https://vimeo.com/452098947 While better than Trump’s climate denial, a review of the Biden climate plan reveals an over reliance on unproven carbon capture and far too limited investment in solar and wind. Biden positions the plan as part of rivalry with China instead of climate cooperation. Bob Pollin joins Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news podcast. Transcript Paul JayHi, I'm Paul Jay, and welcome to theAnalysis.news podcast.The 2019 U.N. annual emissions gap report states that, if all the countries that made commitments tothe Paris agreement fulfilled those promises completely, we are still headed for 2°C warming by 2050and 3°C by the end of the century. I'll say it again. If the Paris objectives are fully met, we hit almostunlivable conditions in 30 years, and a catastrophic tipping point in 80, maybe sooner, within thelifetime of our kids. These assessments were based on all countries meeting their Paris commitments,but that's not happening. President Trump pulled the US out of the Paris agreements and is undoing themodest regulations the Obama administration enacted. What happens if we continue business as usual?The IPCC, (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), says by the end of the century, warming hits4.8°. The Independent reported in 2016 that the IPCC estimate may be low, quote, "Research by aninternational team of experts who looked into how the Earth's climate has reacted over nearly 800,000years warns this could be a major underestimate because they believe the climate is more sensitive togreenhouse gases when it's warmer. The actual range could be between 4.78°C and 7.36°C, by 2100,based on one set of calculations," end quote.The IPCC says the world must avoid hitting 1.5° Warming because once one point five degrees is hit, itmight be impossible to prevent further warming. And even at that level, the consequences of extremeweather are calamitous. When we assess Joe Biden's climate plan, it shouldn't just be in comparison toTrump's, which is nothing. Under Trump, the worst-case scenario is almost guaranteed. At least withBiden, there's a recognition of the problem and a real plan.But does the Biden plan live up to the urgency and scale that science says is necessary to avoid climatecatastrophe? Because if it isn't, then while it looks and feels like significant progress, we still end up withmuch, or most of the world being unlivable.While there are many things to discuss in the Biden plan, including, I'm concerned about the attitudetowards China which we'll discuss later in our interview, but perhaps the biggest concern is it seems tobe very reliant on carbon capture technology, nuclear, and seems to downplay renewables; solar, wind,and geothermal. And these are the concerns of our guest. And now joining us is Bob Pollin, co-founderof the Perry Institute, that's the Political Economy Research Institute in Amherst, Massachusetts, and isthe author of an upcoming book co-authored with Noam Chomsky titled "Climate Crisis and the GlobalGreen New Deal: The Political Economy of Saving the Planet." Paul JayThanks for joining us, Bob. Robert PollinThanks very much for having me on, Paul. Paul JaySo what's your overview to start with of the plan? What encourages you? Let's start with that, and thenlet's get to what concerns you? Robert PollinWell, the first thing is encouraging. I know it's a very low bar, but at least there is a plan, and it's prettyserious in terms of the scale of the project. The scale of the project, if we just look at the overall amountof money they are suggesting should be spent, is in line with what I think is the right scale. They'relooking at a budget over the next 10 years of about 500 billion dollars a year total, which is, again,
No transcript available.
POWERED BY BLUBRRY
