 All right, you ready to roll up your sleeves? Yeah? They're rolled up, you're rolled up. Christy's ready. Okay, I'm here at three purposes. The first is to introduce our simulator end roads that you're going to be using. Second, I really want to guide your thinking towards the root cause drivers of the climate and equity crisis, both towards what's causing it and what you can do about it. What are the high leverage actions that need to be taken to bend the curve on this challenge? From a systems thinking perspective, what's really driving change, not get distracted by the flavor of the month, whatever is the hot thing that's in the headlines? And the third is to have, let's just stir the pot a little bit and help you be as fierce for results as I think you probably are. But when you're all together, you get to notice how fierce the results you are. So you know what I mean by fierce for results? Anyone else want to see some results in the world? Yeah. You're going to spend your whole career working on stuff. Look at some things done here, okay? We're going to use a simulator end roads. We built it with our colleagues at MIT Sloan Sustainability Initiative to using a system dynamics model. Anyone here studied the field modeling field of system dynamics before? Grew out of 1950s MIT, high order non-linear differential equation models basically applied electrical engineering and control theory, but you'll see making it much more accessible in simulations that people actually use. The actual use is the mission of Climate Interactive, the non-profit that I'm the executive director of where right now there are 500,000 people using the model, it's in 21 languages. We're proud that it is all around the world, but there are some moments that we're particularly proud of. One of them is that the earlier version of this model called sea roads, we gave to the Chinese government and the US government asked for a version of it, so in 2014 when they sat down to negotiate the bilateral US-China climate deal, they had the same model. They could agree about how the carbon cycle and emissions and temperature worked to the point that they could artfully disagree about many other things, but not the basics of the carbon cycle. And that set them up to come up with an agreement, that set up the Paris Agreement. And then in this last couple of years, the members of Congress, we met with 128 members of Congress using this simulator in settings like this or one-on-one to help figure out what are the important strategies here in the United States for addressing climate and equity. All right, so why we do this? I want to get away from models and stuff and get back to what matters to us as human beings. What a summer for climate. A tropical storm in California, what was that about? So we heard the first one, a tropical storm in California, five words or less. Call some out. Here, wildfire smoke, wildfire smoke, wildfire up in Canada, but all over. Another one, yes. Floods in Pakistan, a third of Pakistan underwater. What else? Yes, heat waves in India. Yes, right here. Sea level rise. What's a city that comes to mind when you get concerned about that? The Netherlands, but, okay, yeah, the Netherlands, what was it, when you said it, what came to mind for you, Wiley? Venice, Venice, Netherlands, Venice, Bangladesh, Bangladesh. Just keep calling them out, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, okay. When I encourage you to be fierce for results, I really want to just get, this is what I'm talking about, okay? The fact that we're here gives us incredible privilege with this great privilege of this education that you're getting. People watching this video, if you're even in school, not necessarily even Stanford, the privilege of getting an education and being safe in this way gives us that responsibility to be fierce for results, fight for results we really want to see. All right, so let's explore this. What does all of this look like? In En-ROADS, you click on a title and you see impacts and you can see ocean acidification or many of these other results that you might be curious about. Here Flood, our friends at Climate Central were kind enough to give us the link to their maps, so not just impacts like, I don't know, feeding people. Crop yield in the top left, 19% drop in Mays by 2100 if things continue as they are. And one note, this is our baseline. This is not going to happen, okay? This is not our forecast, this is not what we're saying is going to happen. This is if we just follow current policies, this is where things are headed. But it's not going to happen because we all are going to do so much better than that terrible situation would be if 90% drop in Mays. I haven't looked in Venice, you said Venice. So you type in here, you can go look with your group, Venice Beach, no. This is not Barbie. So then you can go look and see, all right, you see the boot, there's the boot. What are we talking about? Areas that are blue in 2100 are at risk to sea level rise. 2060 and you can go look again and then you can go see other areas. So this is a serious threat, boy, even in 17 years, 2040, yeah, 20, okay. Go look, get grounded in what really matters when it comes to impacts. Now I'm going to ask a lot of why questions. Why is this happening? Why is sea level rise happening? Let's call out melting glaciers is a big part of it. It's secondary. Warm water is bigger. Warm water is bigger. Warm water is bigger. Why is water warm? Because of this trend, temperature change, of course, this is where things are headed in this scenario where we are here at 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, we want to limit warming to that dotted line and or the second dotted line of two not going up to 3.3. Why is that happening? And notice I'm clicking up here. These are our favorite 12 graphs. There is greenhouse gas net emissions. The reason temperature is going up is because of the pollution. Climate change, science is easy. There's this stuff called greenhouse gas net emissions when it goes up, temperature goes up. This is the pollution. That blip right there, COVID. But it's coming back. Those emissions are coming back up. Now when you see a scenario like this and you see a model like this, you think, how would they build confidence in a model like this? It seems to run really fast. Maybe it's pulling data from somebody else's model. No. It's starting in 1990 with initial conditions every 45 days, 5,000, 15,000. I'm going to check that. Conditions are calculating every 45 days how this plays out through the next 110 years. But we have a lot of respect for the big integrated assessment models and the other models that other teams build and then they share their research and we compare against them. That's one of the ways that we build confidence. So when you see a graph like this, know that it's really important to say, hey, if the other scientists on earth, what do they think is going to happen? With what they call implemented policies. You see that red line? This is the same time horizon of the graph. That red line shows what all these other models think. There's a big uncertainty band. They think that's where we're headed. How do we compare? We're a little conservative. We see the three dots that were on the upper end but within the band because we don't think we should assume strengthening of policies. We have a $5 carbon price. Why a quarter of the world's emissions has a carbon price on it right now? About 20 bucks. Average it out, that's about $5. But we're assuming it doesn't get any stronger. It's not going up to 10. And others like to assume, hey, it's going to happen because at the same time as carbon price could go up, guess what's happening to fossil fuel? Subsidies on the other side are also going up. So we said, all right, we're not going to assume strengthening. And so we're a little bit on the conservative end. So know that the baseline you're working with is a reasonable starting point for model experimentation. We are not a forecast shop. We are a learning shop. We want you to learn and decision makers to learn what are the high leverage actions to create in the future that you really want to see. There's our baseline. So back here to where we were with the model. OK, let me make it nice and big. Here we were greenhouse gas net emissions. Why? Why is that going up? What is the biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions? Fossil fuel combustion, burning, coal, oil and gas is the biggest source. Why is that? And one note, I'm asking a lot of these why's, why's, why's? I want to get a start to focus on root cause drivers. And the perspectives that I really like is an alternative to a view where we just look at events. What are the events? What are the headlines you hear on climate solutions these days? What do people talk about? What's up with climate? What do you hear? Just call out. Yeah. Say it again. Net zero. Yeah, we just need to get to net zero. What else do you hear in headlines about climate solutions and the new green deal as a suite of policies here in the United States? What else? Pardon. What is a silver bullet? Carbon capture, carbon capture. Maybe we can grab the carbon dioxide at the end of the smokestack for gas and coal. Maybe we can make these machines, direct air capture machines that are like dehumidifiers that kind of pull it out of the atmosphere. What else? Maybe it's a hoax. Maybe it is a way for guys like me to get rich. Exactly. So this is how we hear this conversation. And sometimes it's tempting to just say, let's react to whatever is the hot thing. The method of system dynamics says under the waterline in this iceberg, it's what's really driving change. And the first perspective is patterns of behavior. What are the trends over time? You'll note in long term trends that graphs I'm showing are 100 years long. This is not the next quarter or the next few years. This is a long period of time. We say, let's look at the trends. Where are things headed? Can we anticipate? But the goal from our perspective is systemic structure, root causes. What is really driving change? That answer to why, why, why? When we say sea level rise, why? Temperature, why? Greenhouse gas net emissions, why? Combustion of fossil fuels. Now we're going to ask the next question in systemic structure. Why? Why are we seeing those emissions going up? And there's a Japanese researcher named Kaya who came up with just such elegant math on the question of why carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and energy is going up. And it just said, follow it from the left. People, global population times GDP per capita. That is how much goods and services produced per person on Earth. Put the two together and you get global GDP. People, GDP per capita, together, global GDP. Third factor, carbon intensity of GDP, energy per unit GDP, and then how much emissions per unit energy. What a beautiful little equation. That gives you CO2 emissions from energy. So let's take the why all the way back here to the far left. Why? Why is population GDP per capita going up? Why is overall global GDP going up when you think of root cause drivers? Why? I'm going to argue from a systems perspective, the core driver is a feedback loop process. And we take that, we are looking for feedback loop processes, such as the growth of capital and industrialization around the world. Capital, factories, businesses, infrastructure, electric utilities, all is generating profit reinvestment, more capital. More profit, more reinvestment, more capital. A reinforcing feedback loop over time. In the same way, what's the population reinforcing feedback loop that's been driving growth since the dawn of humans? More children have more children. More children become adults, more people, more births, more births, more people, more births, more people, more births, around and around. Two feedback loops that the industrialization one on GDP population are the core driver. So when I say what are the core drivers of change over time, I am talking about that is number one of the top 10 system structures driving climate and equity dynamics. Number one, we just named and it is reinforcing GDP growth. Look for that. When you try to understand what's going on in the model right now, one of the 10 things that will explain behavior to you is the fact that you have this core driver. More people, more industrialization, more energy demand, therefore more burning coal, oil, gas, more emissions, more concentration, more temperature, more sea level rise, Venice. That is the causal chain, okay? All right, that was number one way over on the left, but look at the second effect from Kaya really focused here, which was pull up Kaya again. The energy intensity of GDP falling steeply over time. This is how much energy it takes to deliver a trillion dollars of goods and services. Yeah, yeah, as we shift from manufacturing economy to service, but also stuff is just getting much more efficient over time. It's falling and falling and falling and Amory Lovens who lectures here my first boss actually talks about this amazing revolution in energy efficiency. There it is, and we're anticipating it to continue as the energy intensity comes down and down and down. However, notice that's like 80 years into the future. This is not a rapid process. And of course the beauty of En-Rhoads is that you're gonna be able to change this. I haven't done that yet, have I? Let's, and we'll all the way down the line. Less population, more population, right? And economic growth, less or more. And you can change it at this basic level of words. Low growth, high growth, keep it simple. Or if you wanna roll up your sleeves and get into it deeper, you're gonna look, click the three dots and you're gonna see, well actually they assumed 2.5% per year GDP growth in the near term transitioning over 70% to 1.5% per year. That's like doubling every like 30 years. That's like steep exponential growth, but you can change it and you can say, that's crazy. It's gonna be only one and it's gonna be two and then you get the GDP that you see there and it does what it does to energy. And then you hit this button and then it plays it three times because it's fun to see lines move around. With a little of software drama here. So my point though with this third factor is how long it seems to be taking. And if we improve the energy intensity of new stuff, so right now new capital is improving at 1.2% a year. The energy intensity is getting going down, down, down. 1.2% a year. Going down, down, down. 1.2% a year. Just the new stuff. If we imagined what if through amazing research here you all are able to improve that improvement, right? Increase it to say 3.2 then you're going to see the energy intensity fall faster. Now in what decade do you see it really kicking in and you see in big results? Can you squint your eyes and see that big enough? When does the energy intensity really start breaking away in a change that I made like next week? Yeah, it takes time. It takes a long time for those changes in the new stuff to be shown in the average and therefore in overall emissions. This is system structure number two. We call it capital stock turnover delays. This is the idea that when you bring in new stuff it takes a long time for the average to change because the existing stuff has a long lifetime. Cars, motors, buildings. All this stuff is lasting like 10, 15, even longer those many years. So it takes a long time to get the old stuff out and the new stuff in. I talked about energy efficiency. This is going to matter in electrification. There are 1.5 billion internal combustion engines on planet Earth. It's going to take, even though it's great we're all buying them like Californians and Norwegians now but even if that happens more and more it takes a long time to get the old internal combustion engines out and new stuff in. This is even more relevant with energy supply infrastructure and I'm explaining this stuff partly again. This is kind of cool structural stuff that you're going to play with a model in a minute and you're going to be like, hey, I just cranked up the renewables winning solar. Why do we still have coal, right? It just should just disappear. It's not going to disappear because once you buy it, it lives for like 30 years unless you shut it down and I'm going to let you shut it down but the transition of energy takes a long time because of capital stock turnover delays. When things change slowly, ask yourself I wonder if that's what's going on. Factor four, it's about carbon intensity. How much carbon oxide gets emitted per unit of energy? See the carbon intensity of final energy. Is it going up, down, or flat? What do you see right there? Yeah, it's going down pretty steadily into the future. This is anticipated to happen. Why? What do you think are the factors of like why that would be going down in this baseline future? Renewable energy. The biggest news about carbon intensity that we anticipate hasn't happened yet but we anticipate is the growth of renewable energy. Let's go look and see what we anticipate when it comes to, frankly, the best news we got in this field is the fact that this is what people expect to see. Renewable energy, wind and solar energy demand. We thought we'd seen a lot in like basically your lifetimes through here. Oh my God, it's been amazing. Have you seen so much? Wow. This is what we're expecting, hoping for. We're hoping you figure out how to make a grid that can do this, siting and permitting that can do this. We're counting on this. Now, the question is why? Why is it growing like that? And why would we have the confidence that it might? And I'll just pause for a second again about how we compare to others. Look at that growth. Again, when it comes to building confidence in a model like that, you're going to want to know the people who have huge models that take a week to run. What did they say about where things are headed? This is a series from 2000 and 2100 for four models. GCAM out of the U.S. Remind Magpie and Message Globium, two other models out of Austria and Potsdam Peak in Germany, and also the International Energy Agency right here. They think with the orange line, this is where things are headed, and of course we want to build our confidence so we will say, what is NROADS? NROADS is in the middle-ish. Does that make NROADS right? Is it valid? No, no. It just builds our confidence a little bit. So this is the kind of test that we have to do to make sure that we're consistent with the literature. Back here, I was asking you, why, why? In the same way that I asked you before about population and GDP growth, what could be the structural driver of this? It's cheaper. It is cheaper. And that is a huge factor. Let's go look at how much cheaper. Click on the miniature graphs. One of my favorites, cost of electricity. Here's how much cheaper. There's a lot of lines on here. Look at the green one. The green one is the marginal cost of electricity from wind and solar. Can we give it up for the drop of 95%? Seriously, clap for this. This is like the best thing. Did you guys think this was going to happen 30 years ago? No, we didn't think this was going to happen. And really, they were right. It's here. This university helped. This is fantastic. It's dropping so much. And it's getting cheaper than the black line of coal and natural gas. That's why we're getting so much more investment. And that is an event-based story. Like this happened, so this happened. I'm asking, what is the systemic structure? And you could gaze over my left shoulder at the third on the list. It's economies of scale. The economies of scale story says the more wind and solar you build, the more you figure out ways to do it more efficiently, production efficiency, installation efficiency, supply chain efficiencies, all that, which brings the cost down more. The cheaper it is, the more you sell. Another reinforcing feedback loop that they call economies of scale. And in enroads, we model that explicitly. And we have a factor called the progress ratio. The progress ratio, which you can change, says that every doubling of cumulative installed capacity drops the cost 20%. And one of the key things we do with the model is you think 20%. Well, that's those industry people cooking the books. I don't believe it. So with many of these factors, you're going to be able to go in here and say don't believe the height. Assumptions go under here. Assumptions, many of the variables in the model, you can change. Of course, we had to find good sources for all these parameters with the best available science, but you can change some. Down here, progress ratio. Here's that number. And these little triangles, you're going to see, here's our source, Jungler at all, McDonald at all, those are the two sources. There's 0.8, which is 0.8 is the 0.2, which is the progress ratio. And if it was faster, what would the line do if it was 0.7? Run your mental model. What would the line do if this was 0.7? If every doubling of cumulative installed capacity got us a 30% drop in cost, what is that blue line on the right going to do? Okay, here's the deal. You got to like talk loudly. Fierce for results loud. What's it going to do? Go up. Yes. Go up. Here we go. 0.7. It goes up and I'm going to hit it again. You can see if that were the case and we may be able to change that by more investment in learning and improvement. So then we get more renewable energy growth. Did you notice the green line came down a little bit more? It got cheaper. You sparked that reinforcing feedback loop a little bit more. This is the third systemic structure driving climate and equity dynamics economies of scale. Okay. By the way, another way we build confidence in the model is that we look really closely at the history. And here's that history that I was getting you to applaud for such as the drop in the marginal cost of solar electricity and therefore the growth in wind and solar. This is, you notice, 1990 to 2020. We want to compare against history. Start the model. See, can we track what's been happening over the last 20 years? All right. Back to Kaia. Kaia was telling us that these were the three, the four factors. Put them all together and we get CO2 emissions from energy. And so those are all the energy emissions that what's underneath all the greenhouse gas emissions other than energy. This graph is the same as that greenhouse gas emissions graph, but now it's revealing in a stack graph what's underneath. Land use CO2, deforestation, land degradation, bioenergy emissions are there. Big black area fossil fuel CO2 above it. F gases SF6 that was in Nike air shoes until they figure that one out. HFCs and then above it methane, three big sources and I'm telling you this because you're going to be able to go in the model and change much, much of this. Food from animals driving that food waste overall waste, wastewater and landfills, but also what energy source is a big driver of methane? Natural gas. So you change the natural gas and you will change that blue area. Nitrous oxide in fertilizer so when you change deforestation if you change food use then you're not going to have to grow as much food and therefore less fertilizer and N2O. Those are all the big drivers that get us here in the baseline. So if this is the baseline what you're going to be doing is creating the future that you actually want to see other than this. So I'm going to start with the first factor actually we can't do that yet we have one more thing that's in the model that I haven't shown you yet and it really doesn't make a lot of sense that GDP growth is doing this right in the model what did I say one and a half percent a year two and a half percent a year one and a half percent a year hold simultaneously that fact of exponential growth where everyone is getting richer and richer everywhere around the world hold that simultaneously with this how is the cognitive dissonance in the moment where you're like listening these things and thinking last time was underwater and what is going to keep growing like the economists just say everything grows on earth so that bugged us enough play with it you'll see at two degrees we get a 17% drop in GDP two degrees and that's already in here and it's new you guys haven't used it last year this is brand new that when and gross world product here it is and overall temperature over on the right and under assumptions we have economic impact of climate change right now it says you see that climate change slows economic growth you can see what the impact is by you say well I see that you use the economist Burke 2018's report by the way you can choose somebody else's they're stronger ones they're weaker ones but you say you know what we're fine we're going to keep growing like that even if we have climate change then you're going to turn it off now run your mental model real quick if that feedback loop we're not there we don't have a 17% drop at two degrees how much higher is temperature we don't have a slowing of economic growth we don't have a slowing of energy demand we don't have a slowing of burning coal oil and gas emissions concentrations temperature would be higher how much hold up your fingers one two three these would be like 0.1 it would go to 3.4 0.2 0.2 degrees up would be up to 3.5 0.3 would be 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 hold up your hand and you got to put your butt on the line just hold up your hand 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 she says that would be a big effect there's a 1.0 in the back 10 of them ok what you're doing by the way this is the purpose of this model it's not a forecasting tool it is a thinking tool you got to simulate your mental model before your computer model you don't learn anything so when you're with your group and you're about to change something don't just move stuff around think I think it's going to do this or you don't learn ok here we go climate change slows economic impact it's off the answer is 0.3 0.3 and there is that impact you'll notice at some point you're going to change things this feedback loop is a balancing loop temperature goes up growth goes down that's a pressure that brings temperature down even more as it feeds back remember those other ones I was talking about were reinforcing loops there are other global feedbacks and that's what we're talking about here of course one global feedback is the damage function I just told you about the others that are here I showed you before crop yield remember I showed you maize coming down 18% crop yield comes down if we don't have our crop yield improving quite as much we have to deforest more in order to feed all the people heading towards 11 billion people on earth therefore that is a reinforcing feedback loop some of them we call tipping points irreversible modes that our overall climate system could go into that frankly don't think much about that there's not a lot of juice in that cup but understand some of these feedbacks are in the model the crop yield one you can change permafrost release people are nodding about permafrost so you can say I think there's going to be more permafrost release of methane and carbon dioxide or there's going to be less there's an albedo effect which is melting of the polar ice cap leads to more warming so those are in the model and you can turn some of them to be stronger or weaker but when I say there are top 10 system structures to understanding climate and equity number 4 is definitely getting your hand on head around global feedbacks and tipping points okay now we're done with the baseline and let's go let's go make things better one of the better idea one of the ideas for making things better that comes up a lot we're going to have as our first test anyone hear about this news about fusion last year? yeah yeah nuclear fusion reactor smashes energy record pushes plasma to a record breaking 100 million degrees and you can imagine the whole like climate world had just a gleeful couple days it could be a silver bullet and it's just around the corner in Forbes I gotta be less mocking because I say all this to set you up maybe it will okay can it generate unlimited emissions free energy from to Forbes could it do all that so I'd like you to think here we have this baseline scenario that I laid out for all of you and here it is because down here at the bottom of course are all the things that we can change that are policies one of them is let's imagine that there is fusion cheaper than coal it's going to have to commercialize over time it's going to compete with coal oil and gas but it's inexpensive here it comes so think how much will temperature go down you're going to hold up one two three four five ten fingers for one ten fingers will be one degree from 3.3 all the way down to 2.3 or maybe to 1.5 think of your number turn to the person next to you and say I'm about to hold up two fingers or ten fingers or twelve fingers tell the person next to you what you think the impact will be on temperature from fusion showing up next Tuesday out of the lab okay time to put your butt on the line hands five four three two one and up point five point five point three one point oh point three point two point two point two these guys have seen it before point five point three one point out point five point two point five all right you have simulated your mental model here it comes new zero carbon energy and boom point one now you think okay I know your first thought is this guy hates fusion and he cooked the books right did it grow let's go look and again go look for graphs primary energy demand primary energy types new zero carbon primary energy demand it grew faster than anything has ever grown in the history of energy supplies it really grew and yet what decade did it grow in yeah it takes a long time to commercialize new technologies so there are those delays that leads it to when does it help in what decade what decade does it succeed at the urgent task of reducing greenhouse gas net emissions yeah it's like the 2050s to the 2060s and just to note I'm going over to Dubai in a few months because we are trying to strengthen these pledges to the Paris agreement and to the pledges in the Paris agreement for us around the world to follow excuse me those pledges we would hit the red line this is and this is not enough when it comes to the speed and scale of decrease of emissions to hit the red line that is when it really helps so the first reason is that it's just delayed and I didn't even put that in here it's just such a challenging factor of complex systems is the long delays in them and the effect of those delays that's one of the factors now note why did it help why it helped is well and just note the world doesn't need wind and solar it doesn't need zero carbon energy or nuclear or clean energy the climate doesn't need it it needs to stop burning coal oil and gas so it's only the ability of these new technologies to what we call crowd out coal in this case coal and gas crowding out how much crowding out did we do go look there's coal well it kept a lot of coal from being burned eventually and how did it do with natural gas let's go see it crowded out natural gas it is very successful at that but it takes a long time but this is the dynamic of crowding out that you're going to see when you look into the model crowding out here and there between various sources okay what else is going on what does this do to energy costs it spreads around the world why it's cheap it's cheap if it's cheap how cheap is it let's go look at the cost of energy oh yeah it's cheap fantastic fantastic it's cheap there's cheap energy around the world what does that do for the incentive for energy efficiency and conservation I wish it weren't true I don't like it but there is a connection between energy consumption and energy price we call this the price demand feedback loop price demand feedback when you notice something funny with the behavior look around and see hey did I make energy really cheap energy demand up did I make it really expensive energy demand is going to go down to energy efficiency that's another important feedback loop driving climate and equity dynamics alright other dynamics here in the model and in particular driving what's going on in the carbon part of the model and I I'm going to pull up here overall emissions and removals you see that red line are carbon dioxide emissions and I'm just going to move a couple things to make it nice and flat if we had energy efficiency you notice now from 2030 and on that red line is fairly flat if the emissions the amount of CO2 we put in the atmosphere is flat I'd like you to also think about CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere because concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere is like a bathtub that is when you hear about parts per million the goal of 450 parts per million 350 parts per million it is the concentration like right in front of us right here CO2 in the atmosphere it's like a bathtub the inflow is what the faucet is what this is these are the emissions and it's flowing in this is units per year gigatons per year this is gigatons total flowing out what's that yeah and I'm going to call it net removals because it's such a flux back and forth CO2 in the atmosphere if emissions are flat what should CO2 in the atmosphere what seems like right it ought to be what shape make your arm do the shape of what CO2 in the atmosphere is going up up up you guys are good wow I have only one flat there's like nine up one flat I have to admit I kind of try to trick people sometimes you notice that it's not nice but it makes for a good drama and you didn't fall for it yeah you'd think it would be flat but like you just noted CO2 in the atmosphere the CO2 concentration is still even when it's flat it's going up and I want you to understand why because it's going to matter when you notice your results on carbon and also on temperature we're now to be we're out of the energy world and the land world we are in atmospheric chemistry here okay over here about how the global flows work and the story is emissions are about double removals the red line is the emissions the blue line are those net removals we have a bathtub where we're putting in double what we're taking out every year that's why concentration is going up what do emissions and removals need to be in order to have concentration flat equal God I love how loud loudly someone said that they would need to be equal they would need to be equal that is the nature of the bathtub and it is one of the most tricky components of this problem sulfur dioxide doesn't behave like this nitrous oxide doesn't behave like this lead in our paint and in the world doesn't behave like this methane doesn't behave like this the long lifetime of carbon dioxide makes it such that the first thing you said for solutions net zero as you know and I'm not going to create it now you're going to create it on your own that's why we have to get those emissions down down down like that ish oh did I just give you a secret no I didn't I'm not going to give you the answer so the carbon bathtub is yet another one of the important systemic structures driving behavior over time okay what else do you want to test I gave you one big policy test now it's time to test other things that show you which graphs to look at what assumptions are behind it etc so that you can get through the last three of the structural dynamics so call it out what are other things that you see here that you'd like me to show you before you go do it yourself carbon removal what's to deal with carbon removal what else carbon pricing methane methane who methane I heard another one pardon bioenergy bioenergy what else electrification electrification solar geoengineering solar geo and radiation solar radiation management it's not in here but it is in our other model because yeah they're talking about it but not in this model okay well let's try some of these and I want to focus and now I'm not going to give you the answers to this because this is what you're going to be doing you're going to go test all this stuff yourself but I need you to see a few more things about how the model works so carbon pricing under here you're going to be able to set as you can imagine any carbon price over time ramp it flatten it whatever you like and you're going to be able to change it one of the things I want you to notice about carbon pricing will be some of the equity concerns related to carbon pricing and some of the equity benefits so carbon pricing I'm going to crank up the carbon price for a second without getting into it too too much let's go look at coal and let's go look at overall air quality air quality p.m. 2.5 emissions responsible in one in ten deaths on earth implicated by air quality some of these cities you've been to what other cities you've seen where air quality is really bad Beijing Delhi etc okay and air quality disproportionately affects people in marginalized areas and communities it is an equity problem as such can we do better so with carbon price watch to notice in particular the dynamics of a super high carbon price that takes coal out because of the high carbon density of coal which leads to air p.m. 2.5 emissions falling in what decade does it fall when we set up a carbon price soon now it is remarkable how soon medical costs drop etc many benefits and it's important to note this is one of these beautiful situations where we can do what our organization's co-founder Dr. Beth Salwin calls multi-solving multi-solving we don't have the time to pick up policies that only fix one thing when there are many things we need to fix actions that cut coal both will change temperature for the climate and health and equity and fairness we call that multi-solving multi-solving go look it up she's got a whole organization built around it two others to look at food food and the interdependence of food where it hides under deforestation notice under here here we have and you're going to be able to look at deforestation deforestation and over here methane some of the other impacts underneath look and hit the three dots because food from animals food waste we don't have to grow as much crops to feed animals if we don't have to grow as much crops we don't have to convert forests into agricultural land therefore less deforestation less cattle not as much meat more dairy means less methane if we don't grow as much of all this crops then we also get to cut methane emissions that we retain more trees in the world and go look remember we were looking at the bathtub at removals we don't chop the trees down natural carbon removal is called not chopping the trees down so they stick around and continue through photosynthesis to remove carbon from the atmosphere those two factors I would call forests and land stocks and flows and that food interdependence okay what did I tell you? I told you I was going to show you around the model so you can now kind of get going some tricks that I'll show you did you know that you can go up here share your scenario copy a link and email it to someone else he's like oh hey team I've got a scenario I like here it is you can send them the entire scenario like a google map address right there I'll post it on this is a twitter what's twitter you can also copy data to clipboard grab it throw it in excel make your own fantastic new graph you can go see a summary of everything that you have done in your scenario right here under here you can go and look at all the equations in the model and the model diagram and you're going to nerd out on terrestrial all the stuff that's in there and you want to see the stocks and flows it's all there and you can go look at the user guide which has a lot of tips and if you really get into it we shot 63 videos to do exactly what I'm doing right now because it ain't rocket science it just ain't rocket science you could do it go study that if you really want to go you can do much more about it the first thing I told you set you up with the model point you at the core top 10 drivers of change over time the top 10 systemic structures when you get stuck playing with the model you're going to say I wonder if it's one of those 10 things that Drew told me about they're right there and I hope right now having seen these trends you are even more fierce for justice fierce for results okay okay thank you