Agricoltura, Nicholas Stern: The state of the climate — and what we might do about it
agricoltura | info | prezzo | dati | produzione
Tomorrow, the UN begins its first Climate Summit, enlisting the world to work together on a problem that’s too big for any single country to solve alone. Economist Lord Nicholas Stern helped write a report that outlines where we are now — and what we could do next. It’s a big vision for cooperation, with a payoff that goes far beyond averting disaster. He asks: How can we use this crisis to spur better lives for all?
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at http://www.ted.com/translate
Follow TED news on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/tednews
Like TED on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TED
Subscribe to our channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDtalksDirector
Commento
-
-
The world view of this guy disgusts me. I will add another question at the end. Will we look our grandchildren in the eye and tell them that on our watch our share of the world economy fell from 2/3 to 1/3? Time for acting on climate change is irrelevant, but it is high time for developed countries to stop supporting developing countries, and start to increase our GDP so the gap between us and them finally stops closing.
-
does anyone know what the opportunity cost is in this video.
-
We understand the nature of the challenge and have the means to solve , so the only real question is whether we think it's reasonable to make some minor sacrifices now in order to give our descendents a chance for a decent life. How much are you willing to give up to insure a decent future for your grandchildren and their children?
-
Strong message! definitely gonna share this with everyone i can!
-
The solutions would have to come out through business. Because its business that is better equipment to handle the money and organization to accomplish this goal, but the government has to get out of the way of business to an extent so that business can succeed at this new goal.
-
We need more discussions on tv and radio. We need the public to know we have to act. with everyone aware, and together, we are very powerful.
-
Bringing your child and grandchild into the discussion is a wrong move in my opinion. You just produce another person that contributes to emission!
-
I think using China as an example in the beginning is inappropriate. First, in per capita, China is one of the lowest emitters in the world (if you don't take this into account, then you treat individuals unfairly); second, China is producing all these stuff for the rest of the world (i.e. the rest of us are responsible for the carbon footprint); third, it is arguable that the growth in China is enriching Westerners and Western corporations. Lord Stern, the way to cut greenhouse gas emission IS actually to live like a Chinese!
-
Kudos to tha man.
-
I really like the way he presented it. Simple, clear and persuasive. This is the way I want my presentation skill to be... :)
-
UN agenda 21
-
15:33 lol...wow...what an odd/cool synchronicity. How weird.
-
'WE can do this, WE can do that... by having government swell in power to force businesses to behave a certain way?' Why not propose sensible ideas from a market perspective to solve the problem? Other TED talks have... But if you bring a baby on the stage then you can sell government interference with ease - 'if you don't think government should do something, you don't care about your children'.
-
Talk talk talk. But no good ideas or actions ready.
-
Climate Gate :/
-
halfway in, and he's still to say anything of substance. And that's the only recent TED talk that even approached a scientific subject.
TED's gone.
-
TED your pissing me off man.
-
First if we want to convince populations, governments, and corporations about the evidence of global warming, we need to stop call it "Climate Change" and call it "Global Warming", and scientists MUST stop writing their papers in the passive and gentle way. Readers and the media see that as not convincing and gloss over.
-
I would like to propose my suggestion to combat climate change; to reduce the world population heavily. Perhaps we could introduce measures similar to china's one child policy, a global one child policy which is particularly important in third world countries such as Rwanda where the birthrate is already unsustainably high.
We could also reduce the population now by executing criminals who have committed crimes which would normally be punishable by jail time. We could also make abortion compulsory for women who's children would be born with severe disabilities.
Tomorrow, the UN begins its first Climate Summit, enlisting the world to work together on a problem that’s too big for any single country to solve alone. Economist Lord Nicholas Stern helped write a report that outlines where we are now — and what we could do next. It’s a big vision for cooperation, with a payoff that goes far beyond averting disaster. He asks: How can we use this crisis to spur better lives for all? TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more. Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at http://www.ted.com/translate Follow TED news on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/tednews Like TED on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TED Subscribe to our channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDtalksDirector
Commento
TED's gone.
We could also reduce the population now by executing criminals who have committed crimes which would normally be punishable by jail time. We could also make abortion compulsory for women who's children would be born with severe disabilities.
Eliminating warming can, only be done one way - the physical output of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
Once again, I inform the officials of the UN, the US, France, Germany, Australia, Trinidad Tobago, radio Liberty, and others:
Remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by reducing emissions from the land impossible. It accumulates in the atmosphere. This same ignorant decision, as the Kyoto Protocol.
Lima. Environmental Summit. December 2014: "However, for the first time in the history of climate negotiations there was approved by all 195 parties to the negotiation process a document that commitments to reduce emissions are willing to take not only developed but also developing countries." Details: http://kommersant.ru/doc/2634202.
Leaders of 195 countries took the initiative and decided to reduce emissions by 5% per year, and begin their decline in 2015?? I stand for the "wisdom" of the political, environmental agencies and research groups 195 states:
2015. Greenhouse gases 2014 have not gone away - they have remained in the atmosphere.
So, in 2015, left in the atmosphere: 100% gas 2014 2015 + 95%.
In 2016, in the atmosphere is 100% of greenhouse gas emissions in 2014, + 95% for 2015 and 2016.
In 2017 in the atmosphere would be 100% 2014 + 95% 2015, 2016 and 2017. And so on.
Natural disasters will grow annually by 95% and reduced by 5%. And this "reduction" will last approximately 1000-1200 years.
Hence, in the bunkers, which have recently been building the elite, will be hard to survive even 3-5 years - a thousand years, it is impossible to live in bunkers.
I also inform you that endless conversations officials do not understand the principles of ecological processes will not remove warming.
Warming can be eliminated only by qualified environmental-engineers.
Sincerely, a developer of environmental programs, Victor Rodin.
--- --- ---
Вывод из атмосферы углекислого газа за счёт уменьшения их выбросов с земли, положительного решения не имеет.
Устранение потепления может быть выполнено только одним путём – физическим выводом парниковых газов из атмосферы.
Ещё раз сообщаю чиновникам ООН, США, Франции, Германии, Австралии, Тринидад Тобаго, радио Свобода, и другим:
Убрать углекислый газ из атмосферы за счёт сокращения выбросов с земли невозможно. Он накапливается в атмосфере. Это такое же безграмотное решение, как Киотский протокол.
Лима. Экологический саммит. Декабрь 2014: «Тем не менее впервые в истории климатических переговоров появился утвержденный всеми 195 сторонами переговорного процесса документ, в котором обязательства по снижению выбросов готовы взять на себя не только развитые, но и развивающиеся страны». Подробнее: http://kommersant.ru/doc/2634202.
Руководство 195 стран проявило инициативу и приняло решение сократить выбросы по 5% в год, и начать их сокращение в 2015 году??? Расшифровываю эту «мудрость» политических, экологических структур и научных коллективов 195 государств:
2015 год. Парниковые газы 2014 года никуда не делись – они остались в атмосфере.
Значит, в 2015 году в атмосфере осталось: 100% газов 2014 + 95% 2015.
В 2016 году в атмосфере будет: 100% парниковых газов 2014, + по 95% 2015 и 2016.
В 2017 в атмосфере окажется: 100% 2014, + 95% 2015, 2016 и 2017. И так далее.
Природные катаклизмы будут расти ежегодно на 95%, а уменьшаться на 5%. И такое «снижение» продлится примерно 1000-1200 лет.
Отсюда, в бункерах, которые в последнее время строит вся элита, будет тяжело прожить даже 3-5 лет – тысячу лет в бункерах прожить невозможно.
Я также сообщаю, что бесконечные разговоры чиновников, не понимающих принципы действия экологических процессов, потепления не устранят. Потепление могут устранить только квалифицированные инженеры-экологи.
С уважением, разработчик экологических программ, Виктор Родин.