was, south of Valencia, the city of Valencia is actually an example.
[00:09:30] We have this horrible, horrible contrast between the place which managed to avoid a disaster despite a flood
[00:09:36] and a place where people died and they've lost everything because there was a flood disaster with the flood.
[00:09:43] Let's be inspired.
[00:09:44] Let's not say, well, it's too much.
[00:09:46] We can't do anything.
[00:09:47] It's awful when places have done it and we've shown how well we've done saving lives and saving monies,
[00:09:55] that when the weather changes, we do not get a disaster.
[00:09:58] But let's take the place where you are, Ilan.
[00:10:00] You're in Canada at the moment.
[00:10:01] And I remember reporting last year on the appalling big fires sweeping across great areas of Canada where,
[00:10:09] I mean, it's not terribly a new thing.
[00:10:11] The scale of it is big, but fires of that kind, wildfires, bushfires are quite well known.
[00:10:17] And yet the devastation was awful.
[00:10:19] So have they not learned the lesson?
[00:10:21] Well, they have.
[00:10:22] And what was interesting about those fires is a few number of deaths.
[00:10:27] People were disrupted.
[00:10:28] It was a horrible time for them.
[00:10:31] But they were able to have the warning in order to get many of their possessions and particularly irreplaceables.
[00:10:38] They were able to get out in time.
[00:10:41] And it is never pleasant returning to a devastated home or devastated town.
[00:10:47] People who live in wildfire zones know this may happen so they can be financially and psychologically ready
[00:10:55] in order to evacuate at a moment's notice and return to nothing in order to rebuild.
[00:11:02] Again, it's always this balance.
[00:11:04] As exactly as you said, the fires were terrible.
[00:11:06] Yet the death toll was very low, showing how far we've come to saving lives and ensuring that people do not get psychologically devastated when a wildfire goes through the hole.
[00:11:19] So it sounds like you're saying that things like wildfires, as a for example,
[00:11:25] it's not that we've necessarily built houses in the wrong place because houses have got to be somewhere.
[00:11:30] And they are going to be surrounded by trees in certain parts of the world.
[00:11:35] It's how we make sure there's enough early warning measures, but also how we take actions locally,
[00:11:42] like making sure we've cleared trees from the immediate vicinity of the house, stuff like that.
[00:11:46] And that's exactly it.
[00:11:47] There's so much that an individual homeowner can do.
[00:11:50] Are the windows fire resistant?
[00:11:53] Are there wood piles separated from the house?
[00:11:57] As you said, clearing vegetation and ensuring that nearby vegetation is much more flame resistant.
[00:12:03] Covering vents with mesh that do not permit embers.
[00:12:07] Now, no system is foolproof.
[00:12:11] So anyone living in a fire zone has to accept at one point that a property may burn down.
[00:12:16] Long before that, be ready.
[00:12:19] Know the evacuation routes.
[00:12:21] Know the warnings.
[00:12:21] Know the warning signs.
[00:12:23] Don't leave it too late and ensure that you're taking with you things which you cannot afford to lose
[00:12:29] and that you are financially and psychologically ready to go back after the fire.
[00:12:34] Even where I am at the moment.
[00:12:35] So I'm in Toronto.
[00:12:36] And in 1954, Hurricane Hazel absolutely slashed through this city.
[00:12:41] Houses were swept away.
[00:12:43] More than 80 people were killed across Ontario.
[00:12:46] And as part of the aftermath, Toronto said never again.
[00:12:51] So they did not rebuild houses in the floodplain.
[00:12:54] They let the floodplains be, amazingly, floodplains.
[00:12:58] So that there's now incredibly greenery around the city.
[00:13:03] Toronto markets itself as a city within a park.
[00:13:06] The pathways are used for commuting, for recreation, for environmental education.
[00:13:11] And when other hurricanes or major storms have gone through Toronto,
[00:13:14] such as Hurricane Isabel in 2003, Hurricane Sandy in 2012,
[00:13:19] the rivers became raging torrents.
[00:13:22] They overflowed.
[00:13:23] They sent mud cascading along the path.
[00:13:27] Trees were felled, but there was no disaster.
[00:13:30] But Ilan, isn't the problem with this?
[00:13:32] What you're talking about is what has happened.
[00:13:34] And clearly from that, they've come up with ideas about how to deal with it.
[00:13:37] But the point of where we are now is that we're moving into a much different situation
[00:13:42] where extreme weather events are more likely, much more likely, some would say.
[00:13:48] And we have to adjust all that.
[00:13:49] What is OK as a floodplain now,
[00:13:51] that floodplain might be rather larger than we expect it to be.
[00:13:55] That's the problem, isn't it?
[00:13:56] Changing our expectations.
[00:13:57] Do more people have to prepare for disaster than before?
[00:14:01] You know, disaster is going to strike in more places.
[00:14:04] And if so, who pays for that?
[00:14:06] Does it become a government expense?
[00:14:07] Do we pay for it?
[00:14:09] You know, do we find a larger proportion of GDP has to be spent on this sort of action
[00:14:13] so that we avoid the cost down the track, as you were saying?
[00:14:16] All of us have to be ready for weather.
[00:14:18] And we've always had to be ready for weather.
[00:14:21] There is no doubt we are changing the climate rapidly and substantively.
[00:14:26] The climate has changed in the past naturally.
[00:14:29] So floodplains were always moving.
[00:14:32] Fire zones were always moving.
[00:14:34] It is up to all of us.
[00:14:36] Who pays for it?
[00:14:37] Well, it's actually who will reap the rewards.
[00:14:39] Because a little bit of investment tends to reap rewards of over 10 times that initial investment.
[00:14:47] The issue is not where are we going to get the money from.
[00:14:50] The issue is what are we going to spend all the money that we save when we stop disasters?
[00:14:56] Recognize all the health benefits that come from the same measures that we need to implement in order to stop disasters.
[00:15:04] So where does that number sink?
[00:15:05] So we spend a dollar, we get 10 times back.
[00:15:07] Where does that come from?
[00:15:08] We published a paper in 2014 where we did a compilation of dozens of examples of detailed cost benefit analyses
[00:15:16] where people had calculated the investment in reducing disaster risk and then the benefits accrued.
[00:15:22] And it was everything from fires and floods to landslides.
[00:15:26] People looked at early warning systems.
[00:15:28] They looked at moving houses and other properties out of the floodplains, did those calculations.
[00:15:33] And generally, the average was on the order of 10 to 1.
[00:15:36] Some of them were 1 to 4.
[00:15:38] Some of them were 1 to 3.
[00:15:39] Some of them were 1 to 20.
[00:15:41] Some of them were 1 to 40.
[00:15:42] So we're talking about selecting the measures which for every dollar or pound or yen or euro invested,
[00:15:50] we do reap 40 back or 30 back or 20 back.
[00:15:54] Those examples exist.
[00:15:56] But those examples are based on what we know right now about the way weather behaves.
[00:16:01] Because we can't, I mean, part of it, we can't actually know what the consequence is going to be in the next 10 or 20 years,
[00:16:07] how bad things are going to get.
[00:16:09] Can you project that?
[00:16:10] Well, I don't do these sorts of projections, but the very skilled, very smart climatologists and meteorologists are doing this.
[00:16:18] And they are able to project.
[00:16:20] So one specific example is people are very concerned about what is called tropical cyclones, hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons.
[00:16:27] And the consensus is, not my own work, but the work from the other brilliant scientists,
[00:16:32] is that the number of those storms, the number of hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons is decreasing.
[00:16:38] So there will be fewer typhoons because of human-caused climate change, but they are becoming stronger.
[00:16:45] So we know the projection.
[00:16:46] We know we have to deal with it.
[00:16:48] How are we going to deal with fewer storms?
[00:16:50] Well, it means that we have to continue to educate people in the tropical cyclone zones that they may be hit any year.
[00:16:58] How do we deal with increased intensity of storms?
[00:17:02] Well, ensure that people get the warnings, are able to evacuate, are mentally and physically prepared to evacuate and to return to their house being swept away,
[00:17:12] and to ensure that they have all the support that they need in order to deal with their house being destroyed.
[00:17:19] This is actually not new.
[00:17:22] Fewer storms, more intense storms?
[00:17:24] Well, we've dealt with hurricanes for centuries, with some successes and with far too many failures.
[00:17:31] Let's learn from the successes over centuries to ensure that we continue the successes in coming centuries,
[00:17:37] no matter how the storms are changing because of human-caused climate change.
[00:17:41] So do you think we are learning, though?
[00:17:43] Because if you would say to me, well, you know, for one-tenth of the cost of fixing your house being destroyed by a storm,
[00:17:54] you'll be able to prevent that from happening.
[00:17:56] I would right now say, you know, look, you know, I live in the south of England.
[00:18:00] The worst we've got from climate change has been slightly heavy drizzle.
[00:18:05] You know, the cost of my house being destroyed.
[00:18:06] I mean, I'm not going to spend one-tenth of the cost on putting in things that are going to help prevent any of the atrocities
[00:18:15] that might come my way as a result of climate change.
[00:18:17] And I'm sure a lot of people would feel exactly the same way.
[00:18:20] You know, it's a problem for other people.
[00:18:21] Why should I spend money on it?
[00:18:23] So what would convince you?
[00:18:24] Well, I guess seeing next door's house destroyed would scare the living daylights out of me.
[00:18:30] But I don't know.
[00:18:31] What if life will be lower taxes in order to ensure your house didn't fall down?
[00:18:35] Yeah, I mean, government policy would help, wouldn't it?
[00:18:37] I mean, in the same way that, you know, government tries to incentivise you to make sure your house is well insulated
[00:18:43] so that, you know, you're not wasting energy.
[00:18:47] But the very same government you see building on floodplains, and you see it immediately
[00:18:52] because they know there's huge pressure on housing and they say, oh, well, it should be all right.
[00:18:56] And they allow the house builders to go ahead and build on that.
[00:18:58] So you've got much confidence.
[00:18:59] Not only are we perhaps individually not taking it seriously, governments aren't either.
[00:19:03] So what would convince you or what could convince us to vote for a government that takes this issue seriously?
[00:19:08] Now, you see, what you're doing, Ilani, is you're asking us the questions.
[00:19:11] And that's not the way this works, right?
[00:19:14] We get on you to answer our questions.
[00:19:18] I point to the successes.
[00:19:19] So Bangladesh, in 1970, a cyclone killed around 500,000 people.
[00:19:27] In the past five years, three major cyclones have ripped through Bangladesh.
[00:19:32] The death toll has been between dozens and hundreds.
[00:19:36] That's still a disaster.
[00:19:37] It is still unacceptable, but it's far better than hundreds of thousands.
[00:19:41] So let's learn from that.
[00:19:43] But they have taken action because they've seen the worst of it, haven't they?
[00:19:47] So they've learned through bitter experience, whereas the rest of us perhaps haven't seen that to the same extent.
[00:19:53] Well, we can see it because we can look at Bangladesh.
[00:19:55] We can look at Toronto.
[00:19:56] And we can look at Valencia, which comes much closer really to us than many of these other things.
[00:20:01] Have we even forgotten July 2021 when flash floods starting in the Alps killed over 240 people in Western Europe?
[00:20:08] Well, we do.
[00:20:09] That's the problem.
[00:20:10] If we're concerned about England, if we want to convince people in England, well, let's talk history.
[00:20:16] The 1953 storm surge, which killed about 307 people on land in England, about 22 around Scotland.
[00:20:23] It sunk a ferry in the Irish Sea, killing over 150 people.
[00:20:26] And perhaps another 150 people drowned in the North Sea.
[00:20:30] So why are we building so many coastal properties in storm surge zones without remembering 1953?
[00:20:37] Even more to the point is that storm then bounced off the east coast of England, smashed into the Netherlands and killed 1,836 people in Netherlands.
[00:20:47] Well, we don't know.
[00:20:48] And I wonder whether we downplay it a little bit as well.
[00:20:51] So before we started talking, I was looking at the World Economic Forum website.
[00:20:55] They've got a table about the impact of climate change, the impact it's going to have on GDP.
[00:21:02] And this is just well out of kilter.
[00:21:05] They say a temperature increase of 3.2 degrees, which would be horrific, would decrease global GDP by 18.1%.
[00:21:14] But for OECD countries, just 10.6 degrees percent, sorry.
[00:21:20] So 3.2 degrees increase, which we know would be, you know, killing many millions of people.
[00:21:27] And the food suppliers would be devastated globally.
[00:21:31] But just 10.6% increase in GDP.
[00:21:34] These are the climate scientists that you're talking about.
[00:21:36] You know, we almost lost 6% of GDP in the UK during the global financial crisis.
[00:21:41] They're saying 3.2 degree increase in temperatures.
[00:21:46] Then we'll get hit with a 10.6%, just 4% more.
[00:21:49] I mean, that doesn't seem that bad, does it?
[00:21:51] And I wonder whether it's numbers like this.
[00:21:53] We're putting it together and telling in our own minds.
[00:21:55] We're going, well, you know, it's not going to be that bad.
[00:21:57] We don't need to take mitigating action because, you know, scientists are telling us it's not as bad as perhaps we think it is.
[00:22:03] I'm concerned about those numbers for other reasons.
[00:22:06] The first issue is that they assume you do nothing.
[00:22:09] But there's so much that we can do to stop a flood disaster with a flood.
[00:22:14] There's so much that we can do to stop a heatwave disaster with a heatwave.
[00:22:18] So those numbers have to be viewed with caution.
[00:22:21] The other major concern is using GDP as a metric.
[00:22:24] GDP measures consumption.
[00:22:27] Human-caused climate change comes from us over-consuming.
[00:22:31] So we should actually want less consumption.
[00:22:35] We should want lower GDP as long as we do in such a way that people's quality of life increases and they have more livelihood opportunities.
[00:22:45] And people do that.
[00:22:46] They reduce consumption.
[00:22:49] Their jobs are better.
[00:22:51] Their health is better.
[00:22:52] And they have more money in their pocket.
[00:22:54] So the real concern is why are we using GDP as a metric when that attitude leads to human-caused climate change and actually removes the solutions that we need?
[00:23:07] Well, there's a whole argument about whether the GDP is a valid measure in lots of ways anyway, of course.
[00:23:11] It's because the world over it's seen as a race, isn't it?
[00:23:14] Who can have the highest GDP?
[00:23:15] The ironic thing is that if you were spending a lot of money trying to prepare yourself for the consequences of climate change, the money that you're spending actually would be contributing to GDP.
[00:23:26] So it's a circular thing.
[00:23:28] But Ilan, one of the interesting things, you've talked in quite an optimistic vein really about what we can do.
[00:23:33] But what about the suggestion that there are certain areas in the world, and I'm thinking particularly in the Sahel in Africa and other areas,
[00:23:39] where the climate change, global warming, as it is there in particular, means that certain areas that have been inhabited up to now are simply not sustainable.
[00:23:50] People cannot grow enough food there.
[00:23:52] People cannot survive.
[00:23:54] And therefore, to some extent, they have to be evacuated.
[00:23:56] Do you think that is a way forward to avoid people dying of starvation, for example?
[00:24:00] Well, that is a key argument that we should stop changing the climate.
[00:24:04] When it comes to most disasters, we should be able to avoid the disaster irrespective of the weather.
[00:24:10] There are exceptions, and you've absolutely raised one of them.
[00:24:13] And there are many other exceptions, which I'm happy to go into if useful.
[00:24:18] So the response is, well, yeah, absolutely, we should not be changing the climate in the way we're doing it.
[00:24:24] Well, tell us, which are the areas?
[00:24:25] Because I'm interested in the Sahel.
[00:24:26] Are there other areas where potentially they might have to be abandoned?
[00:24:29] Absolutely.
[00:24:29] We're looking at heat waves.
[00:24:30] So in the UK in 2022, the first recorded temperature over 40 degrees Celsius was measured.
[00:24:38] And that is really a sign of things to come.
[00:24:40] And we are locked into a lot of this heating.
[00:24:42] We are seeing areas in northern India at the moment where the farmers simply cannot be viable
[00:24:49] because the heat is leading to drought and there are major concerns.
[00:24:54] When we look at many other areas of the tropics,
[00:24:56] the projections are that it will simply be too hot to be outdoors.
[00:25:01] From Melbourne in Australia to Manama in Badain,
[00:25:04] there will be hours of the day for days or weeks on end when it is too hot to be outside.
[00:25:11] That, as you intimated, will have knock-on effects on food supplies.
[00:25:15] It means construction workers, delivery workers are out of a job.
[00:25:19] So what do we do?
[00:25:20] Do we just say, well, let's flip our schedule and stay indoors during the day and be out at night?
[00:25:25] Do we put air conditioning in everywhere,
[00:25:28] which then uses a lot of energy and contributes to human-caused climate change?
[00:25:32] There's really no way out of this.
[00:25:34] The advantage is that stopping human-caused climate change saves so much money.
[00:25:40] Oh yes, it also saves lives.
[00:25:42] But of course, we're talking politics, right?
[00:25:44] So it's about the money.
[00:25:45] Stopping climate change improves our health.
[00:25:47] Stopping climate change gives us different jobs,
[00:25:52] different livelihoods, which are often much better paid and safer.
[00:25:56] You know, do people want to be down a coal mine with all the health impacts of that?
[00:26:01] Or do they want to be working nine to five in the renewable energy industry,
[00:26:06] where they can walk to and from work and have an evening meal with their family every night?
[00:26:11] So I think we all know that.
[00:26:14] Well, I mean, at least half the population knows that, Ilan.
[00:26:17] The half who voted for Donald Trump last week perhaps aren't too clued up.
[00:26:22] Half of Americans in that particular case.
[00:26:24] Yeah, but I wonder whether it is just too late,
[00:26:29] because it seems like we've been going down this road,
[00:26:33] been talking about it for decades.
[00:26:35] We keep on missing targets.
[00:26:37] And, you know, are we at the stage now where we have to say, well, OK, sure, if we can do it, great.
[00:26:42] But really the focus now from this point on is how do we cope with this world that we've created
[00:26:48] and what actions do we need to take?
[00:26:50] And you're saying, well, there's some areas where we, you know, we just can't backtrack.
[00:26:57] There's going to be areas of the world where people can't live from now on.
[00:27:00] So do we then say, well, OK, we've got to find homes for those people.
[00:27:04] We haven't even mentioned the islands that are going to disappear below the Pacific pretty soon,
[00:27:09] which is another aspect of this where people simply cannot live anymore.
[00:27:12] It's not one or the other.
[00:27:14] We have to stop human-caused climate change.
[00:27:16] We also have to adjust to the impacts.
[00:27:19] Adjusting to the impacts is not new.
[00:27:22] We've had to live with changing climate and changing weather since the dawn of humanity.
[00:27:26] So let's do better.
[00:27:28] And same with stopping human-caused climate change.
[00:27:31] It's basically pollution prevention.
[00:27:33] And we've succeeded with chlorofluorocarbons, which destroyed parts of the ozone layer.
[00:27:39] We've succeeded with DDT and other pesticides.
[00:27:43] So it's about taking those lessons, recognizing what we can and should do,
[00:27:47] but doing it simultaneously, adjusting to the impacts,
[00:27:51] using that to support pollution reduction,
[00:27:54] and using pollution reduction to support adjusting to the impacts.
[00:27:58] So yeah, absolutely.
[00:28:00] The best time to have done this was probably to start about 300 years ago.
[00:28:04] It's too late for that.
[00:28:06] So the second best time is to start today.
[00:28:09] It's not about today because people have been doing this for decades,
[00:28:12] and there are many successes.
[00:28:14] So it's about recognizing cities like Toronto, which went for green spaces.
[00:28:19] It's recognizing architecture, which involves passive cooling and natural ventilation,
[00:28:25] to try and ward off the worst of the heat humidity without using electricity.
[00:28:30] It's about places that are using walking school buses,
[00:28:33] so kids can get to and from school safely,
[00:28:38] while walking to get exercise without using vehicles which burn fossil fuels.
[00:28:44] So much excitement around the world, so much inspiration.
[00:28:47] Are we there?
[00:28:48] Of course not.
[00:28:49] We've so much longer to go.
[00:28:51] But again, if we're not doing it now,
[00:28:54] and we haven't done it 300 years ago,
[00:28:56] the best time is to start today.
[00:28:58] Right.
[00:28:59] But it's not easy, is it?
[00:29:00] And for every possible solution, there's a million and one reasons why not.
[00:29:05] So you just said about, you know, walking kids to school.
[00:29:08] Sounds fantastic.
[00:29:09] Sounds obvious, doesn't it?
[00:29:10] But in this country now, in the olden days,
[00:29:12] you used to go to the local school,
[00:29:14] and they used to have to meet the requirements of their local population.
[00:29:20] These days, kids have to go to school across town,
[00:29:23] wherever they can fit in.
[00:29:25] There isn't that guarantee that you can go to a local school.
[00:29:27] So walking to school isn't a possibility.
[00:29:29] That's why our roads are busy at school time,
[00:29:31] because everyone's crossing from one side of the town to another.
[00:29:34] Public policy has created just this, you know, massive inconvenience,
[00:29:39] which is, you know, contributing to the problem.
[00:29:41] And that's exactly why any approaches to deal with climate change,
[00:29:45] any approaches to deal with any other disaster,
[00:29:47] need to be integrated to these other policies
[00:29:50] to ensure that we've so many gains
[00:29:53] across these million and one reasons that you mentioned.
[00:29:55] Well, Ilan, as we kind of draw this to a close,
[00:29:57] because we're going to have to,
[00:29:59] you've said what you think should happen pretty clearly,
[00:30:02] both in terms of mitigation and dealing with
[00:30:04] what is inevitably coming around the corner.
[00:30:07] But do you think that actually it will happen?
[00:30:10] Do you think that the governments will see
[00:30:12] the error of their ways in certain places
[00:30:14] and actually do enough
[00:30:16] to make sure that we do avoid
[00:30:18] these cataclysms from weather events
[00:30:21] that we seem to be experiencing?
[00:30:22] That's up to us.
[00:30:23] It's all very well to blame government.
[00:30:25] In the UK and in Canada,
[00:30:27] we're very fortunate to have democracies.
[00:30:30] We can say whatever we want about the government
[00:30:32] without fear of a knock on the door
[00:30:34] in the middle of the night,
[00:30:35] which means that the government is us.
[00:30:38] So if we want the government to act,
[00:30:40] we need to act.
[00:30:41] Partly is doing it ourselves.
[00:30:43] Partly is getting the government that we want.
[00:30:46] Do you think the finance sector's got a role
[00:30:47] to play here as well?
[00:30:50] Or are they full of self-interest?
[00:30:53] Because I'm thinking that the one area
[00:30:55] that would be paying out for a lot of this,
[00:30:57] obviously, would be insurance companies.
[00:30:58] Now, they may say,
[00:30:59] well, this is fantastic
[00:31:00] because we can push our premiums up more,
[00:31:03] but they have to pay out more as well.
[00:31:04] But maybe if they're in a position
[00:31:06] where they say, well, okay,
[00:31:07] we will insure you,
[00:31:08] but you have to do A, B, and C,
[00:31:11] which is to try and mitigate the impact.
[00:31:13] Yeah, and they are doing that.
[00:31:14] Everyone has a role to play.
[00:31:15] The for-profit sector,
[00:31:16] the not-for-profit, academia,
[00:31:18] and definitely government.
[00:31:20] So the insurers, the reinsurers,
[00:31:22] the brokers, the whole financial sector,
[00:31:24] absolutely, and they have been leaders.
[00:31:27] They say recognize the costs.
[00:31:29] This is not new to them.
[00:31:30] Even in 1992,
[00:31:31] when Hurricane Andrew ripped through Florida,
[00:31:34] just missing Miami,
[00:31:36] several insurance companies went bankrupt.
[00:31:39] They say could not afford the payouts.
[00:31:41] And those which didn't go bankrupt
[00:31:43] were sweating.
[00:31:44] They said, well,
[00:31:46] if this had gone through Miami,
[00:31:47] we would be gone.
[00:31:48] So they have been working on this for decades,
[00:31:50] and they are very much leaders.
[00:31:52] Are they pursuing it because of self-interest?
[00:31:55] I don't care.
[00:31:58] Stopping human-caused climate change
[00:31:59] is in everyone's self-interest.
[00:32:02] We should not be acting
[00:32:04] to have a better environment for others.
[00:32:07] It's for ourselves.
[00:32:08] We should not be acting
[00:32:09] to stop disasters for others.
[00:32:11] It's for ourselves.
[00:32:12] Unfortunately, it does help others also.
[00:32:14] But the key is that
[00:32:16] it is in all our self-interest.
[00:32:19] So we should all want to be leaders
[00:32:21] as much as much of a financial sector.
[00:32:24] Alan, thank you so much for what seems,
[00:32:26] I'd say, quite an optimistic take on things.
[00:32:28] Maybe it all looks better from Canada.
[00:32:30] I don't know.
[00:32:30] Well, I call it a realistic approach.
[00:32:32] We are in deep trouble,
[00:32:33] but we've also come from a long way.
[00:32:36] We also have a long way to go.
[00:32:37] So let's start today.
[00:32:39] There we are.
[00:32:40] Look, you know, we can both learn
[00:32:41] from your optimism, Ilan.
[00:32:43] A couple of grumpy old Englishmen.
[00:32:45] So good to talk to you.
[00:32:46] Thanks for joining us.
[00:32:47] Thanks for the offer.
[00:32:48] Thanks very much, Ilan.
[00:32:49] I do feel a bit guilty, actually,
[00:32:51] that there he was.
[00:32:52] He was very optimistic,
[00:32:53] and I feel like we weren't
[00:32:55] being quite so optimistic.
[00:32:56] Well, yes, that is kind of what we do.
[00:33:00] But it's practical.
[00:33:01] It's both saying you can do something about it,
[00:33:04] but also, I mean, he was admitting
[00:33:05] there are certain places
[00:33:06] that may just pretty much have to be abandoned,
[00:33:10] which is awful.
[00:33:11] And, you know, what do we do about food supplies
[00:33:13] and all that sort of stuff?
[00:33:14] There's a million and one questions.
[00:33:15] It is bizarre that this is not our number one concern.
[00:33:18] You know, it's perhaps number three or number four
[00:33:21] in our list of concerns right now.
[00:33:23] Well, one concern is almost as grim at the moment,
[00:33:24] and that's what's going through at the moment
[00:33:27] in Parliament, potentially anyway,
[00:33:30] which is what do we do with people who are so ill
[00:33:32] they don't want to live anymore?
[00:33:34] It's too painful for them.
[00:33:36] Can they be assisted in shuffling off this mortal coil?
[00:33:40] The end-of-life bill, which sounds ominous, doesn't it?
[00:33:44] End-of-life bill sounds as though
[00:33:45] the government's got some sort of
[00:33:47] surreptitious move to wipe us all out,
[00:33:49] but it's actually about the choice to die early.
[00:33:53] I think, basically, if you've got less than six months to live,
[00:33:55] that's the idea, isn't it?
[00:33:56] Should we be able to choose?
[00:33:57] But the question is, as always with these things,
[00:33:59] and we did debate this a little while ago on the podcast,
[00:34:02] but it's all got a lot more solid in a way
[00:34:04] because the arguments now have to be turned
[00:34:06] into some kind of law,
[00:34:07] and it's a question of whether you can avoid
[00:34:09] people being forced, not really forced,
[00:34:12] but perhaps bludgeoned metaphorically
[00:34:14] into doing something they don't want to do
[00:34:16] because, you know, the elderly feel that they're
[00:34:19] a waste of time or whatever it is
[00:34:21] and fears that they'll get pressure.
[00:34:23] Well, let's hope bludgeoning isn't one of the techniques used,
[00:34:25] but we do have the detail of the bill,
[00:34:29] which we can discuss.
[00:34:30] So whereas before we talked about it more
[00:34:31] from a philosophical point of view
[00:34:33] as to whether it's, you know,
[00:34:34] the right thing to do or not,
[00:34:35] now at least we can look at the detail and say,
[00:34:37] well, okay, if we are pushing ahead with it,
[00:34:39] has this law got the right provisions in it
[00:34:41] and the right caveats?
[00:34:42] So we can explore all of that next week on The Y Curve,
[00:34:45] and we will do that.
[00:34:46] We will.
[00:34:46] Join us for that.
[00:34:46] Thanks for joining us today.
[00:34:47] We'll see you next week.