Unlike Microsoft Windows, says our guest on today’s BradCast in response to Bill Gates’ new book on climate change, “if the global climate system crashes, you can’t reboot it.” Of course, what does a billionaire software engineer know about how to save our climate anyway? Well, our guest — an actual Nobel Prize-winning climate scientist — has a few thoughts on that as well. [Audio link to full show is posted below summary.]

First up, however, a few quick, breaking news items as usual…

Then, with Trump out of the White House and Dems in control of both chambers of Congress, it seems a very good time to renew the previously forestalled federal efforts to take action on our critical climate crisis. Private industry has figured out the urgent need. This week, Volvo announced they would move to an all-electric car line by 2030 and, in just four years, by 2025, would produce only electric or hybrids. And the American people seems to have figured it out as well. By a whopping 79% to 20%, they now favor the development of renewable energy over the continued production of fossil fuels.

So, it’s time to finally restart the debate about how best to move forward again to save our climate by decarbonizing our economy. We’re joined today by award-winning climate scientist DR. MICHAEL E. MANN, Distinguished Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, author of nearly 200 peer-reviewed papers and loads of books, including his latest, The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back Our Planet.

Last week, Mann penned an op-ed for Newsweek, detailing two very different potential paths forward. One, he describes as a “technocratic” path which “envisions climate action as a mere engineering problem” to be solved with massive — if dangerous — geoengineering schemes, as detailed in software mogul Bill Gates’ new book, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need. The other, which Mann favors, is the “sociopolitical” path relying on safe, clean, already-existing technologies.

“It can be a bit frustrating,” he tells us. “To the extent that Bill Gates might use his platform to create more public awareness for the climate crisis, that’s great. The thing that troubles me is that his prescription is wrong-headed, in my view. It’s overly technocratic. It’s like if your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  If you built your reputation, if your role in society has been to promote computer technology, technological or technocratic solutions to problems, everything looks like a technocratic problem.”

“The problem is climate change isn’t a technocratic problem,” Mann argues. “We have the solutions — wind, solar, geothermal. [Gates] downplays those solutions, based on what I would say is an unbalanced assessment of the literature and what researchers have found. He downplays the potential for renewable energy to meet our needs and help us decarbonize our economy. By downplaying the obvious solution, it leads him to promote far riskier strategies — like geoengineering, massively interfering with the Earth’s system in some other way to try to offset global warming. What could possibly go wrong?”

“This problem at this point is a political problem, it’s not a technological problem. We have the solution. The problem is that we don’t yet have the representation in our government,” asserts Mann, noting that Gates “actually said, ‘Well, I don’t know what the solution is to the politics here.’ If you don’t know the solution to the politics, then you don’t know the solution to the problem, because that’s what it is at this point. It’s a political problem.”

Our conversation is enlightening, encouraging, and, yes, maddening at times. We discuss, for example, one of Gates’ “solutions” to the climate crisis: more nuclear energy. But even a number of esteemed climate scientists argue that we can’t decarbonize without relying on nukes. Mann disagrees and explains why.

He cites peer-reviewed literature from energy experts who “all come to the conclusion that we can meet 80% of projected energy demand by 2035 from renewables, and 100% by 2050…based on existing technology,” adding, “That’s without nuclear.”

As usual, there is much more in our in-depth conversation with Mann than I can cover here, but that is well worth tuning in for. Mann himself, in his Newsweek piece, notes that both he and Gates are optimistic about the future, and that he hopes to find places where their two different paths toward the same ultimate goal may converge. “Whether we have a crisis is no longer a matter of worthy debate. Precisely how we solve it is.”

And, yes, we welcome a response from Gates. Happy to have him on the show, with or without Mann there to debate him as he sees fit. Though we do hope that our good-spirited snark today about Windows crashing won’t keep Microsoft’s former CEO from dropping by…

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!…

* * *
While we post The BradCast here every day, and you can hear it across all of our great affiliate stations and websites, to automagically get new episodes as soon as they’re available sent right to your computer or personal device, subscribe for free at iTunes, Pandora, TuneIn, Google, Amazon or our native RSS feed!
* * *

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION
ONE-TIME DONATION

Choose monthly amount…

(Snail mail support to “Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028” always welcome too!)