 Hi, we're back. We're live at two o'clock block. I'm Jay Fiedel. This is Think Tech Hawaii. And the name of this show, which has a lot to do with the name of our guest, is Climate Change Beyond Outrage. That's the name she gave her show, which played on Think Tech for some years. Anu Kriti Hiddle, who is a researcher at East West Center researching climate change. Welcome back to your show, Anu. Thank you, Jay. It's a pleasure to be back. And yeah, I guess I play a researcher on television, obviously. I have a different day job. So happy to be back. Oh, good. Nice to see you smile and face. So let's talk about climate change. And the reason I say that is, first, this is 25th anniversary is something I would like to hear from you about that. And second, we don't talk as much about climate change as we used to. It's like the elephant in the room that nobody really pays attention to. So tell me about the 25th anniversary. Well, I was hoping to just tell you that let's talk about being 25. And that's where you come in and say, Anu, you look 29, not 25. To which I would say, no, no, Jay, I was talking about you turning 25. Anyway, thank you for that. Maybe we both remember when we were 25. I can't remember back that far. Neither can I. I mean, my own 25. 25 years of negotiations. That's right. So where exactly have they gotten us on? That's the question. So 25, that sounds like a big number, but I'm trying to talk about how my point with asking you, do you remember what you did when you were 25 is that 25 is really not very old when you come to think about it. And when you're talking about maybe 200 governments, are they how slowly government works and how slowly government moves? Do you think 25 years is a very long time? So, you know, people have been saying we've just had. So last year in December, we had COP 25 or the 25th year of the convention of the parties, which is the meeting. It wasn't a party. It was just a meeting of the parties to the UN framework convention on climate change. So that's a mouthful, but it essentially led up to the what most people know as maybe is more familiar, the Paris Agreement in 2015. So when you really look at it, the Paris Agreement is five years old, and we all know what toddlers are like, right? So I mean, it's not really been that long. And I started looking up, well, how long have other institutions been around, you know, Sierra Club, gosh, you know, in the late 1800s, nature conservancy in the 50s, you know, so these are these are sort of older middle-aged institutions. And so the UN Convention on Climate Change, and which is the global negotiations for what the whole world is going to do about climate change. And then Paris is the agreement that we came to what we need to do to keep that global warming below two degrees Celsius. I mean, 25 years, five years, so, you know, just a moment in time, right? Well, yeah, it's a moment in time, but there is a certain exigency about all this. And I think we do forget that. It's a one-way street, and it's very hard to reverse it. And when you get to the end of the street, well, the planet is unlivable. And it's getting that way. I mean, there's so many indicators in so many places. And that for some reason, people don't say, you know, when I see an extreme, extreme storm season, like I think we might have, you know, in the next few months, including here in Hawaii, I say that people don't associate that with climate change. When you see them say that the hurricane is on the way, they don't say it's climate change. You have to figure that out. And maybe, you know, you wonder why are they not telling me this is climate change? How do I find out whether it's climate change? Well, I'll tell you how to find out. It is climate change. Everything is climate change, and we're not paying attention to it. And we're not even reminding ourselves of it. I think we've lost our way. What do you think? Well, I just, you know, I wanted to that brings up a really good point, because maybe we haven't paid as much attention to it, because it's not the frontline fire that's burning right now, right? We've got a pandemic raging out there. So, so that's, that's obviously right there in the front lines, we have to put out that fire. But in the background, we've got these other things going and they're going to be multipliers. So meaning that they're just going to make climate change is just going to make all these things worse, right? So your storms, of course, Hawaii's always had a hurricane season, but now is it going to be more frequent? Is it going to be more intense? Is it going to actually make landfall? These are all things that are exacerbated by climate change. So I think one thing I was, I wanted to just mention with starting with that 25 years, just going back to that for a second, is it's not a long time for institutions, but maybe because we need to move so fast, maybe the best place to do this work is not the national government or the international set of governments, you know, the family of nations, maybe that's not the place to do this work, because they move so slowly. That's been one of the conversations going on at COP 25 last year in Madrid. And this year, it was supposed to be COP26 in Glasgow, but they've moved it to sometime next year because of the pandemic. And one of the conversations that was happening around that is should we have it every other year, every couple of years? I mean, even the Olympics aren't every year, right? Does anything get done anyway? Well, so that's the point is that, you know, it's such as it takes so long for a government to move. Imagine 200 of those governments just rounding up, you know, 200 of those governments moving at all in a year. I mean, I know what it's like firsthand to be how fast government moves now. Well, you know, but you say, well, we shouldn't have government do it. There are 190 some of governments in the world and they can't get together in anything. And I will totally agree and some of them are really unable to ever get together. But are you proposing that we go to the nonprofits? I mean, there's 100,000 nonprofits dedicated to climate change. Do you think they're going to be any faster? Not just nonprofits, but I would say business. And I think everyone really so nonprofits, research, business and governments and local and state governments, not just national governments. So I'm not saying climate change shouldn't be the realm of global governments. I'm just saying that maybe global governments are not the only place where that should reside. And that was the conversation. And it's not just me saying that that was the conversation in Madrid is where are we going to take subnational actors, meaning states, cities, regions, and where are we going to take? What's the role going to be of non state actors? So they're just we, we is the global community. I'm sure we, you know, we can work this out together, give us a couple of hours or it can be my puppy who is very wise and thoughtful. But I don't know who else is going to be able to do that. Well, these were at the negotiations last year. And this was the conversation outside of so it's been very, you know, focused on the negotiations have been focused on just governments and ministers and so on, bringing bringing their their countries line to this. And it's been a very rigid agenda. And it's been, you know, you can imagine, right? A lot of bureaucrats all in one space. What about the United Nations? Right. So this is under the United Nations. So they're bringing all these countries are coming under the aegis of the United Nations. This is the United Nations Convention on Climate Change. It's okay. And the United Nations have the clout these days to bring people together and make it happen. Because I mean, Trump pulled money, he pulled prestige from the United Nations, nobody did with the World Health Organization in the time of pandemic incredible. Does the United Nations have the cloud? They seem to be deteriorating. No. Well, I mean, these actually, it's given some room for some of the other countries to step up, you know, it can't always be the United States leading these things. And of course, it could be the United States. It came to the United States now, because we have a problem in Washington. But I think it needs more than just the United States. That's the point is that it can't just be only the United States and that other countries do have to pull their weight. And they do have to step up. And the European Union, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, all these folks who are, you know, who are needing to show leadership as well as needing assistance. They need to come together. And they need to say they need to have some goals. They can't just be saying, Oh, the United States isn't doing anything. Well, so so I think it has given some room for the Europeans to step up for 25 years. Why haven't they stepped up yet? Because we were kind of crowding the agenda, I think. That's my take on it. And I think also 25 years, like I've been saying, it's not a long time for governments, you know, it gives them, it gives them some time to just waffle, but not enough time to actually do anything. So can we afford to spend another 25 years in endless discussion because this is happening? No, we can't. And that's why I'm saying that maybe it can't be just the realm of the governments. And that's what has been our, you know, the subnational actors, that's been our sort of maybe not fault, but that's where we need to step up and say, All right, make room over here. Let me get in and do my thing, you know, and that's where the action is. That's where the implementation is. That's where the needs for capacity and funding are. And that's where I think the United Nations could all these countries at the global level could be making alliances to put capacity and funding. You know, the problem is that the United Nations Secretary General changes. You know, membership changes is, you know, there's ongoing politics within the United Nations with a complex, I'm sure you're close enough to know that. And so the problem is that getting people to focus, getting that institution to focus on this and treat it as a high priority because everything in the paper, everything in every paper is begging for priority. I mean, certainly COVID is begging for priority, but there's, you know, there's also Lebanon, there's dictators here, there and everywhere, there's human rights issues, there's this little war, there's big wars going on, riots in the street, the world is burning. And it's very hard for something so, so existential as climate change to get on the priority list. So nobody talks about it really. So, so the conversation with the pandemic and recovery has basically been, at least in the climate change arena has been to do a green recovery, right? So that a green recovery is actually going to be better than a brown one. So, you know, it's use the co benefits of what we would do for climate change, use that as a recovery strategy as well, because it will make you more resilient, you know. And then I think like the UN has come up with something very like people are thinking about how do you pandemic proof, you know, your future. So I think there's like something like 75% of zoonotic of diseases that are going to come up are of zoonotic origin. And that basically means that we need to keep the wild wild and that we're not doing that. So, you know, that's another issue. But all of these things, you know, my research and my focus has been on the global negotiations. And I'm really starting to see how and how very organically the it's almost a movement, you know, how very organically the subnational actors and the non state actors have come together and are sort of almost rising up, if you will, to become part of that conversation and start doing because they are the ones who are doing things at the ground level, you know, it's not the big ministries and the big departments and so on. Those are the funding. And that's very important. That's the funding and the capacity building. But then you're looking at who's actually doing this, you know, I mean, who is a candidate for leader within this organization, this this group of organizations. I mean, is there somebody there whose name comes to mind? Yeah, so this has been interesting. They're calling, they're calling them sorry to speak over you, Jay. They're calling to mind. What they're saying is we need a high level champion, you know, we need someone that has name recognition that can champion the cause. And so I don't know if this Sir David Attenborough is still the high level champion or but last year he was, I think last year or the year before he was the high level champion. I mean, the fact that I don't know who the high level champion is kind of tells you something. I haven't I haven't kept up with that one. But, you know, that is something that that has possibility is like who is the sort of who's a name that everybody would know and that people look look forward to Greta Thunberg. I was just going to say, you know, would it be Greta Thunberg and it's going to it's going to take 20 years for her to get into position, but things aren't going to go anywhere for the 20 years. So we can wait, but that's just it. She doesn't need to with a high level champion. You don't need to have a job that's going to get you anywhere. They're just going to appoint you a high level champion and then you start being a high level champion. You know, that's the beauty of it. It's really funny we having this conversation. I would not have thought of her, but you're right. And she's, Trump calls her sort of angry. I think he says she has an anger management problem. That's rich coming from him. So I mean, but she could be the one. She's iconic. She's smart. She's articulate. She's dedicated to the issue dedicated almost as much as you are. Right. Maybe you and I should be the high level champions. Only we're kind of low level. So, you know, maybe we could be the low level champions and that's what we are. Right. I mean, I like to say that, you know, when my daughter, when people ask me what I do and for my day job, my daughter, when she was filling out her common apps or colleges, she says, I can't find your, your occupation in here. And so what are you looking for? She says, I'm looking for petty bureaucrat. So maybe I could be the petty level champion. That reminds me of a conversation. I don't know if I told you about this. I had with a student at one of the local colleges and which will be unnamed. And she was studying environmental things. That was her degree. And I said, oh, good. When you, when you get finished and you have your environmental degree, you'll go work for the federal government where you can do some good. She said, never. I'm never working for the federal government. It isn't capable of doing anything good. And okay, I'm not, I'm not sure I fully agree. If I were her, I would maybe reconsider that. But, but, but the fact is that there's nothing happening in the federal, you know, they're building pipelines. They're not doing green energy. You know, the AOC green new deal. That's a, that's a dream. It's aspirational. It's too, it's too heavy a word for it. And the federal government's not doing anything. Did an uncle Joe come up with something? Say his climate action plan, didn't Joe Biden come up with an action plan? He didn't win yet to say. So, I mean, I, I mean, I would like to see that. I think we have to make a big switch here because it's biblical. It's biblical. If we don't, this is sort of the divinity's way, the deity's way of testing humanity. So can can we deal with this planet or not? Right. And I think it's very interesting that, you know, that you would say it's an existential problem. And I agree with you, because this may be something people don't want to hear, but it's my lunch hour. And I can say that it's, you know, it's the pandemic touches people, right? It touches people. And it's touched almost everyone. But climate change touches everything. It touches everything. And therefore it touches us. I mean, it even touches COVID. Right. Right. So, so it really is the larger problem. And we're just putting out a, this is just a fire drill, you know. Well, let's, let's say this is my ghost of Christmas future question. Let's say that nobody does anything. That is, it's a talk fest. It goes on for another 25 years. And nobody steps up. No agency steps up. There is never any agreement on anything and no action is ever taken. Okay. What happens? Well, I don't think no action will ever be taken. So I disagree with that one. Okay. Well, I'm giving you a hypothetical. What happens? I know, but I mean, that's, that's sort of a, you know, okay, so what happens, you know, everything happens, right? Everything that we've been thinking about happens. Things go absolutely crazy. And if it's an existential problem, then we stop existing basically. Well, I get, you get bad weather. People don't know, not just bad weather. I think you get deaths from that. Oh yeah. Not just bad weather. I think you get, you know, really bad weather. You lose your cities on your coastlines. You lose your food. You lose your cities. I mean, if you're losing, you lose your air, then what's left? You lose your water. I mean, you lose everything. So it's, it's mad max at Thunderdome. Well, I mean, if it's existential by definition, that means that, you know, you stop existing, right? Well, you know, there'd be a few people left. You know, there'd be sticks and stones, you know, what did Einstein say that the next war will be fought with sticks and stones? We'll be, you know, we'll be rolled back into some previous time 100,000 years ago. I mean, I think there's a real chance of that if we do nothing. On the other hand, I would take your point that maybe we'll do something. It won't be dramatic. It won't be profound or thoughtful, but we'll do something. And it will be sort of a knee jerk something. And so the answer lies in between, or the timeline lies in between. And we don't, we don't completely destroy the planet and humanity. We just make it much worse to live in, to get food, to get water, to have a little peace and quiet. We're already doing that. We're already making it worse. Yeah. And so I mean, I think that we really, I put some hope in the fact that there is actually quite a lot happening, even if the national governments aren't lining up. And that's been my area of focus is the global negotiations. But that doesn't mean that there's nothing else going on. There's a lot going on. It's just what's the use of these global negotiations. I mean, people are saying that these things are two weeks long. They happen every year. They're very expensive. Costs have risen going to these things. Is anyone even going to notice that we didn't have one this year? And I would say that at the first COP, there were 4,000 people, 4,000 attendees 25 years ago. At this last one, it was about 25,000. And at the one in Paris, there were like 38,000. So that was an all-time high. I mean, so this has become sort of not just a place for the parties, the governments, but for other people to come for researchers. And it's become a very complex collaborative process. But do you need that? I mean, I don't know. We are doing this to resume, right? Yeah, no, I don't think you need that. You need a champion and people around the champion. I think it's very troubling to find that heads of state reject and deny climate change. I mean, it's a parallel to heads of state projecting and denying the Holocaust, which everybody knows happened. But they reject the fact of it. And it's not just Trump here, but it's others elsewhere. And they stand in the way. And their, their nations are only, you know, humanity is funny. If you elevate somebody to be the leader of a given jurisdiction, a lot of people follow that person, even if that person dead wrong. It's not only in the US. And so if some head of state says there is no climate change, it's a hoax. A lot of people are neutralized on the issue immediately. They're not going to do anything or advance any initiative. Right, some are. But you know, like, I think it's the Pew Charitable Trust have found they've got an arm that looks at, you know, they've done surveys of climate change and beliefs and so on. And what do people, how many people believe that the government is doing something about climate change? And there's, you know, I mean, they, they're about 70, close to 70, 75% of people who do believe that climate change is happening and that the government is not doing enough about it. So it's no longer, I think it's a myth to say that people think that it's not happening just because there's a leader who denies that there's a minority now and we give them equal airtime. So it seems like it's not happening, but it's not true because we give them equal airtime. It seems like it's, you know, there's a vast majority that says climate change is a hoax, but that's not true. Well, you know, I was going to ask you, and I'm going to withdraw this question as soon as I articulated, I was going to ask you, what should we do? Because I think, you know, that has been discussed ad nauseam, what should we do? Instead, I want to ask you this question. From all that we know, from all that you know, you've studied this for your entire adult life, all five years of it. From all that we know, Anu, what is going to happen? Give me your best guess. Don't, don't strain on it. Just give me your best guess about how this is going to go forward. Oh, I mean, I feel like it's going to go forward like we do with anything else that's big, right? With poverty, with, you know, all those systemic things, right? We sort of limp along, then something big happens, and we make some progress, and then we kind of go back a little more, and we limp along some more. So the way we're going, we're not going to hit that two degree target, we're more, we're more locked into like a three or 3.5 degree warming. So, you know, it's just, it's just going to get worse for people. It's going to get a lot worse. And I think the thing to do is to maybe become rich so that you don't have to deal with these things. But then we're finding like even in a pandemic, being rich may not be helpful. No, I mean, it helps, it helps, but it doesn't, you know, sequester you from everything. Well, suppose I feed it to my question, the fact that the COVID may not be over for a while. And the COVID has, it's demonstrated that it has had a profound effect on our economy, world economy. And it slowed down, slowed down productivity, it slowed down burning fossil fuel, slowed down everything. And although it's going to be painful, that's likely to continue in some degree or another, where we have a very low rate of productivity in the global economy, and therefore less burning of less fuel, fossil fuel, less of everything, less of everything. So isn't, doesn't that kind of solve the problem at least to some extent, and say, well, we have less carbon going out, less emissions, less human activity. And therefore, don't worry about it. It's going to correct itself. You know, we're going to become a very quiet species. No, I don't think it's going to correct itself, I don't think it's going to correct itself, because we're not doing any structural changes. So the minute we're, you know, this pandemic is gone, we're just going to go back at it. And in fact, probably we'll redouble our efforts of burning fossil fuels and so on. So if there are no structural changes, we'll just go back to it only more so. So that's my take on it. But I think we should end with something where we, you and I vote on a high level champion. And I think we've already cast our vote on that one. Right. Okay, well, I don't, I don't think it's you or me or my puppy. It's gonna be Greta Thunberg, right? Yeah, Greta Thunberg, she's fabulous. Or if not her, somebody else like her who's young and motivated. A zoomer. What's that? A zoomer. This age, the children who are the young people who are coming of age now, instead of the boomers, it's the zoomers. Thank you for that. I want to add one other point before we quit. And that's the reverse, the reverse of how COVID affects humanity, affects climate change. I want to turn that around and see what you think. You know, the climate affects COVID. One very, very interesting point that has come up only recently on national public radio is that vitamin D and sunlight actually affect COVID. So it's recommended that you get outside. It's recommended that you get a little sun, not just for the vitamin D, but for the sun. Who knows? Maybe it's that ultraviolet light that Trump was talking about, but it's external, not internal. That was something else. That's another story. That's another story. But you know, I'm really wondering if somehow the environment can be turned to dealing with COVID. That it's a simple, this is a dream, a pipe dream, but as simple as going outside. And maybe if you did, you know, some analysis, you'd find that people who go outside more have less COVID. And so the environment actually has an effect on COVID. And we live in a world that's indoors. We live in a world of stale air, indoors, where we're too crowded. And you know, the nature is saying, don't do that. Go outside where you started. What do you think about that? Well, which is where I come back to what I'd said earlier, keeping the wild, wild, you know, not just for disease, but for your spiritual health and for your physical health and all of those things, you know, so keep the wild, wild. Comes back to the same point about living in harmony with nature. That's right. Respecting nature and, you know, not abusing it. That's right. And that balance, finding that balance. Well, I hope you come back and report to us because, you know, whether we, whether the public is informed and studies this or not, it's happening. And it's, it's dynamic. It's, it's evolving every day. Our planet is changing. Nothing stays the same. So for example, if you go to a conference in Marrakesh, for example, which you have done for us before, I hope you'll call in and let us know how everything is going in Marrakesh. Wonderful. Okay. In the meantime, in the meantime, I'm just calling in from Honolulu. Okay. Let's do that. All right. Sounds good. Thank you for having me. Thank you. I'm a researcher at the East West Center in Climate Change dedicated to the issue. So nice to talk to you. Very nice to talk to you. Aloha.