Skip to main content

tv   The Stream  Al Jazeera  January 9, 2022 7:30am-8:00am AST

7:30 am
maybe about a 100000000 years after the big bang. and what it's going to do is look at infrared light. and so that's like the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that we feel as heat. and so, stars and galaxies, planets whenever they form are very, very hot. so the telescope is going to look for those heat signatures as far back, you know, as a 100000000 years after the big bang, which is incredible. so we could not only see some of the 1st stars and galaxies, but it can also do things as sniff out x o planet atmospheres to see what kinds of chemicals are in there. maybe even to find you know, other habitable, habitable planets out in the universe, ah, 0. these are the top stories authorities and cars. exxon of confirmed the rest. all
7:31 am
former security serves the sheep, kara massimo is recharged with high treason, phase allege role in anti government protest this week. the rest is fueling speculation of a power struggle and the ruling party. roman forest walker has more on what's behind nearest his departure today. really cements this idea that cause him, you're much so kind of the president on is, is purging the government. the system be a leads of all those figures who owed allegiance to the former president nozzle term as a by that it's really quite an extraordinary picture. i'm a difficult to explain in a nick, but inside an enigma why this would, would have happened. but this really explains the dog nature of cows or politics, internal politics. the estate department has condemned an air strike uneasy of his northern te gray region. at least 56 people were killed in that attack. aid work has said it hit a camp for internally displaced people in the village of dairy bit near the era
7:32 am
trained border. the number of people being admitted to hospital in the us with covered 19 is rising. driven by the only con variance health regulators are wanting more children under the age of 5, who on yet eligible to be vaccinated are now being admitted to hospitals. thousands of people protested in the french capital against the governments moved to time restrictions on unvaccinated people. a propos, vaccine pass would, oh, alone would allow only those who have have the job to enter public places. if the bill is past is it's expected to go into effect. and next saturday, a gypsy palestinian activist attained in egypt for more than 2 years, is robbed and false. rami shop was forced to renounce his egyptian nationality before he was deported on 1st like those that had lines. the news continues her on our desert after the stream. when the news break site is tornado destroyed everything it touched in mayfield. when people need to be heard and the story town,
7:33 am
he has done his job to tell us what's going on with exclusive interviews. and in depth reports i get on my right the winds and just be 3. i'll g 0 has teens on the ground to where you are award winning documentaries and lives on air and online with high and for me. ok to day on the stream could blocking out the sun actually help reduce the temperature down here on earth. let me show you what i mean. to instance, you could have material pumped into as stratosphere. that material could reflect the sun's rays or solar energy. all the way back to the sun, meaning that we down here, a cat correlate that is a very basic. we're dementia understanding of solar geo engineering. there are pros,
7:34 am
thera, cons, though, unknowns and unknowns. there is a debate. let's take a look. should we be pursuing sola geo engineering? the answer is that we just don't know. what we do know is that the impacts of climate change are serious and getting worse, and that we're not doing all we need to do to address the climate crisis. so would you engineering might be a useful part of the portfolio of responses, but it also entails a wide range of poorly understood risks. a well designed research program can help us understand those ris and whether or not solar g o engineering deserves the spot . in the portfolio of climate change responses, solar, you engineering is a really dangerous idea. it is messing with the global climate system. it is basically just about suppressing some of the symptoms of climate change. it is not doing anything about the root causes and it comes with tremendous risks for global
7:35 am
communities and ecosystems. so instead of betting on high risk techno fixes what we're really should be doing as get out of fossil fuels, that means co and gas and not be expanding any of that infrastructure. and there's really no way we can do wednesday our way out of the climate crisis. some of i guess and nodding their head, some of agatha shaking their heads. let the debate vicki. hello, david. hello, angelie kelly. really nice to have you on the stream. david, we introduce yourself to our international audience. i'm david keith and professor at harvard in public policy and also mentioning i worked on this topic, i worked on climate for about 30 years. nice to have a hello angela, telephone. you all, what you do? hi, be mine, and thank you for me for having me on the show. my name is angela michelle. moving in. i'm an energy policy consulting based in your daily, in the i haven't you done? these are things. what was your engineering, my interest in the space, excuse me,
7:36 am
from a bush that's interested in climate change and the other solutions that we are looking at to deal with that you great to have you and kelly, please introduce yourself. i international audience watching right now. hi premie, it's good to be here. my name is kelly wands, or i'm the executive director of the 3 year olds are non profit organization called silver lining. and our focus in silver lining is near term climate risk. so we drive our research, we work with government stakeholders, numbers of the public, our youth organizations to look at expanding our portfolio of options to address climate risk in the next 30 to 40 years where we may have some gaps that might not be addressed in other ways. thank you, kelly. thank you. okay, thank you. david and audience. i know you have thoughts on this. i know you've got opinions and maybe the a couple of things that you want to ask out line. i'll pass guess jumping to the
7:37 am
comment section and u t. could be part of this discussion. the idea kelly and david that sola geo engineering may well be a climate change solution. david, you go 1st. so solution is a loaded word and then picks up exactly on the click critique you heard, which is the idea that it's the source solution. nobody in this debate was remotely sensible things as a solution. i dud just but there are future, but it may be is a way to substantially reduce risks over the next generation in ways that we cannot achieve by emissions cuts alone. so maybe that the combination of emissions cuts and solar g r sharing could be significantly safer, particularly for the world's most vulnerable. that would be emissions cut alone, but no single thing as a solution. even emissions cut alone and our solution cuz we clearly need adaptation. a complicated problem, my climate change has many different things. we need one of which may be vis
7:38 am
technology. hey, one of the things that we found as we were putting the show together, the stream so together was trying to find out all the different ways that maybe you could reflect off the sun, the sun's radiation, the energy. so you can cool at climate if that was possible. i'm looking here on my laptop at marine cow brightening science visibility and applying for research. can you tell us what marine cow brightening is certainly, and i appreciate your characterization. we don't tend to refer to these techniques as blocking the sun, but rather increasing the reflection of sunlight. so relatively modest amount of increase in the reflection of sunlight of clouds or particles. and yeah, monsieur can produce quite a large object in terms of heat energy moving out of your system and the marine cod brightening the idea is based in the image that you showed on observations from
7:39 am
things that already happen in the system today, where particles from emissions and natural sources mixed with clouds in ways that make them slightly brighter. so in the image here are the streaks that you see in the clouds. those bright streaks are actually created by the emission from ship and globally. today, scientists believe that the totality of the particles and emissions, not the particles that produce greenhouse gas facts, but those sort of dirtier kind of pollution particles. one of the side effects is that they mixed with clouds in this way and globally are, are thought to be creating something of a cooling effect that we don't understand very well. the idea behind the marine corp brightening is to use a cleaner or more benign material. like seesaw, particles from ocean spray and sea water bright and clouds over the ocean, better particularly susceptible to be effect. and it's thought,
7:40 am
although there's the so i'm going to be you feel if last me in the bit right. you've lost me. ok. i lost a little bit. so help me get back on track. what are you? this is me. you can hear me thinking now libel is her hi. all right. so if you were explaining what, what then goes up into the stratosphere to help cool us theoretically, what it, what are you? what is going up in it, in marine cod? brightening materials, going into the lower atmosphere, so it's coming up from the surface. right. and the marine club, right. the proposal is it's a salt spray that's generated from sea. water ok sprayed over the ocean into low line clouds. and so it brightens patches of these clouds in a way that reflects large amounts of sunlight back to space. ok in
7:41 am
a way that could produce a global cooling effect. thank you for speaking slightly. that does not ha, yeah, the audience, or like way ahead of me. i'm does, i think kelly just say angela said this is, this is fascinating. there's so much research and science going on here. why would you be concerned? no. so i think the 1st thing to realize is that, you know, we had it on the spot where your heart linked towards a climate and what you see and climate scientists and what you see nicholas have mean us, are you aware of that? but the point is that there are 2 camps of pot on by the we need to pause you. so lord, you and he really such one camp says that, you know, we don't know enough about solar, jew engineering and it could potentially be an option that because he was in case of a claim with emergency i. so we need to know more about it. so we need more research, the other count, which also consists of a different set of sam this, it consists of environmental policy, exports, and also other governments,
7:42 am
such as the united kingdom that has put out statement saying that grounded he thought that is available and, and that he so said if my map, if we feel that need know enough already to make the statement that we don't need more on solar directly with anything such because it is likely to cause more detriment that benefit to certain sections of the population. hardships. so the question do only on solar, jew engineering research is that there needs to be a point in the scene such where we stop and ask ourselves, when do we know enough to make this, call it on whether we need to progress with the thought. the point is that, so no, you engineering cannot be an indefinite quests to make it a workable solution. despite all the disks think, i don't think it is, i think, but here's what i think we know with real confidence. there's an enormous amount of research now over a decade and a half, the suggested the biggest drivers of global kind of risks are peak temperatures. and they're especially drivers for the world's poorest. they kill people. they may
7:43 am
people last economically productive and they make it harder to learn literally. the one thing we know from every single model, no exceptions about solar geo assuring is it would reduce peak temperatures and do it in a way that's pretty uniform. it's not like there's some group assigned as a model that shows that doesn't trip happen. all model show that would happen. so that's the potential. the only serious paper that looked at the effect of this technology, on se global inequality, showed that it would dramatically reduce global income inequality and would likely reduce global death from the waves. now, to be clear, there's a big set of risks and the st. keener this researching this has in a way that i think is wonderful. been often the very 1st to raise those risks from the beginning. but quantitative answers matter. and despite the kind of stuff you heard in the lead in say from the lady from recall, there is not evidence that the risks are really big compared to the benefits. in fact, we now have many sign the papers from researchers around the world on many of the
7:44 am
key risks you shouldn't trust any one scientists. you should trust a group of people that, that, that surrounds the world. and he's not the, we know that each of the rest that we looked at, the air pollution risk from doing this, the ozone risk, etc. they're real. and the community isn't one of the 1st commit to talk about this risk. but they look relatively small compared to the benefits and to me that is the reason to take it seriously. and i think we have to be very careful. but people who live were pretty rich, will far from the equator. kind of dismissing this when they're not the ones who are going to suffer the most very, not coming hill going to so, so i think, i mean, one of the points that they would need is that you know, that these models suggest that our soldiers unit could be beneficial, fired certain sections, i mean, it could be beneficial, our membership, our, the, my new population on in the future if you want to implement it. but i think it's important to highlight hello that basically the research that's being done in the
7:45 am
so in order to engineering is being down to simulations in climate orders, which helps us understand the impact of solar jew engineering on the ot system. so scientists that work on these models have recently also produced up a boy that missed the radius. and so i think these indian monitors and if they're sneaky, highlighted that it gives challenges in determining the impacts of jew engineering on local regional unclaiming conditions. so i mean that i like even with that is the thought that's happening right now. it's not taking into account another. our region is that those so i won't, they're not your lead depend of it that they're not perfectly dependable. susie true, it's the same size, same exactly the same model, just a sec. it as, as we'll use furnished amy impacts of c o 2. so just with when we add seo totally atmosphere, which range a climate, we also can predict exactly what will happen locally. we can do it for either it's the same underlying science. you can't dismiss the science to suggest solar
7:46 am
geometry and might be useful and accept besides as just climate as a big risk. kelly, can i open this conversation up a little bit more because we have people online who also will have some questions and, and some thoughts. so i'm just gonna go to salient who is on twitter. she says, i'd be interested to know who decides if we go ahead with solo geo engineering or not, the entire world is invested. what if there's a 20 percent chance of causing damage? who gets the vote ok, let's take that chance. k. so thank you for that question. so that's a terrific question. we believe that this field is a field where scientific assessment is really important. open science that allows stakeholders from around the world to get the information is really important. and that governance, government engagement is key. so in silver lining, we work with the u. s. science agencies and the u. s. government to help develop a scientific assessment past. and we're hopeful that you work into un arena as well
7:47 am
to develop a scientific assessment path that helps stakeholders and government representatives make these decisions in an open and constructive way. scientific information is critical to that. and i think we disagree with david on the level of certainty that we have around what the fix you see in risks. but that process of driving information so that we can all look at it together is critical. i'm just looking on youtube and ms. rainey is watching on youtube list. thank you for being part of the show today. if we do so, as you engineering, how do we force companies to change the harmful practice? my concern is people will keep doing the same harmful things over and over again. they would you touch him if you didn't say it is a climate change solution, but it can how comp, companies will keep doing the wrong things unless the government's forced them to
7:48 am
stop. so we won't get climate action unless we have government action to regulate the use of the atmosphere as a waste time for our carbon. that's what climate activists including me, have on our entire careers for no question. it won't happen automatically. we need, we need people marching the streets when the government actually that's what's going to change it and nothing about solvers sure. and really changes that much one way or the other solar generational will provide an excuse, a false excuse. that may be used by some people to try and avoid emissions cuts, but it's wrong, nothing we know about solar geometric changes. the fact that we have to cut emissions eventually to net 0 in order to have a stable climate. i'm looking at this image here on my laptop, david, will you talk us through it so that everybody can understand what is going on here and what we're looking at. because we're still in that phase right now where we're looking at theory, but also trying to do some practical research as well. this is part of the practical research david. yes, this is an example of
7:49 am
a research project called les stress period and controlled perturbation experiment run by my colleague frank, which, where the objective is to understand with a stratosphere balloon experiment. how, how some aerosols in the stratosphere cells are just really fine particles that are small if they don't fall very fast, how they interact with each other, how much they stick together, and how particular interaction happens in a plume? and if one was ever going to do this actually for real, from aircraft, with much, much larger quantities of material, you would need to understand the details of that interaction. so it's more to say, this isn't a test whether or not so, or geometry works or not. it's a incremental step to understand a little bit better, some of the underlying science i want to bring in a voice. it's important because i think there's a lot of people not quite understanding what is going on here, but they're still the research that is happening. and then worried about the down slide, the negative impact that what might happen if we change how warm or how cool the us
7:50 am
s have a listen, have a look solar engineering as a technology that is now being touted as one of the solutions for the climate crisis can have many unintended consequences. first to fall, it can alter the regional climate there by effecting not only the country that is using it or deploying it, but also the countries in the neighborhood. secondly, it has political connotations because it may divide the world into haves and have known that is countries that have access to this technology and the ones that do not have access to it, especially the developing world totally may have security implications as well. because this technology can be used for dual purposes, then by creating some sort of insecurity in many regions as our whole list of concerns they're coming from, the public is there, and i'm just rounding angela. you start, can you pick up? is there a, a problem with the public being on board with the science?
7:51 am
this is the science is ahead of the public a angelie. so i think there is definitely a level of suspicion and fewer in the minds of the public. because one is that we all acknowledge that there are a lot of uncertainties at risk associated with solar, jew engineering. and the fact that, you know, people and communities are representatives of these communities that are most biting it a little bit of the impacts of climate change. they're not nearly at this decision making it when i'm where these are just going to progress. so, i mean, not being always the wasted open, you know, not being able to understand what is happening in terms of such creates or the sense of humor and uncertainty. k, a problematic is that well, we think it's a really important problem to address, but it does take sophisticated resources to study these questions. and i think there's a misperception that the research is moving quickly to the total level of research
7:52 am
in this area around the world. as tiny on, there are a handful of researchers and just single digit $1000000.00 per year all over the world studying. and so we think it's actually quite important that we invest resources where they are in the climate models in the observations, in the tiny experiments that will help us understand these things and drive to make that information available and make that participation available to people around the world, so for example, we're working with amazon web services to put global climate bottles on the cloud that could look at these questions in a way that would allow researchers in the global south on other parts of the world to study them for themselves. so we think the problem is not advancing the science, but the problem is creating the resources in access so that everyone to share in it and then have a voice around the table as, as to what we're going to do. we have
7:53 am
a very serious safety situation, the current that projection have over 1000000 people on the planet displaced. and so we think this is a way of exploring options to see if we can do better than that. i agree with everything kelly just said, and i think i want to add one more point, which is it's easy to on any topic like this cherry people have opinions in different directions to. he said that we know anything, and we don't know very much about what regular people actually think. there's good evidence from to papers that people in more vulnerable climate or climate vulnerable countries or more supportive research on this. so it's true both among climate negotiators, depending on where they came from and it's true in asian countries. if you compare rich and poor, poor countries, you're more supportive. and in general, it appears actually maybe a little contradict your application for me that it may actually be that regular people are more supportive of this than experts. i don't think we know that definitely. but that he said that we have empirical evidence from surveys. that's the way it appears all, and it's really difficult as kelly was saying,
7:54 am
it's not like this is a big, huge area of research. it's, it was very, it was very nice and is becoming less nice because the climate our time is actually warming up. so people are now thinking, what else, what else can we do here? i'm going to show to headlines. david, i apologize now is these headlines mosque, but they, they are going to be quite painful for you to look at controversial test flight aimed at calling the planet cancelled. sweden cancel bill gates, controversial climate cio engineering project is to put i think you're involved in bill gates has put some investment into it. what happened, david? why was it can so i'm sorry, but if you say i got it right there. bill. yes. did not invest, does just plain false bill gates was one, invest means a financial investment. delegates was one of a whole range. oh, i see you at now david. i did say he was one of the investors. so it's not it. okay . yeah. but, but what happens quickly as of anna to return, which is different from philanthropy and he had no control or insight into this. i
7:55 am
think it's kind of important actually when people are saying things that are false, sorry to get my back up. but i think truth matters absolutely. welcome. please continue that the, the project that was going to happen in june has been cancelled. it was going to be in swedish, in lapland. what happened and, and how can you make that connection between what we've been talking about and the cancellation of that practical research project. so we were only planning to fly there because there's a limited number of place around the world that do house is transfer ballooning. and as we, your space corporation turns out to be a wonderful partner for doing ballooning. so we thought that we might fly with them for that reason and some the sammy counsellor indigenous organization and some environmental groups are produced. a very we're very negative argued that shouldn't happen. and to be clear, they actually can see that it has no risk. but that their risk is the idea which i
7:56 am
think is a consistent view. oh and they argued that it shouldn't happen. a swedish government took that seriously and basically told s s c that they shouldn't verify us. that's what happened. thank you for sharing at with us. that must be quite disappointing for you and the rest of your team at this point. but i want to bring in another point. this one comes from catriona mckinnon. who's thinking about ok, if we get a little bit further along with the science, then what do we need to be thinking about his yes. need to start a public conversation about solar radiation management soon. and that conversation needs to be focused on the d and difficult ethical questions that this new technology raises for us collectively. and in particular, we need to start talking soon about how to govern research into this new technology . in order to mitigate the rest of the technology running ahead of governance and am just wondering, are we there yet?
7:57 am
i know you have wrinkles. they've everything. we should've been talking serious about governance 30 years ago. yeah. i mean, when i 1st became involved in this, i and many other people have argued that biggest problem is governance, and we need to begin gover. discussions are hard. we need to begin the conversations early in order to have any chance of making reasonable decisions when the real decisions come a half the decisions to be clear they shouldn't be made by scientists. they need be made in some organized way that is as legitimate and democratic as possible, but that can all happen in a 2nd. and he am just about to wrap up the final thoughts that day. so i think it's important for people to know that these items will, are you engineering currently is being dominated by a group of imaged institutions that is based in the globe? not. so the only constructive way forward on this is to establish an international governance mechanic. so that is, that is sort of dev knocked to international participation. okay. thank you angela . i would also, we're just right at the end of the show. you pull up
7:58 am
a point that needed a new show to into, to talk about that point. but thank you actually for ending on why the debate will continue angelie kelly david on you too. thanks for your comments. really appreciate it. i see you next time. take evelyn ah. the listening post cuts through the noise like full peanut competing, now they see monday being used to perpetuate their complete separating spin from fact all 3 versions of the story and then some element of the truth. but the full story remains and cooking, unpacking the stories you're being told, it's not a science story at all. it's a story about politics. the listening post, your guide to the media. on a jesse era, we understand the differences and similarities of culture across the world.
7:59 am
so no matter why you call hand out, you sarah, will bring you the news and current affairs that mattie out is in the silence has been distinct. ah, beneath this eden ah, is one of scandinavia largest iron or deposits. and it's driving a wedge between those seeking wealth and those defending their way of life gallery. a witness documentary on a jessia with
8:00 am
awe off to days of anti government process, causing stones from intelligence chief is arrested on suspicion of treason. ah.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on