All language subtitles for Living.in.The.Futures.Past.2018.1080p.WEBRip.x264-RARBG

This Earth
was here before us,

and it will be here
long after we're gone.

Every living thing on
it has evolved together,

over eons of time.

And although we are
part of the web of life,

because we see it, we
think we stand above it.

From all that nature gave us,

we have made a new
world out of wilderness,

and built great civilizations.

It seemed there was
nothing we could not do.

Even the sky itself
was not the limit.

It's great to
be back in space.

We see the symptoms of
a reality we didn't expect.

Have we reached the limitations
of our human nature?

Is this the end of
the line for us?

It's hard to tell from
our current point of view,

living here in
the future's past.

The world that we live in

is just this
shockingly blue sphere.

When you see it in space,

you understand there's a planet

that's bowling around the
sun, turning on its axis.

The oceans, clouds,
mountains, forests.

You can see it
all from up there.

You can see over a thousand
miles in any direction,

and it's all moving underneath
you at five miles per second.

When you look at the horizon,

you see a very, very thin little
blue ribbon of atmosphere,

and it really
brings home to you,

it was a shock to me and
I'm a scientist, okay,

I thought I had all the scales
worked out, intellectually,

but it was a shock to me to
see how thin the atmosphere is

and how obviously it's easily
affected by what we do.

This is the great
challenge of our time

dealing with the human
impact on the environment

and what it means in terms

of our civilization
going forward.

We cut all the trees,
we kill all the fish.

We consume and consume.

So much ecological writing,
you know, just open the paper,

is about the end of the world.

As in, it's starting, like,
when's it going to start?

I wonder, three, two,
one, and the concept "world"

as a sort of way
of distinguishing

between human beings and
everything else, has evaporated.

This is the only
place that we know,

out of this whole
universe, that we can live.

Life is messy.

We are changing multiple aspects
of the Earth environment.

Predicting all the effects of
it is incredibly complicated.

What do we do?

We've been standing back
and watching nature decline

before our very eyes.

It's on everyone's mind

is why are why not
doing more in response?

We've used our abilities

to build a huge technological
society that's very advanced

but in our essence,
we're still animals,

and one of the problems
is that, as animals,

we have certain emotions
and certain tendencies

that are counterproductive
in our great, complex society.

Spinoza, the
philosopher, has said,

"Man doesn't really understand
all the unconscious processes

"which actually really control

"their conscious
behaviors and thoughts."

Perhaps the
solutions we're looking for

start in us, in our genes,
our subconscious motivations,

our most primal instincts.

We are the most flexible
species ever evolved,

I would think.

And when you see people
thriving in the Arctic,

and you see people thriving
in the Kalahari Desert,

and you see people thriving
in the Amazon Rainforest,

these are titanic
accomplishments.

But, we also have the ability
to destroy all of those habitats

and everything in between.

Can looking at evolution

help us understand the
current conscious self we have,

and the future of humanity?

From an evolutionary
perspective,

humans are just another species.

We're unique, but
evolutionary biology

sees every species as unique.

Every species, everywhere,
is a genius at survival,

otherwise it wouldn't be here.

Every species can
teach us something.

When you look at all the
different life forms,

the plants and the animals,

they just seem so
different to each other.

But, of course, we're all
made of the same stuff.

The atoms, which make
the molecules,

which produce the DNA,

and the diversity started this
process of natural selection.

And, so we know that
natural selection

has allowed diversity to appear
as a process of winning out

those who are most suited
to the environments.

Natural selection has evolved

different lineages of organisms,

and we are at the top of
one of those lineages.

The fact we're animals

doesn't mean that underneath
our sophisticated civilization

we are these utilitarian lumps,
it's exactly the opposite.

What it means is that being
sophisticated and artistic

goes all the way down
and leads to the level

of beetles with
iridescent wing cases.

Because there is something
intrinsically nonutilitarian

and playful about evolution.

We're part of the
system, we're nature.

We're part of the Earth,

and we're fundamentally
dependent on its good graces.

Very symbiotic relationship
to everything on this Earth.

And I understand some
people that if they say

"no, no, this is
a science thing,

"it's not for us, that's
the province of God,

we shouldn't go there."

I can hear that view,

but I really don't think
it's what I see in scripture.

What I see in
scripture is, c'mon,

I wanna to show it to you.

I want to reveal myself to you.

I don't see science as
challenging my faith.

In fact, I see it as
affirming my faith.

We are new on the planet.

We are the most newly evolved.

We're a trial run.

In terms of evolution,

animals adapt to their
ecological conditions,

but as humans, we have been able

to control our
ecological conditions.

Evolution itself is a process

by which organisms
become more efficient

at extracting resources
from their environment.

Humans are unique in that
what makes us so different

from all other animals is
our mastery of technology.

We're uniquely able to
transform our environment

in ways no other animals can.

We humans are
really big-brained primates

that lucked out by
becoming bipedal

and discovering how to coerce
other animals from a distance,

by being able to throw.

We figured out how to tame fire
and use it to our advantage.

Our evolving technology
allowed us to expand

into new territories and
manipulate the environment

in ways that gave us an edge.

Places like this remind me

about how harsh nature can be.

We're so used to living
in air conditioning,

and having the comfort
of the modern world,

but when you go out into nature

and experience it first hand,

you're reminded very powerfully

about how weak we
are as an animal.

And this is because
we are fundamentally

a cultural species.

Culture is our life
support system.

Our cumulative culture allows
us to cushion ourselves

against the harsh realities
of the environment

and to reshape the environment.

Our culture is an integral
part of our ecology.

We can trace human ancestors
back over four million years,

and anatomically modern humans
for more than 200,000 years

and we have inherited their
successful survival traits.

These traits are in all
of us, to some extent,

traits like optimizing time,

really caring about what
other people think about us,

and comparing
ourselves to others.

We are still trying to attain
the same daily emotional state

as our successful ancestors.

We carry the same
neurotransmitters in our brains

that created the
exhilarating feeling

our ancient ancestors got

when they had the
unexpected reward

of finding a berry or a nut,

or were looking forward
to a successful hunt.

But in a culture of
amazing technology,

we are surrounded by
ready-made stimuli

pushing us to reward ourselves.

Our evolutionary impulses
can be easily hijacked.

Irrespective of where
you grew up in the world,

it's in our DNA to
copy those around us.

For humans, imitation
is part and parcel

of what it is to be
a member of a tribe.

Now our adaptations

are primarily to the
cultural environment

we created around us.

If we don't fit
into our culture,

we're not going to reproduce,

we're not going to
survive very well.

We're going to be ostracized,

and being ostracized in a
social species like ours,

can feel like a death sentence.

Do we have a human
brain mismatched

between how we
evolved to be here,

and the modern circumstances
we find ourselves in?

Are our needs any different
from our ancestors?

Need, the word, can mean
strongly desire, can't it,

like, I really need
a bar of chocolate,

and I'm afraid to say,
that from my point of view,

I'm sure Neanderthals
would have totally loved

Coca-Cola Zero.

Like, they looked
really good and pure

because they didn't
have it, you know.

It's us poor saps,
but, presumably,

they got the same
nervous system.

If it's true that Neanderthals

would have also become
addicted to Angry Birds,

there's something true
in contemporary society,

contemporary society is
saying something true

about ancient people.

This is a modern human brain,
and as far as we can tell,

it's identical to the
brain of individuals

who lived 50,000 years ago.

But of course, the
information which is stored

in the modern brain
is very different

to that of our ancestors.

The brain really, basically
encodes information,

and that information will change

from one generation to the next.

So you can see the
course of human evolution

as the accumulation of
wisdom and knowledge

that we pass on from one
generation to the next.

Our perceptual system
isn't attuned to

the massive changes that
are happening on the planet,

nor are they attuned to the
very fine-grained details

of those changes.

Our brain's alarm
system for threat,

the amygdala, the
emotional centers,

are very tuned to
these earlier dangers

from a time when that
rustle in the bushes

might be a tiger that
was about to eat you,

or today's symbolic realities,

I'm not being treated fair,
or "honey, we have to talk",

or whatever it is
that triggers you.

We have a very quick system

that is sort of dealing
with gut reactions

with reflex responses, with
an instant response to danger.

And on the other hand,
we have a slower,

more deliberative system
which takes time to engage,

and which is slow and ponderous,

that we should keep engaged

when we're looking at complex
issues in the world around us.

We are physical
and biological beings

living in an ocean
of cosmic energy.

That sounds pretty
trippy, and it is.

Where every part contains
information about the whole.

The long view is both
forward and back.

For 99.9% of our
evolutionary history,

we were hunting and
gathering people,

living in small kin groups

where everybody was
related to everybody

and therefore we had
a vested interest

in taking care of each other.

We also lived off of
the land in such a way

that we did not live beyond
the carrying capacity

of the environment.

There was no way to store
food for long periods of time,

and therefore, there was no
ability to acquire surplus.

What this resulted in

was it created a very
egalitarian social system

where women had autonomy,

there was no real rigid
dominance hierarchy among men,

and it was only after the
invention of agriculture

and the domestication
of plants and animals

that humans were faced
with the situation

of what to do with
these surplus resources.

This was the beginning
of the Neolithic Revolution.

We started farming
for the first time.

Everything took off from there,

and that's only been
around 12,000 years.

That's a blink of an eye
in evolutionary terms.

Controlling the production
and distribution

of these surplus
resources led to a change

in human cultural and
social organization.

Cultural evolution is
a transferrable system

a lot like DNA.

It has all the properties
of an evolving system.

Since we found agriculture,
things changed.

And we we started to
act like a larger entity

just like an ant colony,

or a termite colony,
or a beehive.

Bees and ants
are individual organisms

performing different roles.

They rush about to feed
or defend the colony

and collectively they
create a superorganism.

Of course, humans are
not social insects,

but if you were able to
watch a village or a city

from a distance over time,

it looks a lot like a growing,
interdependent superorganism.

A reorganization of
material existence

with far reaching implications.

Today we live in a world
of material abundance

and inexpensive energy,
and this leads us to think

that this is normal for humans,

that it's the normal
human condition.

Early societies, even
through the Middle Ages,

and up until almost
the modern era

had 90% of their economies

devoted to the
production of energy,

primarily in the form of food.

That meant that 90%
of what people did

involved producing energy, in
other words, just getting by.

Our lives were
based on solar flows.

Sunlight hit the earth,

photosynthesis grew the plants,

rain and soil, with the
nutrients, grew crops,

animals ate the crops,
and we ate the animals.

Energy transforms from
one state to another.

Our bodies were product of the
current sunlight of the day.

And we are just transient
entities, which appear,

move a little bit,
and then disappear.

That's the way the system works.

And, we have this
chance to be alive,

to move on this planet, to
do things on this planet,

to create things on this planet

because we have this
gigantic flux of energy

coming from the sun.

The whole universe
is a giant machine

for dispersing
energy potentials.

Energy is everything
in the sense

that nothing moves in
the universe without

an energy potential available.

We have been also
able to increase

this already very
large amount of energy

by means of using
ancient processes

frozen below the ground
in the Earth's crust

in the form of what
we call fossil fuels.

Fossil sunlight
is so powerful

it's indistinguishable
from magic.

And we're mining
this ancient sunlight

in a very brief period
of human history.

A chemical composition
of 50% of the protein

in our bodies and 80% of
the nitrogen in our bodies

indirectly comes from
the chemical signature

of this fossil sunlight
that we're mining.

So, we are different
than our ancestors.

They were made of sunlight,
we are made of fossil fuels.

In hunting and
gathering societies,

solar energy can
provide enough food

to support maybe one
person per square mile.

Basic subsistence agriculture
can support more people,

but nowhere near the
population densities

that we have today.

The way we live is an anomaly.

So there's really no
way for anyone to know

at a sort of visceral level

that there are any
problems with the system,

and if you look
around, it all works.

We know historically, I mean,

to the extent that we
even pay attention to it,

we used to use wood.

We're sort of aware that
our predecessors used wood

and they used so much of it,

they had to switch
to something else.

They switched to coal.

And then they switched to oil.

80 years ago,

the oil in America was
just under the surface.

We would need very
little machinery

to get these gusher wells,

and we would get out
over 100 times the energy

that we put in.

Suddenly this whole new world
of transportation opened up,

and with that this
entirely new model

for how we fed ourselves,

how we clothed ourselves,
how we built shelter,

and it totally changed
the way we live.

It made it possible for us to
move away from the country.

Throughout human history, we
had to live sort of scattered

in order to not tax any
particular resource too greatly.

As we began to be able to
import food, or import energy,

we could pretty much live
wherever we wanted to,

and where we wanted to
live were in the cities.

So, we have this
massive migration,

and we empty the countryside.

We all move to the city

because we're growing
food in the country,

and we can just
transport it to the city,

and once you're in the city,

then you can do all
these other things.

You know, you can create
all this knowledge,

you can create technologies,

you can create this
massive economic growth,

and the longer you've
been living that way,

the harder it is to remember

what allowed it to start
in the first place,

and that was this
idea of cheap energy.

Humans gradually became a
functional superorganism.

At first, we would
maximize grain surplus.

We would grow more
grain and store it,

and that would allow our
population to increase

and our territory to expand,

but now we're maximizing
surplus value.

We're maximizing financial,
digital, electronic

representations of surplus.

But all money really
effectively is

is a claim on some
energy services.

And so what ends up happening,
is money, trade, technology

are all in service
of the superorganism.

It's nearly
impossible for individuals

to function independently
in modern society.

We contribute to and rely
on a growing superorganism

to feed us, clothe us,

power our sophisticated
communications,

even protect our
societies from each other

through highly
organized warfare.

We live within a mesh of
energy-eating interdependence

and we never really
see the big picture.

A state of plenty can have
unintended consequences.

It is the paradox of our times.

Running in the background
of all that we do

whether we consider ourselves
to be capitalist or soviet

or feudal, everything
is a kind of program,

a kind of recipe, a
kind of algorithm,

the logistical functioning
of Neolithic society,

which started all
over the world.

The trouble is that when
you wash, rinse, repeat,

eventually, when you
do it enough times,

it starts to reveal its flaws.

For example, me starting my car
is statistically meaningless

from a global warming
point of view.

Billions and billions
of car ignition turnings

has a meaning, and
that's the paradox.

All of a sudden,

we realize that we're
part of a superorganism.

We are enmeshed in
systems of production,

systems of manufacture,
systems of use.

It's incredibly
important to recognize

that we're all
part of the system.

As social organisms,
we're something like ants.

Our signals that we exchange
are far more complicated

than the simple chemical
signals that ants exchange,

but we do exchange
signals, and as humans,

we take individual actions
that, on the whole,

cause emergent behavior.

The problem that's
happening today

is that the emergent behavior
is growing very complex

and detrimental to the
planet, to ourselves,

and to many other species.

Emergent
behavior is all around us,

and can be fastmoving
and unpredictable.

No one could foresee our
patterns of interaction

would lead to the
internet, the smart phone,

the disappearance
of phone booths,

and the rise of server farms.

Who knows what will happen next?

We're all in this together.

Maybe if you're off the grid

and truly walking
everywhere you go,

maybe then you have the
right to polish your halo.

We're tiny little microbes

on the surface of
this huge planet.

We can actually affect the
planet and cause it to respond.

If we don't stop emitting
carbon dioxide at these rates,

pretty soon we're
going to be in trouble.

We're going to have massive
climatic disruption.

The rainfall belts will move.

People in the
hundreds of millions,

maybe a billion
and a half people,

will have problems getting
access to fresh water and food.

The issue is not what
the world is like

when it's cold or
when it's warm.

We are in a time of change.

What is interesting is
how the world changes

when you dramatically,
in our case,

increase the concentration
of carbon dioxide

and other greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere.

Or, when it suffers
mammoth biodiversity loss

caused by our own behavior.

If there's a big change coming,

and we want to know what
it might do in the future,

what do we do?

We look at what's
happened in the past.

Geological history largely
reinforces the lessons

from the climate models.

When they say the
doubling of carbon dioxide

will lead to about 2 1/2 degrees

to three degrees of warming,

the history of the Earth is
broadly in agreement with that.

So a lot of my own
research is focused on

the reconstruction
of past climate.

We look at dramatic transitions

and there's not a lot of those,
because in Earth history,

things change gradually.

Three years ago I
started on a project.

It was to look at an event

that was about 120
million years ago.

And it was to
explore exactly this.

It was what we
generally considered

a rapid ocean acidification
event, a rapid warming event,

and we thought, let's look at
this, and see what happened.

And as we studied
it more and more,

and we got better and
better at age models,

we got better and
better reconstructions

of the climate change,
it became apparent

that this particular event

that happened about
100 million years ago,

the climate change happened
over about 40,000 years.

This is the same degree
of climate change

that we think might happen
over the next 100 years.

There's much more
energy in the system.

We have very little knowledge

of how Earth's biological
life support systems

will respond to dramatic
and rapid change.

We have extraordinary
biomes on the planet

that all are individual
pieces of a jigsaw.

The picture is clear

when they're all
functional and all present.

But start picking
those pieces off,

and you can no
longer see, really,

what that picture looks like,

and the functionality of the
entire system is out of whack.

The arctic icecap is shrinking,

the Greenland ice
mass is being lost

at 300 gigatons a year,

that's 300 cubic kilometers
of ice a year is disappearing.

The ocean is changing,
sea level rise,

we're seeing significant
sea level rise,

we're expecting a couple
of feet, maybe more

before the end of the century.

So all these things are facts.

It's not so much
the change itself,

but it's how fast
it's happening.

The faster the change comes,
the less time we have to adapt.

The faster the change comes,

the less time the
trees have to adapt,

or plankton living in the ocean.

The faster the change comes,

the less time ecosystems
have to adapt.

And the more complex these are,

the harder it is
to actually predict

what the consequences
of that change will be.

Climate change is going to
put huge stress on societies

that are already under
internal political stress,

and stress induced
by lack of resources.

Like, food availability,
water availability,

dramatic events associated
with climate change,

all of which potentially
will exacerbate the divisions

in society.

Access to wealth
creates divisions.

Access to food and water makes
divisions very pronounced.

It's gonna impact the way
humans live on the planet.

And when that impacts, then
people move, people are angry,

land becomes less
valuable, or more valuable.

Populations shift, and those
shifts destabilize governments.

Huh!

We might look up at night

and wonder at the far away stars

as if we were in a pristine
crystal snow globe.

But our problems can
no longer be pushed

into the back yard
of the less powerful,

the less fortunate among us.

No, here we are, and
here we were made,

where everything from
farmers, dogs, LED lights,

flowers, pencils, politicians,
microwaves, and penguins,

the past, present, and
future are all interrelated.

In the next 10 years,

we shall increase
our wealth by 50%.

The profound question is

does this mean we will be
50% richer, in a real sense,

50% better off, 50% happier?

And so to just get more facts

about climate change
or about oil depletion

or about environmental
destruction,

people don't know what to do

because they're part
of this organism

trying to get more
feelgood brain chemicals.

The treadmill is getting
smaller, and smaller,

and smaller, and smaller.

And, the number of people who
want to be on the treadmill

is getting bigger and bigger
and bigger and bigger.

And eventually, there's
going to be no room to run,

and so, people will fall off.

Many people will fall off.

We are profoundly motivated
by having purpose.

We're motivated by having
a sense of autonomy,

efficacy, and control.

Where it seems that our gifts,
our energy, our life force

is not going to
have some impact,

we will simply withdraw,

and we will very likely
redirect that energy

into where we can feel
we have most impact.

And where is that in
our culture right now?

It's in consumption.

The economist Immanuel
Wallerstein has talked about

world systems theory, in
which all things are connected

for better, and often for worse,

so, living here in the
most industrialized part

of the industrialized world,
our tentacles reach everywhere.

Efficacy is
the ability to produce

a desired result.

But are the results we're
achieving, the ones we intend?

Wild animals are
disappearing forever.

Our intelligence is remaking
the world before our eyes.

Today we can just click
on a link somewhere,

and have something
appear on our doorstep

without having any idea of what
went into getting it there.

All we know about what
got it there is the price.

We get more and more
detached from the actual cost

of creating and transporting
what we're using.

Energy is really at
the center of physics,

but for the lay person,

probably the easiest
way to explain it

is that energy is the
ability to do work.

Work is force through distance.

So every time that you move
something from China to the US

or from the floor to the
ceiling, that takes energy.

When you drive to work,
obviously it takes energy.

To boil one quart of water,

it takes up the equivalent
of 500 calories of food.

Any kind of transformation
requires energy.

We are powerful
creatures on this planet,

but we still need the
ecosystem to survive,

so we don't want to
destroy the ecosystem

because it would be rather bad.

And this is a transition, you
can call it also a revolution,

you can call it
whatever you'd like.

The point is that there
have been such revolutions,

such transitions in the past,

but these transitions
have a cost.

An energy transition
must be paid in energy.

Energy is the
currency of life.

Energy creates
movement and food.

All life taps energy flows.

We used to measure units of
energy in terms of horsepower.

One horse could do
the work of 10 men.

A small tractor could do
the work of 40 horses.

It would take 450 horses or
more to get the same work done

as just one semi truck.

And unlike horses, trucks
can work day and night

in any weather.

The flow of fossil fuel has
turbocharged our society.

And so, to just say,
we have the science now

to realize that these fossil
slaves, they don't complain,

they don't sleep, they're
tireless, they're super strong,

but they poop and they breathe,

and their breath is causing
our biosphere to warm up,

and our oceans to acidify.

Let's keep them in the ground.

It's not quite so simple.

If you consider the power
that's in fossil fuels,

90% of the work done in
human economies is done

by fossil slaves.

The average American consumes

220,000 kilocalories, every day.

We don't think about that,

we only think about the 3,000
or 3,500 of food that we eat.

But our energy footprint

is almost a hundred
times more than that

if you consider our
buses, and our airplanes,

and all the hospitals, and the
Disneylands, and the NASCARs,

and in all the various
things that we buy

that are imported all
around the world.

It's what people invest in,
and a lot of pension funds,

and a lot of the institutions
that humanity depends on,

of course they
gravitate toward oil.

Renewable energy,
although it's mature

and it's getting very cheap,

it's not going to replace
this infrastructure

and this civilization.

We have a very limited
amount of time to transition

to a low-carbon economy, but
it's very naive to just say,

let's keep it in the ground

and keep everything
else running.

So if you ask "can solar
energy power our society

"as it is today?", then you
already have the answer.

It is no, it is not possible.

If you want to switch
from oil and gas and coal

and to move to solar energy,

then you have to
change a lot of things.

Our food system right
now is an energy sink.

We use 10 to 12 fossil-calories
to produce one food-calorie.

Right now we have around $100
trillion worth of machinery

on the planet that uses
gasoline or diesel fuel.

So, for one barrel of
oil, which we pay $50 for,

we have thousands of fossil
slaves standing behind us.

The American inventory
of automobiles,

250, 270 million cars and
light trucks on the road,

you're talking about more
than a decade of production

and you're talking
about more wealth

than the gross domestic
product in a year to replace it

So you're not going to make
these changes overnight.

You see, there is a
parameter which is very basic

in evaluating these
kinds of things,

which is called energy
return on energy invested.

Energy doesn't cost dollars.

I mean, it does, but
it really costs energy.

Oil's the biggest
industry on the planet,

so, it sets the pace,
in terms of inflation.

So if you raise
the price of oil,

all the other prices go up,
until people have accommodated,

and they can still afford
to pay the extraction cost

for oil.

So, it's not like we're
running out of oil,

or coal or gas, it's that
it's getting more costly,

in energy terms, to get it.

Because it's more costly,

it has less benefits
to the rest of society.

The 1930s, the
Beverly Hillbilly oil

just bubbling under the
ground, we've used all that.

Net energy, which
is the energy left

after we've paid the energy cost

of finding and extracting it,
net energy is declining now.

We don't realize the
scale and the stakes

of what's happening.

When we take on debt, we
are promising to repay it

with future energy.

The fossil fuels will
not last forever,

they cannot last forever.

The energy potential
in one barrel of oil

is equal to a human being
working 40 hours a week

for 4 1/2 years.

You have to think to the future,

you have to save
something for the future

in order to have a harvest
of renewable energy.

Do not eat your seed
corn, is an old saying.

Wise farmers know that
if they eat their seed corn,

there will be nothing left to
plant for a future harvest.

Will future generations
look back at today

and view much of the
energy we're burning

to have been wasted?

Are we eating our seed corn?

So many of us have come to
expect the level of comfort

and convenience unprecedented
in our biological past.

We need to redefine
our expectations

not as what we will lose,
but what we might gain,

by preparing for
something different.

Oh, fossil fuels are bad?

We need to keep
them in the ground,

so we've got this big
divestment campaign

where we stop investing in
coal and oil and natural gas.

But if we stop
investing in the stocks,

as long as we continue
to fly and drive

and have infrastructure built
around cheap transportation

and global connectivity
of supply chains,

then some hedge fund will
just buy those stocks back

five cents cheaper.

We can very easily get
into the mode, for example,

when we think about oil,
of addiction speech.

I'm going to leave this bottle
of whiskey in the cupboard,

and I'm not going to touch
a drop of it, which means

that I'm still fixated on
this whiskey, paradoxically.

This is actually, of course,

not really thinking differently.

There's a little bit of
a hangover from this myth

that things should be
functioning smoothly

and that smooth functioning
is something that's real.

If you find yourself
10 or 20 years from now

in a world where
energy isn't cheap,

you're going to have
to unwind, somehow,

this massive global city system.

So you look back
in history to times

when this has happened before,
I mean, the Roman Empire,

one of the reasons it fell

was it was no longer
able to continue

to bring in food and
other supplies to Rome

and the other big city states.

And cities no longer
were habitable,

they just didn't
function anymore.

So what happens
this time around?

And in the past it's been
conflict with other tribes

that has brought human
progress, such as it is,

at a tremendous
cost of slaughter.

World War I brought forth
radio and airplanes.

World War II gave
us nuclear energy.

Space race between the United
States and the Soviet Union

and the Cold War that gave
us communication satellites

and global positioning
and many other things,

and now we're into something

where we have to
work collectively.

We can't work
against each other,

we have to work with each other,

we have to work with each other
with the view of the future,

not against each
other in the present.

The trouble is not so much
in what we're thinking

about the world we live in,

it's in terms of how we think
about the world we live in.

Well, here we have
a human brain.

When you see it in reality,

it seems kind of a bit
disappointing, doesn't it?

It's very small
for what it does,

if you think about
what we're capable of,

then to think it all comes out
of a little object like that,

it's quite remarkable.

Let's take a moment

to imagine entering
into a theoretical world

where everything in
existence, at all scales,

has equal value.

From skyscrapers and trees,
to humans, cola, cups,

and orangutans, shoes,
and suitcases, vessels,

water, diamonds, and
dragonflies.

Even time itself.

If we can imagine every
thing is intrinsically equal,

then we'd know that what
we perceive as reality

comes from the value judgements
that exist in our minds.

If everything exists
in the same way,

then we have an
interesting problem.

If it's true that
even just by existing

I am killing a huge
number of life forms,

then I have to figure out
what kinds of life forms

I'd like to kill,

and I have to be rather
conscious and explicit about it,

and being conscious and
explicit about stuff

is an incredible drag.

There's always an
unintended consequence

of what you're
doing, for example.

Reality is happening on a
number of different scales,

all at once.

You can never get
it completely right,

so we're confronted
again with the notion

of exploring various
different shades of hypocrisy.

You know the famous study,
if I offer you $20 now,

or I can give you
$50 in a week's time,

people just kind of are almost,

kind of compelled to
go for the short term.

To go for the short term.

Yeah, if you think
about it, up to a point,

that's very rational.
-Mm.

Because you could be dead.

That's right, you don't know
who's going to .

Right?

So, the

Bird in the hand,
worth two in the bush.

Absolutely, so there
is some rationality

to that discounting.

Organisms that worried
about 50 years from now

were outcompeted by organisms

that worried about
5 minutes from now.

Our fate is in our own hands.

No one else.

How will we
shape the future

towards a better outcome?

What defines our identity?

Are we our urges?

Are we our principles?

Who are we?

Who I am is really the
accumulation of my experiences

with other people, my
interactions with other people.

Babies don't have
a "self" concept,

they don't have an
idea of who they are.

But as they interact
with other people,

they begin to create
an image of themselves,

a feeling of who they are, and
thoughts about who they are.

That's really picked up
from the views and responses

of other people.

In this modern society,

people spend a large
amount of time and effort

accumulating objects
and possessions,

and sometimes these have no
particular use, whatsoever.

But it's almost as if we have
to acquire things around us

to make a statement
of who we are.

We use objects as an
extension of ourself.

In the life of sentient
beings, desire is inevitable.

The kind of plastic products
that consumerism makes

out of desire might be optional,
but desire is inevitable.

That same drive is what makes
it easy for Apple to sell us

a new iPhone every year.

I mean, I guarantee you, you
don't need the next iPhone.

In fact, you don't even
know what new features

it's going to have, and you
won't know, until you see them.

But you're pretty sure
you're going to like them

when you see them.

And that was the whole
point of this notion

of dynamic obsolescence.

You would be allowed to feel,

to achieve a certain
emotional state,

for a short period of time,

and then almost as quickly
as you'd achieved it,

it would begin fading,

and you'd have to
have something else.

We have a real love
for a way to feel

how we want to feel faster.

We may have a very developed
conscious mind today,

with a lot of knowledge,
cultural knowledge,

technical knowledge,

but the way we think is
still very much influenced

by a primitive unconscious
that we developed

millions of years ago.

We humans aren't just
like animals, we are animals.

And as animals, we
compete for mates.

Organisms in the wild that have
extra resources to display,

like flashy tails,
or large antlers,

are advertising to their mates

that my genes are so good, I
don't need to skimp and save,

because I'm so strong, I have
these amazing attributes.

The same phenomenon
happens in human societies

to impress members
of the opposite sex.

A lot of these displays
require spending extra energy

and natural resources
that we don't really need

to be genetically fit,

but we respond to
those cultural signals

as if those things
really do matter.

This question of status
and of showing our status,

I do believe

that that's one of the most
fundamental determinants

of our behavior.

-Yeah. Well you know
who knows this

best of all, is the marketing
and the advertising people.

Because when they're
selling us stuff,

and it's designer, or,
what they're tapping into

is this preoccupation with
what other people think,

because they
understand, intuitively,

that we're all animals
seeking social status.

We like things to be convenient,
we like things to be new,

and we like bags that
have names on it.

We like to drink out of
bottles that we can throw away.

We like styrofoam containers
for our fast food.

Plastic itself is something
that is persistent through time.

It gets recycled, it gets
recycled, it gets smaller,

it gets smaller, and now
it's right back to us

and detectable, in
our blood stream.

We're out of alignment
with what we hear

and we understand, and what we
know is going on,

and the life that I am leading,

including all the things I love

that might be really
ecologically problematic

but that I love them anyways.

So we have this very
positive spin on ourself,

and we try to maintain
that characterization

to the extent that we will only
pay attention to information

which confirms that bias.

We'll deliberately reframe
things that we've done

in order to keep the
coherence of who we are.

Our brains are always
creating these distortions.

We have no direct
contact with reality.

One of the important
qualities that we developed

that helped us survive
was group identity.

And today, group identity
still plays an important role

in our life and has an
important unconscious effect

on our attitudes
and our actions.

So we have this tendency always

to attribute blame to others,

rather than accepting
it ourselves.

And this is part of
the bias which creates

or keeps the coherence of
this being a good person.

So, we're all
capable of running around

with the wrong idea of what is
really going on in our world.

And, there's no mechanism
or voice inside us

to signal the
artificiality of that.

We don't want to live
in a state of anxiety,

we want to believe that
the things we enjoy doing

will never change.

Do we confuse what we
need with what we desire,

and what we desire,
with what we need?

Desire is logically
prior to need, actually,

and need is really, just,
like stabilized desire

that's been turned,
probably socially,

into something
seemingly necessary.

And so I think we need to
be a little bit careful

when we talk about being
in an ecological society,

meaning our needs matching
up with what we want.

So there's this constant dance

between the inhibitory centers
that know what's good for us

in the top of the brain,

particularly the
prefrontal area,

and the midbrain areas,
for emotional impulse,

which just wants to grab that
yummy thing, and have it now.

So, let's say we're in a bakery,
everything looks so good,

and our brain, which
during evolution

was designed to crave fat
and sugar, is going nuts.

It just really wants one
of those yummy things.

But then, our
prefrontal cortex,

the part of the
brain that learns,

the part of the brain
that understands,

says to us, you know,
this is fattening,

and you have that
blood sugar problem,

it's not so great for you.

And the prefrontal
cortex has the ability

to inhibit emotional impulse,

and once we understand the
true cost of the things we use

and the things we do
to the environment,

the very same mechanism applies,

and it let's us pull back
to the balcony of the mind,

where we see everything
that's going on,

then we can make
a better decision.

This is the first step
in changing our habits

because without mindfulness,

we don't even notice
the choice points,

we just blindly, spontaneously,
automatically do that thing

we've always done, our
old habits take us over.

When there's uncertainty,

when there's a
sense of precarity,

when there's a feeling of
vulnerability and confusion,

that's exactly when we are
most susceptible, obviously,

to adhering to a message,
a voice, a person

who comes along and is able
to meet those anxieties

and those uncertainties with
such confidence and certainty.

And so, that's what we've seen
replaying over and over again

in politics.

I don't need to mention
the obvious examples

of what happens when the
larger public's sense of fear

is coopted.

About half the wealth
in the country is held

by the top 1% of the people,

and there are a lot
of us out there,

and my parents were
certainly one of them,

who were scrambling from
day to day to survive.

And they, in their
lifetimes, in the 1930s,

had actually seen
people starving

because they couldn't
earn a living.

And so, most Americans
haven't seen that,

but some Americans
still feel that way.

And they feel the threat and
the fear of unemployment,

so they're focused nearterm.

In any symbiotic relationship,

who's the top and who's the
bottom is a little bit

confusing, and this could
collapse at any moment.

The desire to be rescued
is based on a profound

and deep sense of powerlessness.

Open up a paper,

or watch a conventional
ecological documentary,

and what you'll see
are all kinds of facts

designed to make you feel
scared, and upset, and guilty.

This is how we talk to ourselves
about ecological disaster.

Now the trouble is, that
means that psychologically,

we're actually still
putting ourselves

before a time when it happened,

somehow allowing
ourselves the choice

to either go down
that path or not.

Now, the point is, we're
already down the path.

When we, on the
climate science side,

talk about the reality
of climate change,

at first blush it sounds
like a bit of a downer.

So, one's natural reaction
if you hear bad news

and someone else tells you,
no, no no, that's not true,

is to at least,
sort of say, hope,

that the guy who is telling you

that this is not going
to happen is right.

For six years in Congress,

I said that climate
change was nonsense.

I really didn't know
anything about it.

Since I represented probably
the reddest district

in the reddest
state in the nation,

I knew that I needed
to be opposed to it.

And my son came to me.

He was voting for the first
time, he had just turned 18,

and he said to me, "Dad,
I'll vote for you,

"but you're going to clean up
your act on the environment."

Your child is sick.

98 doctors say,
treat him this way.

Two say, no, this
other is the way to go.

I'll go with the two.

You're takin' a big
risk for those kids.

Some people think
that what we have here

is an information deficit.

That if we just gave people
more scientific information,

showed them the science,
then they would come around.

We've got people
that make a living

and a lot of money on
talk radio and talk TV,

pronouncing all kinds of things.

They slept at Holiday
Inn Express last night,

and they are now
experts on climate.

It's an identification problem.

It's, it doesn't
look like my tribe,

doesn't sound like my tribe,

doesn't sound like our war cry,

doesn't sound like our song.

Too often it's presented,
climate science is presented,

as if it's some kind
of new religion,

and you have to believe.

No, don't ask people to
believe in climate science.

Just say, here's some data.

Now, what does your
faith tradition tell you

about what to do with that data?

In mine, it tells me

that I'm a steward of
this glorious creation.

Sometimes science
turns out to be wrong.

But other times it turns
out to be very right.

And the key to
scientific endeavors,

what we're here to
discuss today, is openness,

access to the data, and full
challenging of the data.

That's how we advance science.

I look forward to hearing
Mr. Chairman, thank you.

Thank you.

There have been major
revolutions in our thinking

across civilization, for
example, for thousands of years,

it was thought that the
Earth was at the center

of the universe.

We now know that
that's not true.

And then of course,
there was also the idea

that man is the pinnacle
of the animal kingdom,

but now we discover, through
natural selection and Darwinism,

that we are just one
of a number of species

that have existed,

and finally if you
think about the self

and the idea that we are
individuals in control

of all our actions
and behaviors,

that has been eroded away
as we come to discover

that this, in fact, is
also not entirely true.

So, I think that the
science has revealed

the arrogance of
the individualism,

the egocentrism that we
have about our planet,

our species, and
ourselves, is unwarranted.

Ecology.

It's a word derived
from the Greek

oikos, or household.

It's the study of
the relationships

that interlink all the members
of the Earth's household.

We can't think of ecology
as only existing over there,

beyond, because it
has no boundaries,

and is in a state
of constant flux.

Ecology is intimate, coming
right up to our skin,

and through it.

It's permeable and
borderless and chaotic.

The internal and the
external are always entwined.

So when we speak
about sustainability,

what is it that we
hope to sustain?

One of the problems
with philosophy

is that it isn't
just in your head.

Philosophy is everywhere.

Everything, in a way, was
a dream in someone's head,

in built space.

Thought isn't just
something that's in here,

thought is everywhere.

The story that we live
in right now is that

we grow the economy
by consuming goods

and in particular,
consuming goods that exist

in limited quantities.

We have the tendency
as meaning-making,

story-making people,
creatures, to have characters,

to have protagonists
who are the villains,

and who are the heroes
and the rescuers,

and that's deep in
our human psyche,

and that's how we tend to
make sense of the world.

And the tendency,
very understandably,

is to create villains,
such as corporations

or oil industries, and to
create heroes, the ecowarriors.

While that's understandable,
what it's actually doing

is it's creating a bit
of an exemption story

where we as individuals
are somewhat exempt

or somewhat out of the story.

There's a lot of criticism
in our culture right now

that capitalism is bad, and
that without capitalism,

we wouldn't be impacting things.

And that's partially true.

Underpinning this system

is the optimal foraging
instinct that resides

in our animal natures.

Wolves, for instance. They're
better off running down an elk

than spending the same
amount of time and energy

chasing a mouse, or a rabbit.

They're more evolutionarily fit

and have more calories
to raise their offspring.

The same dynamic is in humans.

We like to invest a little
and get more in return.

We do this in stock markets,

when we get a 20%
discount on shoes,

a two-for-one cocktail
at happy hour,

or a steal of a
deal buying a house

on some special foreclosure.

Capitalism isn't
entirely good or bad.

Capitalism is in service
of the superorganism.

Together, we're functioning
like a gigantic wolf pack,

hungry for more energy.

You know, one of the
many causes of war

is actually the
shortage of energy.

Since energy is always flowing

from a kind of compacted stated
to a less compacted state,

entropy is how things are
constantly running down to zero.

We can't actually create a
machine that reverses entropy.

Entropy is why time seems to
only be going in one direction.

Entropy is why you've
never seen a broken glass

reassemble as a perfect glass.

And if you're looking for the
perfect ecological machine

that will actually fully
put the energy back

in to the system that the
machine has sucked out of it,

I'm afraid you're
going to be waiting

until after the end
of the universe.

So, you always
have to leave room

in your analysis of animals,
and animals in the broad sense,

I include people in that,

of thinking that we're always
going to do the right thing,

that we've optimized
all of our actions,

our foraging strategies
and everything else,

and we can
extrapolate from there

because if we had
everything right,

there wouldn't be any
problems, would there?

There'd be no poverty,
there'd be no climate change,

there'd be no warfare.

Where you sit determines
where you stand,

and if you're sort
of all tied up

in any particular
kind of industry

and you see your future
there, naturally you hold on.

There's no such thing
as a free market.

I hope people can
understand that

because if there
were free markets,

you'd end up the way we
ended up in the late 1800s,

with a few very powerful trusts
controlling all of America.

Without government helping
us shape the market forces,

the market forces will be taken

by the very shortterm
requirements

that are placed on them by us.

By our need to go to
the filling station

and get the cheapest fuel, by
the need for the pension fund

to get its 8% return, no
matter what it's investing in.

Really tough to earn the
6 or 7% or 8% per year

that were in those
actuarial calculations

when the pension funds
were established.

So, it's not some
foreign institution

that makes us be short term
focused, it's us.

Why didn't the administration
anticipate the energy crisis

several years ago, formulate
a positive action plan

and do something about it?

Have to bring a different
perspective to this.

A couple of years ago I
asked a member of Congress,

I said, "what's the toughest
issue you're dealing with,

"right now?"

And she said federal subsidies

for seashore flood insurance

because we've always
subsidized it,

and the cost of the
subsidies is going way up,

and people insist on
buying these homes

that are subject to tidal
erosion and to flooding,

and to destruction, ultimately.

There isn't transparent
accountable pricing

for all the impacts of the
burning of fossil fuels.

The markets still
aren't working right,

and once those costs are
revealed, and put at the meter,

and put at the pump, then
consumers will make choices

that are in their self-interest.

We'll be making transportation
fuel on our roofs.

Of course I'm not saying
that we get to nirvana

and we don't have any war.

One of the causes of
war would be less,

because energy would be
more abundantly available

and more distributed
around the world.

If we're going
to live up to our name,

Homo sapiens, which
means wise man,

we'll have to understand our
subconscious motivations,

our unconscious desires
and justifications

and the true cost of energy.

When you look at the past,
you're looking at a decision,

decisions about how
to live in the world

that people in the past made.

It may be technically true

that we don't know everything

about where our food came from.

We keep telling
ourselves it's difficult,

but just read the back
of the cereal packet.

It tells you what
all the stuff is,

and then you can figure out
where it came from on Google.

From what countries
do the raw materials

for an iPhone come from?

Hey there you go.

Oh here, how about this,
the commodity chain.

We know that certain
things that we do now

turn on certain
parts of our brain

or inspire certain
kind of attitude

or inculcates certain
kinds of response,

so however we want
to talk about it.

We could think of
the kind of fire

that consumerism lights up
in us with all of the desires

as a kind of gateway
to more desires

that might be actually
more interesting

and more in sync with
other life forms.

When you think about the
universe as a flow of energy,

then that simply changes
your whole perspective

about what it is to be alive.

All living systems require
energy as individuals.

If we think more strategically

about how we're using
the planet's energy,

life would be better
for every living thing.

You know, individual
behavior can emerge

as something different
at a different scale.

Emergence is sort
of interactive.

We don't need 24/7
access to energy.

We need 24/7 access to feelings.

If we can just approach
each other without the sort of

condescension that
comes way too often

when we come to
environmental topics,

and say, all right, so we're
looking for something to work.

One of the important aspects

of the evolution of
cooperation is the development

of complex moral emotions,

so sympathy, empathy,
compassion,

and these are the key.

I think this is vital
to our understanding

of the human condition.

The morphological
adaptations that we have

are simply reflections of where
our ancestors

arose on the planet.

How much sun did they get, how
much oxygen was in the air?

These determine the
shapes of their skulls,

the color of their skin,

but it has nothing to do
with the inherent essence

of what it means to be human

because we're all
the same species.

Ignition
sequence three, two.

It's been a pretty wonderful
journey for mankind,

but, boy, what a
wonderful set of issues

to have to wrestle
with, going forward.

We don't even have to
get to Alpha Centauri

to find these issues and
learn about ourselves.

It's about how do we look
at longterm problems.

Can we embody the wisdom
that we feel's inherent here

and move into the future wisely?

In our council at Onondaga,
when we looked into the future,

we address ourselves
and say Swyonisu.

Across the fire. Swyonisu

And I asked one of the
old chiefs, my uncle,

I said, what does
that actually mean?

And he said it means
the leaders, I said no,

what's the real,
literal translation?

He says it means you who
look far in the future.

Now, the lift off.

With this, it's gonna be made
here, the eagle has landed.

Astronaut Neil Armstrong,

pursuing the next step in the
evolution of our knowledge,

when he returned
from one of mankind's

greatest engineering
achievements, stated,

"I felt the successful
lunar landing

"might inspire men
around the world

"to believe that impossible
goals are possible,

"that there really is hope
for the future of mankind."

We are living in
the future's past.

The relative odds of future
outcomes change every second.

The world we all live in

is not larger than
the sum of its parts.

Each part is neither
the center or the edge.

It's a bustling world,
a household of beings.

Colleagues, both
human and nonhuman,

animate and inanimate,

over which we have influence,
but, in turn, influence us.

Physical realities exist,
regardless of our desires.

Seemingly insignificant
actions taken collectively

have led us to this moment.

Everything is a system
of relationships,

and it's not easy to
see the connections.

The connections between
the paint on a barn,

the indifferent asphalt,
a press conference,

or to see the invisible links
between human expectations,

human vulnerability,

human memory,

and the fragility
of life itself.

No, it requires effort.

Energy comes in many forms.

It's both the means and the
ends of all our pursuits.

All of us held in the
arms of the atmosphere.

We don't have to be
poets, scientists,

superheroes, or saints.

Each of us can think
about how we think.

Could the solution we're
looking for be inside us?

We're humankind.

Ingenuity is in our DNA,
and we can visualize.

What kind of future
would you like to see?

What are you willing
to contribute

towards creating that future?

Ask yourself, what
am I willing to do?

And not something that
requires more effort

than you're willing to make,

and not some small contribution

that just scratches
the guilt itch,

but doesn't get the job done.

No, ask yourself, what am
I willing to contribute

that comes natural to me?

Something that I can sustain

until the challenge
has been met.

Something that
fits into my life.

My profession, my hobbies.

Fits in with my relationships.

Something that's a
part of who I am.

Yeah, you know, each
of us, is unique.

Each of us has a gift, a
strength that we can direct

towards creating this world

that we'd like to
see in our future.

That we'd like to see in our
kids' and descendants' future.

We love our kids, right?

A quote from the
religious philosopher,

Pierre Teilhard de
Chardin, comes to mind.

"After mastering the winds,
the waves, the tides,

"and gravity, we shall harness
for God the energy of love.

"And then, for a second time
in the history of the world,

"man will have discovered fire."