Saving the World From Bad Ideas

Clean energy won't work in the global south... right? At a moment when the fossil fueled economy is cracking under geopolitical pressure, Daan Walter of EMBER brings the data that reframes everything: clean energy is moving ahead, in developing countries — it's already winning. Walter unpacks EMBER's latest electricity review findings: for the first time, wind and solar absorbed nearly all global electricity demand growth in 2024, causing fossil fuel generation to actually fall. And unlike the economic shocks of 2020 or 2013, this is structural.The episode covers the ElectroTech revolution's three core drivers — none of which are explicitly about climate. Walter explains why emerging economies, far from lagging, are leapfrogging the West: over 50% of CVF nations now out-solar the United States. The Strait of Hormuz crisis is accelerating everything. Pakistan's bottom-up solar revolution — millions buying off Alibaba, DIY-installing, disconnecting from failing utilities — is the preview of what comes next everywhere.Nuclear gets a candid assessment too, the question is how it can play nice with solar dominating the grid. Walter closes with a refreshingly honest admission: we don't know yet how to solve the last 5-10% of the grid cleanly — but that's fine. The right move is to sprint the 90% we can solve and invest in R&D for the rest, rather than let perfect be the enemy of transformational.🧠 Topics Discussed:⚡ ElectroTech defined: why wind, solar, batteries, EVs, and heat pumps all cluster around electricity as their magnetic center📉 Bad idea autopsied: "clean energy is too expensive for developing countries" — true five years ago, dangerously wrong today🌍 CVF nations leapfrogging: 50%+ of the world's most climate-vulnerable countries out-solar the US💸 Capex parity moment: upfront costs of EVs and solar panels now matching fossil alternatives — the game-changer for capital-constrained economies🌞 Solar as baseload: 80-90% uptime solar + battery achievable at ~$100-120/MWh; UAE Masdar project hit 99.5% uptime below $70/MWh🛢️ Hormuz crisis as accelerant: biggest energy shock since the 1970s, turbocharging electrotech exports from China globally👨‍💼 Guest Bio:Daan Walter is a Principal at EMBER, where he leads global energy strategy research. His CV spans Rocky Mountain Institute (batteries, efficiency, mineral demand), McKinsey, and two graduate degrees from the University of Cambridge — one in nuclear energy, one in theoretical physics. He's one of the sharpest analysts tracking the real-time pace of the ElectroTech revolution.💬 Quote Highlights:"The answer is not 'you're wrong.' The answer is: you were right five years ago." — Daan Walter"The poorest countries in the world and the poorest families within countries are adopting ElectroTech because it's the cheapest option now, not the most expensive." — Daan Walter"We identify three key drivers of the ElectroTech revolution across the world. None of those three are explicitly climate." — Daan Walter"Every country in the world has a small Saudi Arabia worth of energy falling from the skies on them every year. All they need to do is put a panel up and capture it." — Daan Walter"By 2040, we might be in a very highly electrified, very low-carbon economy — in the same way that by 2040, we might be in an economy that largely runs on AI white-collar work." — Daan Walter🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected]📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

“We can stop worrying about the climate.”In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas speaks with climate scientist Zeke Hausfather about a dangerously complacent idea: we can stop worrying about the climate. As recent years have broken temperature records and warming appears to be accelerating, they explore why that conclusion is badly mistaken. The conversation unpacks the hidden role of aerosols in masking warming, what recent spikes in temperature do and do not mean, whether net zero really stops further warming, and how seriously we should take tipping points, geoengineering, and carbon removal. The result is a clear-eyed discussion that pushes back against both panic and complacency, and argues for staying focused on the scale and complexity of the climate challenge.🧠 Topics Discussed🌡️ Why the rate of global warming appears to be increasing☁️ How aerosols have masked part of the warming caused by greenhouse gases🚢 Why shipping pollution controls became part of the climate conversation🧮 What happens if sulfur dioxide emissions fall even further♻️ Why reaching net zero means temperatures likely stabilise rather than keep rising📈 What explains the exceptional warmth of 2023 and 2024🌍 Whether the world has actually passed 1.5°C yet🔥 Why climate complacency is just as misleading as climate fatalism🧊 How to think clearly about tipping points, from permafrost to ice sheets🌊 What we know, and do not know, about AMOC slowdown and Arctic feedbacks🛠️ Why solar radiation management remains controversial, risky, and unresolved💨 Why geoengineering cannot replace emissions cuts🪨 Which carbon removal pathways seem most promising today💸 Why carbon removal is likely to matter, even if it stays expensive⚡ Why solving climate change will require many tools rather than one master fix👩‍🏫 Guest BioZeke Hausfather is a climate scientist and climate research lead at Stripe. He writes for Carbon Brief, publishes the The Climate Brink Substack, and has served as a lead author for the IPCC. His work focuses on observed warming, climate model performance, carbon removal, and the intersection of climate science and policy.📚 Recommended Reading & ResourcesThe Climate Brink by Zeke HausfatherZeke Hausfather’s work for Carbon BriefIPCC reports on 1.5°C, mitigation, and carbon removalFrontier and Stripe’s work on carbon dioxide removalResearch on aerosols, shipping emissions, and recent warming trendsResearch on solar radiation management and carbon removal technologies💬 Quote Highlights💬 “Our best estimate removing sort of natural variability is that the current rate of warming due to human activity is somewhere in the order of 0.27C.” — Zeke Hausfather💬 “If you were to get rid of sulfur dioxide emissions completely... you would end up at about two degrees of warming rather than the 1.5 or 1.4 we’re at today.” — Zeke Hausfather💬 “Getting to net zero emissions of all greenhouse gases and aerosols would lead to roughly flat temperatures.” — Zeke Hausfather💬 “All of these geoengineering approaches we’re talking about... are literally that.” — Zeke Hausfather💬 “There’s no silver bullet, but there’s silver buckshot when it comes to climate change.” — Zeke Hausfather🌐 About WePlanetWePlanet is an international movement campaigning for science-based solutions to the climate, nature and development crises. Through conversations like this one, we challenge bad ideas, test assumptions, and make the case for a more abundant, resilient and hopeful future.📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Are vaccines overrated?In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas speaks with Dr Seth Berkley, infectious disease epidemiologist, former CEO of Gavi, and co-founder of COVAX, about what the world got right and wrong during COVID-19. They discuss vaccine equity, pandemic preparedness, the politicisation of public health, and why the world remains dangerously vulnerable to future outbreaks. From the rapid development of mRNA vaccines to the rise of vaccine disinformation and the growing threat of H5N1 bird flu, this conversation is a sobering reminder that pandemics do not end just because societies stop wanting to talk about them.🧠 Topics Discussed🦠 Why societies so quickly try to forget pandemics, even when the threat has not fully passed🔬 Whether the origin of COVID matters for future policy and lab safety💉 How quickly the world developed COVID vaccines, and why that scientific achievement was extraordinary🌍 Why COVAX was created, how it worked, and what it achieved📦 The scale of vaccine nationalism and the human cost of hoarding⚗️ How mRNA vaccines changed the speed and future of vaccine development🧬 Why HIV remains one of the hardest viruses to vaccinate against🐦 The pandemic potential of H5N1 bird flu and why it deserves more attention📱 How social media, political polarisation, and public-health messaging failures fuelled vaccine hesitancy🏛️ Why attacks on institutions such as WHO, CDC, and public science undermine future pandemic response🚨 Why measles is resurging in countries that had once controlled it🤝 Why global cooperation, advance funding, and trusted scientific institutions remain essential👩‍🏫 Guest BioDr Seth Berkley is an infectious disease epidemiologist and Adjunct Professor at the Pandemic Center at Brown University. He served as CEO of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, from 2011 to 2023, and was one of the co-founders of COVAX, the global effort to ensure equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines. He previously led the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative and has spent decades working at the intersection of global health, vaccine access, and epidemic preparedness. He is the author of Fair Doses: An Insider’s Story of the Pandemic and the Global Fight for Vaccine Equity.📚 Recommended Reading & ResourcesFair Doses: An Insider’s Story of the Pandemic and the Global Fight for Vaccine Equity by Dr Seth BerkleyGavi, the Vaccine AllianceCOVAXCEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations)WHO Pandemic Accord / pandemic treaty processIAVI (International AIDS Vaccine Initiative)💬 Quote Highlights💬 “Vaccines are the most powerful public health technology [and] have led to the 40 year increase in life expectancy.” — Dr Seth Berkley💬 “COVID isn’t over. We could have worse strains… and we need to learn the lessons from the previous one so we’re better prepared for the future one.” — Dr Seth Berkley💬 “H5N1 is a really scary virus.” — Dr Seth Berkley💬 “Outbreaks are inevitable, but pandemics are optional.” — Larry Brilliant, quoted by Dr Seth Berkley💬 “The only thing that can protect us in a pandemic is science.” — Dr Seth Berkley🌐 About WePlanetWePlanet is a growing international movement campaigning for science-based solutions to the climate, nature and development crises. Through this podcast and beyond, we challenge bad ideas that stand in the way of progress, and make the case for a more abundant, resilient and hopeful future.What lessons should the world have learned from COVID-19, and are we any better prepared for the next pandemic?Let us know what you think, and share this episode with someone interested in vaccines, global health, and the future of pandemic preparedness.Follow Saving the World from Bad Ideas for more conversations with scientists, writers and thinkers challenging the dogmas holding us back.📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected]📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Geothermal energy isn't niche—it's everywhere. In this conversation, Mark Lynas speaks with Terra Rogers—program director for Superhot Rock Geothermal at Clean Air Task Force—about how next-generation geothermal technology could deliver 24/7 carbon-free baseload power anywhere on Earth.For a century, geothermal meant hunting for rare pockets where heat, water, and permeable rock aligned naturally—volcanic zones like Iceland, Japan, New Zealand. But it's hot everywhere. At 5 kilometers depth in the US West, temperatures hit 150-200°C. Go deeper—eventually to 10-15 kilometers—and you reach 400°C supercritical phase, where water acts simultaneously as liquid and gas, delivering 5-10 times more energy per well.Borrowing from the shale gas revolution, next-gen geothermal creates artificial reservoirs by fracturing hot rock and cycling water through it—two straws in a sponge. No natural water pockets needed. Just drill, fracture, inject, extract steam, generate power, repeat. The technology exists. Forge in Utah cut drilling time from 60 days to 15 days and reduced costs 50% in three years. Fervo just sold 500 megawatts to California. Japan targets four 100-megawatt supercritical projects.🧠 Topics Discussed:🌋 Conventional geothermal: 100+ years in Iceland/Japan/New Zealand, hunting natural water pockets🔥 Superhot breakthrough: 400°C supercritical phase = 5-10x more energy, works anywhere🛢️ Shale revolution parallel: fracture hard rock, create artificial reservoirs, cycle your own water⚙️ Engineering gaps: high-temp instruments, thermal-resistant cement, casing expansion management📉 Cost trajectory: Forge cut time 60→15 days, 50% cost reduction; targeting $20-40/MWh at scale⚡ Scale potential: 500 MW (Fervo), gigawatt plants possible, high school campus footprint🏭 Industrial heat cascading: Iceland model—power → pharmaceuticals → fish → melt streets🌍 Geographic expansion: UK (Cornwall), Germany, France all viable with deeper drilling🔬 Next-gen drilling: plasma/laser tech to penetrate hard rock, reaching 15-20 km eventually💰 Investment gap: $1B invested, need institutional money for wells 1-5 (each $5-20M)🛢️ Oil & gas pivot: trained workforce, rig assets critical for climate-relevant timeline🗾 Japan commitment: 4x 100 MW supercritical projects, desperate for firm power📊 Jobs & transition: existing oil/gas/power workforce ready to deploy👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Terra Rogers is program director for Superhot Rock Geothermal at Clean Air Task Force, where she advances policy, investment, and research to commercialize next-generation geothermal energy. Her work focuses on enabling firm, carbon-free baseload power by creating artificial geothermal reservoirs in superhot rock accessible anywhere on Earth.📚 Recommended Reading:● Clean Air Task Force geothermal resources ● FORGE (Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy) Utah data ● Fervo Energy commercial deployments ● Japan supercritical geothermal initiatives💬 Quote Highlights:(01:08) "We are both blessed and cursed with 100+ years of operating data. The world has heard of geothermal and concluded it's not for them because they don't have it." — Terra Rogers(03:09) "It is really truly hot everywhere. It's now just a matter of can we access it with drilling technologies we have." — Terra Rogers(51:26) "The geothermal industry can do this without the oil and gas industry. It's just if we want to do it in a timeline that matters for climate, we need to do it with their assets." — Terra Rogers🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Conspiracy theories are psychologically reassuring closed systems that are corroding democracy. In this conversation, Mark Lynas speaks with Calum Matheson—associate professor and chair of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh—about why conspiracy thinking is more dangerous than ever.The appeal is simple: know the conspiracy, and everything makes sense. You're exceptional because you see the truth while others are "sheep." Every event fits the pattern. And there's always a kernel of truth—the Epstein files validate QAnon, Purdue Pharma's opioid conspiracy fuels anti-vax narratives. Real conspiracies exist, making fake ones nearly impossible to debunk.The problem? Conspiracy theorists use the same language we do—claiming we ignore evidence and suffer cognitive bias. Worse, conspiracy thinking now runs governments: RFK Jr. heads Health and Human Services, transvestigators claim all celebrities are secretly transgender, and deplatforming backfires. Matheson's prescription: stop trying to demolish conspiracies with facts. Instead, teach probabilistic thinking. Science isn't absolute certainty; it's extremely high probability. We must learn to live with uncertainty and accept that expertise means "more likely to be correct," not "infallible." The goal isn't eradicating conspiracy thinking—it's mitigating its democratic corrosion.🧠 Topics Discussed:☢️ Nuclear weapons psychology: why people fantasize about post-apocalypse instead of engaging policy🛖 Survivalism: impractical prep rituals, post-collapse fantasies of rebuilding society🌀 Conspiracy appeal: closed systems, psychological reassurance, certainty in chaos🔍 Evidence misinterpretation: conspiracists use same language as debunkers (cognitive bias, cherry-picking)🚬 Real conspiracies: tobacco, fossil fuels, Purdue Pharma—kernel of truth validates broader theories🦎 Wild theories: David Icke's lizard people, transvestigators, chemtrails, QAnon🏛️ Democratic erosion: RFK Jr., MAGA conspiracism, January 6th, anti-immigrant narratives📱 Social media: algorithm-driven radicalization, deplatforming backfires📊 Probabilistic thinking: science = high probability, not absolute certainty; tobacco industry exploited doubt🎓 Expertise failure: media/philosophy professors deny Sandy Hook—credentials ≠ immunity👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Dr. Calum Matheson is associate professor and chair of the Department of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh and faculty at the Pittsburgh Psychoanalytic Center. His work examines nuclear weapons psychology, conspiracy theories, and extremist movements. Author of Desiring the Bomb: Communication, Psychoanalysis and the Atomic Age, his latest research explores conspiracy communities including Sandy Hook deniers and transvestigators.📚 Recommended Reading:● Desiring the Bomb — Calum Matheson ● University of California tobacco industry document archive ● Merchants of Doubt — Naomi Oreskes ● Research on conspiracy theory psychology and social contagion💬 Quote Highlights:(29:13) "The issue is that conspiracists are misinterpreting evidence, not ignoring it. Their protocols for understanding are incorrect. They believe they have evidence for things they don't actually have evidence for." — Calum Matheson(01:01:33) "The world is probabilistic. A scientific discovery is not uncovering fundamental truth with absolute certainty. It's developing a hypothesis the evidence confirms is very likely to be true. Absolutes aren't appropriate for belief." — Calum Matheson🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

At 90 years old, Sylvia Earle has witnessed more ocean change than perhaps anyone alive. In this conversation, the legendary oceanographer delivers an urgent message: we're destroying the very systems that keep us alive, and we're running out of time to stop. Earle dismantles the illusion that wild-caught seafood is sustainable.Since the 1950s, we've removed roughly half the ocean's wildlife. Ninety percent of big predators like tuna and swordfish are gone. Half the phytoplankton—the ocean's oxygen generators and carbon capturers—have disappeared. We're now killing whales not by hunting them, but by taking their food: industrial krill fishing in Antarctic waters strips food from penguins, seals, and the recovering whale populations that migrate thousands of miles to feed there.But there's hope. When commercial whaling stopped in 1986, populations began recovering. The technology exists: cell-cultured fish is already on menus in Singapore and the US. The knowledge is here, the choice is ours.🧠 Topics Discussed:🌊 Sixth mass extinction: first caused by one species (us) in geological time🐋 Whale recovery: populations increasing since 1986 commercial whaling ban, but now threatened by food depletion🦐 Krill crisis: taking Antarctic krill = killing whales, seals, penguins by removing their groceries📉 Ocean wildlife collapse: 50% gone since 1950s, 90% of big predators disappeared🫁 Phytoplankton loss: ~50% decline since 1950—ocean's oxygen generators vanishing🎣 Wild fish economics: 30-year-old lobsters, 50-year-old orange roughy, 400-year-old sharks taken at zero cost🐟 Salmon farming absurdity: chose carnivore requiring 3-4 years, fed wild fish—should farm plant-eaters🧬 Cell-cultured seafood: already available in Singapore/US, chicken/fish grown from cells without killing🏴‍☠️ High seas tragedy: half the planet's ocean = global commons raided by few countries/companies🌡️ Ocean life support: 97% of biosphere, generates most oxygen, captures carbon, maintains habitable temps🤿 Technology revolution: scuba (1940s), submersibles reaching 11km depth, exploring last wilderness📊 Shifting baselines: each generation accepts degraded normal (passenger pigeons darkening skies → gone)🎯 Mission Blue: 168+ Hope Spots globally, champions protecting ocean places from where they are to better👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Dr. Sylvia Earle is a legendary oceanographer, explorer, author, and lecturer who has led over 100 expeditions logging 7,000+ hours underwater. She was the first female chief scientist of NOAA, has been a National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence since 1998, and founded Mission Blue to inspire ocean protection. At 90, she remains one of the world's most powerful voices for ocean conservation.📚 Recommended Reading:● Mission Blue: Hope Spots network (mission-blue.org) ● Sylvia Earle's books and documentaries ● Studies on whale recovery post-whaling ● Research on ocean wildlife collapse since 1950s💬 Quote Highlights:(03:23) "We've removed roughly half of the wild animals in the ocean since the 1950s. The sixth mass extinction is caused by one species—us." — Sylvia Earle(24:20) "About 90% of big predators—tuna, swordfish—are gone. We treat them like chickens. They're like lions and tigers, and they're disappearing fast." — Sylvia Earle(01:06:39) "All of us have a vested interest in the high seas, the global commons. Those who extract from it are taking from you, from all of us. Why do we let this happen?" — Sylvia Earle(01:29:06) "When the buying stops, the killing can too. Every fish you choose not to eat could be swimming out there. The ocean says thank you. The kids say thank you." — Sylvia Earle🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Are ultra-processed foods really the enemy? In this conversation, Mark Lynas sits down with Nesli Sözer, research professor at VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland and founder of NAPKIN (Nordic Alternative Protein Knowledge and Innovation Network—yes, the best food acronym ever). Sözer dismantles the myth that processing itself makes food unhealthy, revealing why the NOVA classification system is scientifically flawed and how it threatens the future of sustainable protein.The UPF panic labels whole grain bread, cheese, and plant-based burgers as "ultra-processed" while ignoring what actually matters: nutritional composition. The irony? UPF fear-mongering pushes consumers toward "natural" meat—more expensive, less sustainable, fiber-free, and genuinely linked to cancer and disease. We over-consume protein and under-consume fiber. Processing can fix both problems. The real bad idea isn't ultra-processing—it's letting pseudoscience derail the food system transformation we urgently need.🧠 Topics Discussed:🔬 NOVA classification: divides foods by processing degree, not nutritional quality🍞 Absurd UPF examples: whole grain bread, cheese, canned foods labeled "ultra-processed"🫘 Why processing matters: removes anti-nutritional factors, improves protein digestibility🦠 Fermentation power: generates umami, probiotics, reduces salt/sugar needs (miso effect)📊 Fiber crisis: Western diets over-consume protein, critically under-consume fiber🧬 Precision fermentation: genetically modified microbes produce identical egg/dairy proteins (no GMO in final product)🏷️ EU labeling ban: MEP Celine Imart pushing to ban "burger," "sausage" for plant foods🌏 Singapore vs Europe: pragmatic approval vs regulatory paralysis💰 Price paradox: plant burgers cost 2x meat despite cheaper inputs (pea/fava proteins expensive, soy/wheat cheap but stigmatized)🌾 Gluten myth: "gluten belly" caused by sugar/fat in baked goods, not protein itself (celiacs are tiny minority)🔄 Diversification imperative: reduce monoculture dependence (wheat/corn/soy/rice), build resilience🧪 Finnish innovations: Solar Foods (gas fermentation), enegaVTT spin-outs), cell-cultured avocados👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Nesli Sözer is a research professor at VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, specializing in plant-based foods, microbial proteins, and hybrid food systems. She founded NAPKIN (Nordic Alternative Protein Knowledge and Innovation Network) and leads multiple EU-funded food innovation projects.📚 Recommended Reading:● VTT spin-out companies: Solar Foods, Enifer, ineVolar, Onego Bio, Happy Plant Protein ● EIT Food policy papers on protein diversification ● Research on extrusion processing and fermentation technologies ● Studies on dietary fiber deficiency and health outcomes💬 Quote Highlights:(03:31) "NOVA classification divides foods into four categories depending on degree of processing. Whole grain bread that is industrially produced is ultra-processed food and not recommended. It's so wrong." — Nesli Sözer(06:50) "It's not really the processing, it's how you formulate the food product that becomes important. All those examples given by UPF advocates focus on nutritional quality, not how foods are made or processed." — Nesli Sözer(15:56) "Think of the extruder like a cow, basically. Instead of feeding grass, you feed ingredients and it's processed into a meat-like structure." — Nesli Sözer(23:37) "We over-consume proteins. We take too much protein than we need. We are consuming very little dietary fiber, which has direct connection to certain cancer types." — Nesli Sözer🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Should we be fishing for krill in the Antarctic? In this extraordinary episode, Mark Lynas connects via satellite with three researchers aboard a Sea Shepherd vessel in the Southern Ocean near the South Orkney Islands—one of the most remote and important whale feeding grounds on Earth.Matt Savoca (Stanford/California Marine Sanctuary Foundation), Ted Cheeseman (UC Santa Cruz/Happy Whale), and Lucia Morillo (Sea Shepherd science coordinator) are conducting the first truly independent survey of this region. Their mission: understand the overlap between recovering whale populations and an expanding industrial krill fishery that takes 620,000 tons annually—the same amount of food consumed by hundreds of thousands of whales, seals, and penguins.This conversation exposes the krill paradox (why krill didn't explode after whales were removed), whale poop's critical role as ocean fertilizer, climate change shrinking krill habitat southward, and why the Marine Stewardship Council's sustainability certification is now facing objections from WWF and other major conservation groups.🧠 Topics Discussed:🐋 Fin whale recovery: from 500,000 to <10,000, now rebounding in South Orkneys🦐 Krill fishery: 12 vessels from 5 countries, 11 months/year industrial operation📊 Misleading 1% claim: catch calculated across Europe-sized ocean, concentrated in wildlife hotspots🔬 First independent survey: Sea Shepherd enabling fishery-independent research🌡️ Climate crisis: sea ice loss collapsing krill breeding in northern regions💩 Krill paradox: whale poop fertilizes phytoplankton that feeds krill—ecosystem engineering🎯 Fishing overlap: whales concentrate where vessels fish; empty water elsewhere🧬 Genetic sampling: pregnancy rates, body condition, sex determination via crossbow biopsy📡 Echo sounding: mapping krill concentrations at ecologically relevant scales for predators🐟 Salmon farming connection: most krill feeds farmed Atlantic salmon in coastal pollution zones🏷️ MSC certification under fire: WWF, ASOC, WePlanet object to sustainability claim👨‍🏫 Guest Bios:Matt Savoca is a marine biologist at Stanford University and California Marine Sanctuary Foundation studying whale ecology and ocean conservation.Ted Cheeseman is a research fellow at UC Santa Cruz and co-founder of Happy Whale, a citizen science platform that has identified nearly every living humpback whale globally.Lucia Murillo is science coordinator for Sea Shepherd, leading campaigns exposing industrial fishing in Antarctica and other protected waters.📚 Recommended Reading:● Sea Shepherd Antarctic web series on YouTube ● Happy Whale platform for whale identification ● ASOC (Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition) MPA proposals ● Studies on krill paradox and whale fertilization💬 Quote Highlights:"Fin whales were reduced by about 95% in 70 years—approximately the lifespan of one single fin whale. The scale of destruction is remarkable." — Matt Savoca"In Antarctica, everything eats krill or eats something that eats krill. The food chains are really, really short." — Lucia Murillo"Each krill fishing vessel takes as much food daily as 100-500 whales. It's structured for conflict." — Ted Cheeseman"The 1% claim uses a denominator the size of Europe. But if all fishing happens in Paris and London, is that appropriate?" — Matt Savoca"This is arguably the place with the highest density of great whales anywhere on the planet. A crown jewel in the world of recovering oceans." — Ted Cheeseman🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Support their work and connect with us💰 Support Sea Shepherd: seashepherd.org 🐋 Learn more: happywhale.com 💬 Email us: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Is there really not enough land for renewables? In this conversation, Mark Lynas sits down with Tom Heap—BBC Countryfile presenter, Radio 4's Rare Earth co-host, and author of Land Smart: How to Give People and Nature the Space to Thrive—to tackle one of the most important yet least discussed environmental issues: land use.Heap makes the case that there's plenty of space for solar (and wind has minimal footprint), especially since solar excels at multifunctional use—combining with housing, car parks, farming, and floating on water bodies. The real land crisis? Livestock occupies a third of Earth's land and over half of agricultural land, delivering 6-16 times less protein per acre than crops. Meanwhile, biofuels require 50-100 times more land than solar for the same energy output, making aviation's biofuel dreams a land use nightmare.But the conversation goes deeper: rewilding's evolution from absolutist vision to pragmatic spectrum, why regenerative farming must avoid yield penalties, and the troubling vibe shift in climate politics. Despite renewables now being cheaper than fossil fuels and China's coal use peaking, environmental issues have dropped down the political agenda. Heap argues we're in a trough, not permanent decline—but only if we keep talking about it and bust the myths that disempowers action.🧠 Topics Discussed:⚡ Land requirements for solar vs nuclear vs wind (solar is tiny, shareable)🌾 Livestock's massive footprint: 1/3 of Earth's land, half of agricultural land🌱 Biofuels disaster: 50-100x less efficient than solar per area✈️ Aviation biofuels would require America's entire land area just for domestic flights🐑 Sheep-wrecked hills: green deserts masquerading as countryside🌿 Rewilding evolution: from absolutist to spectrum, avoiding food footprint export🥩 Regenerative farming challenge: needs yield parity or risks overseas displacement🧬 Gene editing progress: crops partnering with fungus for nitrogen, holy grail of nitrogen-fixing cereals🇨🇳 Pakistan's grid death spiral: behind-the-meter solar boom crashing legacy infrastructure🌍 Climate vibe shift: why environmental issues dropped off the agenda despite tech wins📊 Pluralistic ignorance: 66% support climate action but think they're a minority (actually believe it's 40%)🚗 Myth busting: rich countries driving less since 2005, renewables now cheaper, others ARE acting⚖️ Slavery analogy: decades-long progressive fights face backlash during insecurity (French Revolution parallel to Ukraine war)👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Tom Heap is a regular presenter on BBC One's Countryfile and co-presenter of Radio 4's Rare Earth. He's author of Land Smart: How to Give People and Nature the Space to Thrive and co-creator of the 39 Ways to Save the Planet podcast and book.📚 Recommended Reading:● Land Smart: How to Give People and Nature the Space to Thrive — Tom Heap ● 39 Ways to Save the Planet — Tom Heap & Dr. Tamsin Edwards ● Research on land use efficiency per energy type ● Studies on pluralistic ignorance in climate action💬 Quote Highlights:"We're moving to a world for the first time in human history where we can have more energy while burning less stuff." — Tom Heap"To power inland flights of America on biofuels, you need the entire land area of America." — Tom Heap"66% of people globally support climate action and would give 1% of income—but they believe they're a minority at 40%. This pluralistic ignorance is profoundly disempowering." — Tom Heap"The fact that cleaner energy is now cheaper is a huge deal. That penny is just beginning to drop." — Tom Heap🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Is nature really as fragile as we've been led to believe? In this conversation, Mark Lynas sits down with veteran environmental journalist Fred Pearce, author of Despite It All: A Handbook for Environmental Hopefuls, to challenge one of environmentalism's core assumptions.Pearce argues that nature isn't fragile—it's resilient, adaptive, and constantly evolving. The evidence shows ecosystems have survived for hundreds of millions of years through asteroid strikes and ice ages, constantly adapting through species turnover and change. Conservation's obsession with protecting "pristine" ecosystems in aspic misses the point: nature needs room to evolve, not to be frozen in time. Novel ecosystems mixing native and invasive species aren't failures—they're nature adapting.This conversation covers the defused population bomb (global fertility now at replacement level), peak stuff (material consumption declining in rich countries), successful technofixes (renewables now cheaper than fossil fuels), and the critical role of indigenous communities in protecting ecosystems. Pearce makes the case for pragmatic optimism: the worst could still happen, but pessimism is for defeatists. From rewilding Europe's wolves to China's authoritarian eco-modernism, the evidence suggests humanity can rise to the challenge—if we embrace innovation over nostalgia.🧠 Topics Discussed:🌿 Why nature is resilient and adaptive, not fragile🦎 Species turnover and novel ecosystems as signs of health👶 The defused population bomb (fertility at 2.3 children globally)📦 Peak stuff: declining material consumption in rich countries🔧 Technofixes that worked: acid rain, ozone layer, renewables🇨🇳 China as authoritarian eco-modernist pioneer🐺 Rewilding success: wolves returning across Europe🌍 Indigenous land management vs. fortress conservation♻️ Circular economy and mining rare metals from waste🚗 Why rich countries are driving less since 2005👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Fred Pearce is a veteran environmental journalist and author who has covered global environmental issues for over 40 years, primarily for New Scientist. His latest book is Despite It All: A Handbook for Environmental Hopefuls.📚 Recommended Reading:● Despite It All: A Handbook for Environmental Hopefuls — Fred Pearce ● The New Wild — Fred Pearce● Eleanor Ostrom on managing the commons ● Ecomodernist Manifesto💬 Quote Highlights:"The evidence is that nature is resilient, it's adaptive, it evolves. Nature's been going for hundreds of millions of years, whereas we've not." — Fred Pearce "Change isn't bad. Change is actually an example of ecosystems that are functioning well, are doing what they should do, are adapting, are changing, evolving and moving on." — Fred Pearce "The population bomb has been defused. By the second half of this century, we're going to have a stable population." — Fred Pearce"Since about 2005, almost all rich world countries, people have been driving, including the US, which is the car economy on stilts really. Even there, they're driving less." — Fred Pearce "Pessimism is destructive and it narrows your horizons. Optimism allows you to look for potential, look for things that will work, push at the open doors." — Fred Pearce 🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Is industrial food actually the villain — or one of humanity's greatest achievements? In this provocative episode, Mark Lynas sits down with Jan Dutkiewicz, assistant professor at the Pratt Institute and contributing editor at the New Republic, co-author of Feed the People: Why Industrial Food is Good and How to Make it Even Better.Dutkiewicz challenges the consensus that "the food system is broken" — arguing that industrial production has created unprecedented abundance and eliminated diseases of malnutrition. The real problems aren't industrialization itself, but specific fixable issues: worker exploitation, factory farming's animal welfare crisis, and agricultural lobbies' outsized power. 🧠 Topics Discussed:🏭 Defining industrial food: scale, standards, regulation creating abundance (not just "ultra-processed")🍽️ Why "the food system is broken" is the wrong diagnosis (it's a complex system, not a broken appliance)📚 The food writing industry: Michael Pollan, Wendell Berry, and agrarian romanticism🌾 Wendell Berry as anti-Norman Borlaug: romanticizing pre-industrial famine and malnutrition👶 Child labor realities: agriculture has most injuries and deaths, minimum age exemptions persist🏛️ Agricultural exceptionalism: carve-outs from labor laws, environmental regulations, animal welfare🐖 Manure lagoons, gestation crates, and why artificial insemination gets bestiality exemptions🍖 Factory farming inefficiency: 80%+ calorie loss converting feed to meat (not actually "efficient")🌍 Environmental impact: livestock causes the biggest footprint by far (emissions, land, water, biodiversity)🧬 "Grass-fed" as marketing: labels like "humane" and "free-range" are unregulated buzzwords🧪 Plant-based alternatives and cellular agriculture: the real path forward (not small farms)🚫 Europe banning "burger" and "sausage" labels: livestock lobby blocking competition👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Jan Dutkiewicz is assistant professor at the Pratt Institute in Brooklyn and contributing editor at the New Republic. He co-authored Feed the People: Why Industrial Food is Good and How to Make it Even Better with Gabriel Rosenberg, offering a data-driven defense of industrial food systems while demanding better labor rights, animal welfare, and environmental regulation.📚 Recommended Reading:● Feed the People: Why Industrial Food is Good and How to Make it Even Better — Jan Dutkiewicz & Gabriel Rosenberg● Michael Pollan — The Omnivore's Dilemma● Wendell Berry — Essays on agrarianism● Bruce Friedrich — Meat (Good Food Institute)● Studies on agricultural exceptionalism and labor laws● Research on livestock environmental impacts💬 Quote Highlights:"Industrial food means food produced using principles of scale, standards, and regulation to create abundance. On balance, that has made the world a better, healthier, more abundant place." — Jan Dutkiewicz"Saying the food system is broken is like saying your house is broken when the air conditioner fails. Identify specific problems and seek specific solutions." — Jan Dutkiewicz"The Dust Bowl — perhaps America's greatest ecological disaster — was caused by poor land management by small-scale family farmers before agriculture was industrialized." — Jan Dutkiewicz"Every call to produce everything from scratch is implicitly a call for more unpaid labor by women in the household." — Jan Dutkiewicz"If we abolished factory farms: 99% less chicken, 97% less pork, 67% less beef. We'd all be vegetarian overnight." — Jan Dutkiewicz"8 out of 10 worst-paid jobs in America are in food. The people getting results aren't food writers — they're food workers themselves." — Jan Dutkiewicz🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow: @weplanetint

Can technology save us from environmental collapse — or is it just another false promise? In this epic conversation, Mark Lynas sits down with Adam Dorr, Director of Research at RethinkX and author of The Degrowth Delusion, to explore four simultaneous technological revolutions reshaping our world: energy (solar, wind, batteries), transportation (EVs and autonomous vehicles), food (precision fermentation), and labor (AI).🧠 Topics Discussed:💡 Technology as "practical knowledge" and how it compounds autocatalytically (self-accelerating)📈 S-curve adoption and X-curve decline: Why disruptions happen in 15-20 years, not centuries⚡ Solar, wind, batteries (SWB): Now the cheapest electricity ever, with near-zero marginal cost🌞 Why massive solar overbuilding beats battery storage (the Clean Energy U-curve)📦 Modularity advantage: Solar/batteries work from wristwatches to gigawatt plants🔌 From scarcity to super-abundance: Rethinking efficiency as "use what's available" not "use less"🚗 EVs and autonomous vehicles: Battery breakthroughs and transportation-as-a-service🥩 Precision fermentation and cellular agriculture: 10-100x more efficient than animal farming🏛️ Political resistance: GMO bans, cellular meat bans, and horseshoe theory opposition🤖 The fourth disruption: AI replacing cognitive, operator, and general human labor💼 Post-labor economics: Universal basic income, luxury services, and navigating abundance🌍 Why abundance makes allocation easier than scarcity (and nobody has all the answers yet)⚛️ AI existential risk vs opportunity: Superintelligence as doom or salvation?🌟 Star Trek vs Terminator: Which future will we choose?👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Adam Dorr is Director of Research at RethinkX, a nonprofit think tank analyzing technology disruption. He authored The Degrowth Delusion: Dispelling One of History's Truly Terrible Ideas and researches energy, food, transportation, and labor disruption. He's also a science fiction author exploring superintelligence and humanity's cosmic future.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:● The Degrowth Delusion — Adam Dorr● RethinkX research reports⁠ https://www.rethinkx.com⁠● Clayton Christensen — The Innovator's Dilemma● Tony Seba and disruption theory⁠ https://tonyseba.com⁠● Mark Lynas — Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet⁠ https://www.marklynas.org/books/six-degrees/⁠💬 Quote Highlights:"Life is unequivocally better on almost every indicator you care to measure than it was historically — life expectancy, infant mortality, literacy, everything down the line." — Adam Dorr"The more energy we have available, the more abundant energy is, the more useful things we can do to garner prosperity." — Adam Dorr"My team has documented more than 1,700 instances of new technologies spreading like wildfire once they catch — it only takes 15 to 20 years." — Adam Dorr"Solar panels just sit there and happily make electricity for decades at near zero marginal cost. They really are a marvelous technology." — Adam Dorr"We're headed into a world of fantastic abundance. That means hugely expanding our capacity to restore ecologies we've damaged." — Adam Dorr"Our environmental issues are not an epic struggle of good versus evil. They are just problems. And problems are solvable with the right tools. Now for the first time in history, we finally have the tools we need." — Adam Dorr🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected]📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast👁️ Follow us on X/Twitter: @weplanetint

Can we really solve climate change just by fixing energy — and ignore food? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with Bruce Friedrich, founder and President of the Good Food Institute, to tackle Bad Idea #37: “Solving energy is enough for solving climate.”Bruce argues that focusing exclusively on decarbonising energy while ignoring food systems is one of the biggest blind spots in climate policy. From antibiotic resistance and zoonotic disease to geopolitics, national security, and the S-curve of technological change, this conversation makes the case that the protein transition must stand alongside the energy transition if we’re serious about saving the planet.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● ⚡ Why decarbonising energy alone only solves about half the climate problem ● 🍖 Global meat demand: why “eat less meat” has never worked ● 🌍 Land use, deforestation, and rewilding at planetary scale ● 🧫 Cultivated meat, fermentation, and next-generation plant proteins ● 📉 The inefficiency of feeding crops to animals ● 🦠 Antibiotic resistance and industrial animal agriculture ● 🦆 Pandemic risk and zoonotic spillover from livestock systems ● 🐟 Cultivated seafood and the future of ocean recovery ● 📈 The protein S-curve and lessons from solar, EVs, and the internet ● 🏛️ Why government support matters — and where it’s already happening ● 🇨🇳🇮🇳 China, India, and the geopolitics of alternative proteins● 🌱 Farmers, land sparing, and the future of agriculture ● 🌎 Food security, resilience, and feeding a growing world👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Bruce Friedrich is the founder and President of the Good Food Institute (GFI), a global non-profit accelerating the transition to alternative proteins. He has worked for more than three decades at the intersection of food, climate, and innovation. Bruce is the author of Meat: How the Next Agricultural Revolution Will Transform Humanity’s Favorite Food and Our Future, and a leading global advocate for plant-based, fermentation-derived, and cultivated meat as climate, biodiversity, and food-security solutions.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● Meat: How the Next Agricultural Revolution Will Transform Humanity’s Favorite Food and Our Future ● Good Food Institute● GFI Europe ● SYSTEMIQ & Good Food Institute – The Protein Transition: Pathways to Lower Climate, Land, and Water Impacts● What’s Cooking? (UNEP alternative proteins report)● Livestock’s Long Shadow (FAO) ● World Resources Institute: Creating a Sustainable Food Future● IIASA land-use & food systems research● Our World in Data: Meat and dairy production ● UNEP & ILRI: Preventing the Next Pandemic 💬 Quote Highlights:“Focusing on energy alone while ignoring food is like lifting your foot off the accelerator — but keeping it on the highway to hell.” “If alternative proteins reach 50%, we could free more land than the entire Amazon rainforest.” “People aren’t going to give up meat — so we need to change how meat is made.” “This isn’t a moral problem. It’s a science and engineering problem.” “The protein transition is one of the most tractable climate solutions we have.”🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human well-being. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation: 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

Is the 1.5°C temperature target helping or hindering climate action? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with his co-authors Kwesi Quagraine (climate scientist at NCAR) and Erle Ellis (professor at University of Maryland Baltimore County) to discuss their groundbreaking new paper published in Nature that proposes a complete rethinking of how we measure climate progress.The team argues that global average temperature targets — the organizing principle of climate policy since Paris 2015 — are intangible, unactionable, and increasingly counterproductive now that we've essentially crossed the 1.5°C threshold. Instead, they propose the Clean Energy Shift (CES) — a simple, measurable metric that tracks how fast clean energy is displacing fossil fuels in real time.🧠 Topics Discussed: 🌡️ Why global average temperature targets are intangible and don't translate into clear policy actions🔢 The problem with "1.5 to stay alive": What happens when you cross a threshold framed as a limit of safety?📊 Introducing the Clean Energy Shift (CES): Growth rate of clean energy minus growth rate of total energy demand🔌 Why clean energy is now the cheapest option in most developing countries🌍 How regional climate impacts differ dramatically from global average temperature (Africa vs Europe vs small islands)🎯 Why "percent clean energy" should replace temperature as our north star metric (aiming for 100%)📉 The challenge of measuring energy: Primary vs useful energy, and why efficiency gains complicate the numbers⚡ Heat pumps, electric vehicles, and electrification: 💡 Why clean energy shift creates positive competition between countries (not just climate guilt)🗳️ Why clean energy targets need to enter UNFCCC discussions alongside temperature goals🔬 The data challenge: Why IEA and others need to release standardized, open-access energy data📐 The paradox of our time: Passing "safety limits" while developing real solutions🔭 The narrative shift from "avoid catastrophe" to "build clean energy abundance"👨‍🏫 Guest Bios:Kwesi Quagraine is a climate scientist at NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research) and former senior lecturer at the University of Cape Coast, Ghana, where he taught physics, meteorology, and atmospheric science. Originally from Ghana, Kwesi brings vital perspectives on how climate policy impacts developing nations and expertise in climate modeling, including solar radiation management research.Erle Ellis is a professor of geography and environmental systems at the University of Maryland Baltimore County. His work with the United Nations Development Program's Human Development Report focuses on aspirational indicators for making a better future. Erle has spent decades studying global environmental change and teaching students how human societies interact with planetary systems.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:● The Clean Energy Shift paper — Quagraine, Ellis, Lynas et al. (Nature, 2025) https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00246-z● Michael Liebreich — "The Pragmatic Climate Reset" essay Part 1 / Part 2● EMBER energy data and analysis https://ember-climate.org● International Energy Agency (IEA) energy statistics https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics● Mark Lynas — Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet https://www.marklynas.org/books/six-degrees/● WMO (World Meteorological Organization) temperature data https://wmo.int/topics/climate● Paris Agreement (2015) — text and NDC framework https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected]📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast👁️ Follow us on X/Twitter: @weplanetint

Is “degrowth” a noble environmental solution — or one of history’s truly terrible ideas? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with Adam Dorr, Director of Research at RethinkX and author of The Degrowth Delusion: Dispelling One of History’s Truly Terrible Ideas.Dorr argues that degrowth — the increasingly popular environmental movement calling for economic contraction — meets every criterion of a “Truly Terrible Idea”: it sounds virtuous, promises the moon, spreads easily, appeals especially to the young, and catastrophically backfires when implemented.Mark and Adam explore why degrowth misunderstands economic growth itself, why material “stuff” is not the same as value, how technological progress consistently decouples prosperity from environmental harm, and why shrinking the global economy could never solve climate change — and would instead cause mass deprivation, collapse, and tyranny.If you’ve ever heard the phrase “you can’t have infinite growth on a finite planet,” this conversation will challenge your assumptions. And it lays the groundwork for next episode’s deep dive into the optimistic, data-driven alternative: a future where humanity and nature both thrive.🧠 Topics Discussed:💡 What makes an idea a “Truly Terrible Idea” (TTI) — and why degrowth qualifies🌍 Why degrowth’s core logic (“too many people consuming too much”) is seductive but false📉 Why “infinite growth on a finite planet” misunderstands value, not stuff🐎 How technological progress (e.g., cars replacing horses, digital replacing film) eliminates old harms🔌 Why degrowth would block the very innovations (solar, EVs, biotech) that solve environmental problems🔥 The “house on fire” analogy: why reducing emissions 50% still leaves the house burning📉 GDP vs wellbeing: is economic growth actually correlated with human development?🌐 Why degrowth is a luxury belief seldom embraced by people who’ve experienced real poverty😡 The role of resentment, pessimism and misanthropy in the appeal of degrowth🏛️ Why degrowth requires authoritarian state control and cannot be implemented democratically🤝 The win–win path: how technology enables prosperity and ecological restoration🔭 Why environmentalism desperately needs a credible, optimistic, tech-enabled vision of the future👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Adam Dorr is the Director of Research at RethinkX, a nonprofit think tank analyzing how new technologies disrupt existing systems. He is the lead author of The Degrowth Delusion, a sweeping critique of degrowth ideology and a roadmap for a technologically enabled, sustainable future. Dorr’s work spans energy, food, transportation, and long-term civilizational pathways.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● The Degrowth Delusion — Adam Dorr ● RethinkX research reports (energy, food, transport disruptions) ● Studies on GDP vs Human Development Index (UNDP) ● The Limits to Growth: Malthus and the Classical Economists ● Steven Pinker — Enlightenment Now ● Literature on zero-sum vs non-zero-sum thinking💬 Quote Highlights:“Truly terrible ideas don’t die out on their own — they must be actively refuted.” — Adam Dorr“It’s not that we need to do less — it’s that we need to do better.” — Adam Dorr“There is no sustainable amount of fire. Reducing emissions by half still leaves your house burning.” — Adam Dorr“Poverty is not virtuous. It is not something to aspire to. To believe otherwise is a failure of compassion.” — Adam Dorr“Technology is the only way we have a rational, data-driven basis for optimism.” — Adam Dorr🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human progress. Learn more at weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected]📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on X/Twitter: @weplanetint

Welcome to season three of Saving The World From BAD IDEASBad Idea #35: ‘THIS is the Future’ Why Forecasts Fail – with David Wallace-WellsIn the season three opener of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with David Wallace-Wells, New York Times columnist and author of The Uninhabitable Earth, to tackle a deceptively simple bad idea: the belief that we can predict the future with confidence.David explains how even sophisticated models can be wildly sensitive to small assumptions, drawing on examples from climate economics and the pandemic era, when many expert forecasts failed to anticipate outcomes even a couple of weeks ahead. The conversation moves from climate targets and energy transitions to the psychology of “normalisation”, the social aftershocks of COVID, and the way politics can swing dramatically with small changes in public mood.The result is a wide-ranging, clear-eyed discussion about uncertainty, risk, and how to stay serious about climate and democracy without pretending the future comes with a reliable timetable.🧠 Topics Discussed: Why long-range climate and economic modelling can hinge on fragile assumptionsWhat COVID forecasting revealed about the limits of near-term predictionHow humility about uncertainty gets weaponised by those who want inactionDavid’s shift since The Uninhabitable Earth: less apocalyptic certainty, more systems thinkingFaster-than-expected clean energy rollout, and the stubborn unknowns around fossil retirement“Normalisation” as a human superpower, and as a moral failure when disasters fade from viewThe post-pandemic social hangover: loss of trust, atomisation, and the politics of public healthVaccine backlash, the contradictions inside “anti-establishment” health coalitions, and what might endureWhy the “world is drifting inexorably right” narrative misses how messy politics really isA cautious look toward 2050: warming, geopolitics, AI hype cycles, and nuclear risk👩‍🏫 Guest Bio:David Wallace-Wells is a journalist, writer, and weekly columnist at The New York Times. He rose to global prominence with his 2017 essay “The Uninhabitable Earth”, later expanded into the bestselling book The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming. His work spans climate change, politics, and the social consequences of crisis, including the COVID-19 pandemic.David Wallace-Wells, The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming (Penguin Random House)David Wallace-Wells, “After Climate Alarmism” (New York Magazine, 2021)Martin L. Weitzman, “Fat-Tailed Uncertainty in the Economics of Catastrophic Climate Change” (Review of Environmental Economics and Policy)💬 Quote Highlights:“Everything we think we know about where we’re heading is bedevilled by epistemic problems.” David Wallace Wells“The future is more manageable than what we feared, though the system is still full of unknowns.” David Wallace Wells“We normalise a lot, and that will govern a lot of our climate future.” David Wallace Wells“Every small shift in the vibes feels permanent, until a few weeks later it doesn’t.” David Wallace Wells“Treating one percent per year as a precise forecast feels abstracted from how decisions actually get made.”David Wallace Wells🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement advancing bold, evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and prosperity. We challenge bad ideas and champion better ones, grounded in human wellbeing and ecological restoration. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the ConversationEmail: [email protected]: weplanet.org/podcastFollow on X: @WePlanetInt

Is nuclear power too slow, too expensive, or too essential to ignore? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with Baroness Bryony Worthington — crossbench peer, climate policy architect, and co-host of the Cleaning Up podcast — to take on Bad Idea #34: “Nuclear? No Thanks.”🧠 Topics Discussed: ● ⚛️ Why nuclear costs haven’t fallen — and why China may change that ● 🇫🇷 What France got right (and wrong) in its Mesmer-era nuclear buildout ● 🇨🇳 China’s nuclear ecosystem: HTRs, molten salts, SMRs, and industrial policy ● 🧱 Why huge gigawatt-scale reactors fail — and when modularity matters ● 🌡️ Heat: the forgotten one-third of global energy that renewables struggle to replace ● 🇺🇸 The growing bipartisan nuclear consensus in the U.S. ● 🔥 Geothermal, CSP, and advanced drilling as zero-carbon heat sources ● 👾 AI and data centres: the quiet driver of surging electricity demand ● 🧪 Thorium, molten salt reactors, and the cult of “better nuclear” ● ♻️ Nuclear waste, fuel recycling, plutonium, and the politics of the NRC ● 🛡️ Risk, radiophobia, and why safety rules became so irrational ● 🌍 Authoritarianism, industrial strategy, and what China’s system gets right (and wrong)👩‍🏫 Guest Bio: Baroness Bryony Worthington is a crossbench member of the UK House of Lords and one of Britain’s most respected climate policy thinkers. She was a lead author of the UK’s Climate Change Act, co-founded the children’s environmental charity Sandbag, and serves as co-host of the global energy podcast Cleaning Up with Michael Liebreich. Bryony currently leads work on clean industrial transitions, including repowering coal infrastructure with zero-carbon heat from nuclear, geothermal, and advanced solar technologies.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources ● Cleaning Up podcast – https://www.cleaningup.live ● BloombergNEF – https://about.bnef.com ● Kairos Power (advanced reactors) – https://kairospower.com ● Oklo (fast microreactors) – https://www.oklo.com ● TerraPower (Natrium reactor) – https://www.terrapower.com ● High-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTR info) – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-temperature_gas-cooled_reactor ● Molten salt reactor background – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-salt_reactor ● Tsinghua University Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology – https://www.inet.tsinghua.edu.cn/ineten/ ● Repower Initiative – https://www.repower.world/ ● Jamie Beard on geothermal – https://www.texasgeo.org ● IAEA on nuclear fuel recycling – https://www.iaea.org/topics/spent-fuel-management  ● Waste Not (WePlanet nuclear fuel recycling report) – https://www.weplanet.org/reports/waste-not ● China’s solar overcapacity & exports – https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy ● Our World in Data: electricity mix – https://ourworldindata.org/electricity-mix 💬 Quote Highlights:“Once you build nuclear, you never regret it — it just quietly produces heat and power for 80 years.” “China has already built almost everything we were going to tell them to try.” “Heat is a third of global energy. Batteries can’t solve that. Nuclear can.” “Radiation is everywhere — from rocks, from the sun, from your partner in bed. We’ve regulated nuclear as if none of this exists.” “I’m not pro-nuclear everywhere. I’m pro-nuclear where it makes the transition faster.” “I’m a pro-humanity environmentalist. Nuclear is part of that story.”🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human well-being. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:Is the food industry slowly killing us? Is processing of food the problem? Do we really need personalized nutrition? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with Professor Sarah Berry — nutritional scientist and Chief Scientist at ZOE — to take on Bad Idea #33: “Ultra Processed Foods are killing us”From the gut microbiome to micronutrients, ultra-processed foods, polyphenols, insulin resistance, fats, carbs, and the myth of the “perfect diet,” Sarah explains why individuals respond so differently to the same foods — and why population-level dietary guidelines often fail to deliver.They dig into the largest personalised nutrition study in the world, break down the science behind metabolic health, explore why the food environment keeps pushing us toward unhealthy choices, and examine how AI, big data, and microbiome analysis could revolutionise how we think about food.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● 🧬 Why one-size-fits-all nutrition fails ● 🍽️ What personalised nutrition actually means (and doesn’t mean) ● 🧪 The PREDICT studies — the world’s largest personalised nutrition programme ● 🦠 Gut microbiome diversity: why it matters ● 🔬 Ultra-processed food: what the science really shows ● 🧁 Why sugar behaves differently in different bodies ● 🧂 Salt, fats, omega-3s, fibre, polyphenols — a practical breakdown ● 🧠 Why “calories in, calories out” isn’t enough ● 🏥 Why metabolic health is declining (and what to do about it) ● 🧘 How sleep, stress, and exercise influence food responses ● 🤖 How AI and microbiome data could shape the future of nutrition👩‍🏫 Guest Bio: Professor Sarah Berry is a nutritional scientist at King’s College London and the Chief Scientist at ZOE, where she leads research on personalised nutrition, metabolic health, and the gut microbiome. She is one of the lead scientists behind the PREDICT studies — the world’s largest programme looking at individual responses to food — and has authored more than 200 peer-reviewed publications. Sarah is a leading communicator on evidence-based nutrition and co-hosts the ZOE Science & Nutrition podcast.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources ● ZOE personalised nutrition programme – https://joinzoe.com ● PREDICT 1 study – https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0934-0 ● Professor Sarah Berry (King’s College London profile) – https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/sarah-berry ● ZOE Science & Nutrition podcast – https://zoe.com/learn/podcast ● Tim Spector’s work on the microbiome – https://www.tim-spector.co.uk ● Ultra-processed foods overview (WHO) – https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2025/06/19/who-ultra-processed-food-guidance/ ● Our World in Data: Diet & Obesity – https://ourworldindata.org/diet-compositions ● Meta-analysis on glycaemic variability & health – https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31220802 ● The Nurses Health Study – https://nurseshealthstudy.org/ ● Gut microbiome science summary (Microbiome Journal) – https://microbiomejournal.biomedcentral.com💬 Quote Highlights:“There is no perfect diet — there is only the best diet for you.” — Sarah Berry “Two people eating the same muffin can have completely opposite metabolic responses.” — Sarah Berry “We’ve been telling people what to eat for decades. It hasn’t worked. We need a new approach.” — Sarah Berry “Ultra-processed doesn’t always mean unhealthy — but most of what’s on shelves today definitely is.” — Sarah Berry “We cannot separate nutrition from sleep, stress, and movement. They’re part of the same system.” — Sarah Berry🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human well-being. Learn more at https://www.weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

Is a world powered by clean energy possible without nuclear power? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with Julia Pyke, Managing Director of Sizewell C, to challenge Bad Idea #32: “We don’t need nuclear.”From financing and grid stability to biodiversity and public opinion, Julia explains why nuclear is essential to reaching net zero — and why the UK’s new fleet of reactors could reduce consumer bills, not raise them. They discuss the economics of megaprojects, how to avoid first-of-a-kind overruns, the role of heat in decarbonisation, small modular reactors, and how the Sizewell C project is reshaping both the local community and the nuclear industry itself.Whether you’re a nuclear skeptic or advocate, this episode offers a rare, detailed look inside one of Europe’s biggest clean-energy projects.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● ⚛️ Bad Idea #32: “We don’t need nuclear” ● 🏗️ Why Hinkley Point C cost overruns won’t repeat at Sizewell C ● 🔧 “7,000 design changes” — and why copying Hinkley avoids them ● ⚡ How nuclear cuts system-wide grid costs ● 💸 The Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model explained simply● 🏭 Why the UK needs firm, low-carbon power alongside renewables ● 🇨🇳 China’s nuclear programme and the myth of “negative learning” ● 🌳 How Sizewell C aims to be nature positive ● 🐦 Engagement with RSPB, Wildlife Trusts & Natural England ● 👩‍🔧 Women in nuclear — and transforming the industry’s diversity ● 🏗️ Local jobs, apprenticeships, and long-term economic benefits ● ♨️ Using nuclear heat for direct air capture and industry ● 🌬️ Is SMR hype overshadowing big reactors? ● 🎶 The Sizewell Choir: wellbeing, culture, and community👩‍🏫 Guest Bio: Julia Pyke is the Managing Director of Sizewell C, the UK’s next large-scale nuclear power station. A former lawyer who helped finance Hinkley Point C, she now leads one of Europe’s biggest clean-energy projects. Julia specialises in nuclear financing, infrastructure delivery, and public communication.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● Electricity Distribution Networks study: government responsehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/electricity-distribution-networks-study-government-response  ● Aurora Energy Research (national system modelling) https://auroraer.com ● UK Government: Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model explainerhttps://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g ● Hinkley Point C project overview https://www.edfenergy.com/energy/nuclear-new-build-projects/hinkley-point-c ● Rolls-Royce SMR Programme https://www.rolls-royce-smr.com/ ● Natural England – Tony Juniper https://naturalengland.blog.gov.uk/about-natural-england/ ● Suffolk Wildlife Trust https://www.suffolkwildlifetrust.org/ ● RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) https://www.rspb.org.uk/ 💬 Quote Highlights:“The thing that stops nuclear being built isn’t engineering — it’s financing.” — Julia Pyke “Counterintuitive as it seems, building Sizewell C reduces consumer bills.” “If we could drop Sizewell C into place without construction impacts, there’d be almost no opposition.” “Nuclear isn’t in conflict with renewables. It makes them cheaper.” “If nuclear had been built out as planned in the 1980s, we wouldn’t have global warming.” “We need nuclear that looks like the society it serves — not just white men.” “Big infrastructure can be nature positive.”🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global science and citizen movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature and human flourishing. Learn more: https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

Is China secretly saving the world from climate catastrophe? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas is joined by Lauri Myllyvirta, Lead Analyst and Co-Founder of the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), to examine Bad Idea #31: “Climate crisis? It’s China that’s the problem!”As one of the world’s most trusted analysts on China’s energy system, Lauri explains why this narrative is outdated — and how China’s clean-energy boom has become the most important climate story on the planet.They dig into China’s extraordinary expansion of solar, wind, batteries, EVs and long-distance transmission lines; the politics behind continued coal-plant construction; the country’s dramatic air-pollution turnaround; and the global consequences if China’s emissions really have peaked.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● 🔥 The “bad idea”: China will always burn more coal ● 📉 Why China’s CO₂ emissions have been stable or declining for 18 months ● ☀️ The solar boom: 100 solar panels installed per second ● ⚡ China’s new clean electricity each year = powering the UK twice ● 🏭 Why coal plants are still being built — and why many may sit idle ● 🪫 Battery deployment hitting 100 GW, transforming grid flexibility ● 🚗 EVs: 50% of new car sales and eating into China’s oil demand ● 🛻 The rise of electric heavy trucks and buses ● 🌬️ Wind, solar and nuclear in China’s power mix ● 🌁 China’s dramatic air-quality turnaround — and the global warming side-effects ● 🌎 Why China’s decarbonisation is now shaping global energy trends ● 🐉 Geopolitics: US decline, China’s clean-tech dominance ● 📊 Data transparency in China and how Lauri tracks the numbers ● 🔋 Solar + batteries as the cheapest power in world history👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Lauri Myllyvirta is the Lead Analyst and Co-Founder of the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA). A globally respected expert on China’s energy system, he publishes widely in international media and frequently contributes analysis to Carbon Brief. Lauri previously worked with Greenpeace and has over a decade of experience tracking air-pollution, fossil-fuel and clean-energy trends across Asia. More about Lauri’s work: ● CREA – https://energyandcleanair.org/ ● Lauri on Carbon Brief – https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-co2-emissions-have-now-been-flat-or-falling-for-18-months/ 📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● CREA – China emissions & energy analysis – https://energyandcleanair.org/ ● Lauri’s latest China emissions report – https://www.energyconnects.com/news/renewables/2025/november/china-s-september-emissions-drop-keeps-annual-decline-in-play/ ● Carbon Brief: China energy & climate coverage – https://www.carbonbrief.org/category/china/ ● Bloomberg: China’s clean-energy boom – https://www.bloomberg.com/green ● IEA World Energy Outlook – https://www.iea.org/weo ● China solar deployment data (NEA) – http://www.nea.gov.cn/ ● China EV market overview (CPCA) – https://www.cpcaauto.com/ 💬 Quote Highlights:“China’s clean-energy boom is the biggest climate story in the world right now.” — Lauri Myllyvirta “Solar additions this year alone can power the entire UK — twice.” “Electric cars in China are already cutting into oil demand.” “China has the ability to peak emissions now — the question is political, not technical.” “Air pollution improved faster in China than anyone predicted — and it shows what fast action looks like.” “China didn’t just decarbonise itself — it made clean energy cheap for the whole world.”🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/weplanetint 

Could democracy really die in America? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas speaks with Susan Stokes, Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and Director of the Chicago Center on Democracy, to challenge Bad Idea #30: “It can’t happen here.”Drawing on her acclaimed book The Backsliders: Why Leaders Undermine Their Own Democracies, Stokes reveals the playbook that elected leaders use to quietly erode democracy from within — the same tactics that have turned Hungary, Turkey, and Venezuela into hybrid autocracies. She and Mark discuss the United States’ alarming slide under Trump’s second term, the global rise of “backsliders,” and why inequality may be the hidden fuel of modern authoritarianism.This conversation exposes the real risks facing democratic societies — and what can still be done to save them.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● ⚖️ The Bad Idea: “It can’t happen here” — and why it already is ● 🧱 The authoritarian playbook: courts, press, civil society, universities, and elections ● 🌀 “Firehose authoritarianism” — how chaos itself becomes a political tool ● 📉 Project 2025 and the new blueprint for executive overreach ● 🧮 How Bright Line Watch measures democratic decline ● 💰 The root cause: why inequality erodes democratic resilience ● 🌍 Why backsliding happens in both rich and poor countries ● 🧠 Right-wing ethno-nationalism vs. left populism — different faces, same logic ● 🎓 Why the educated elite have lost touch with working-class voters ● 🗳️ What Sweden and Brazil can teach us about democratic survival ● 🔮 Can the U.S. still hold a free election — or is this democracy’s last chapter?👩‍🏫 Guest Bio: Susan Stokes is the Tiffany and Margaret Blake Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, where she directs the Chicago Center on Democracy. Her work focuses on democratic accountability, political participation, and comparative politics.She is the author of The Backsliders: Why Leaders Undermine Their Own Democracies (Princeton University Press, 2024), which explains how elected leaders across the world — from the U.S. to Hungary to India — erode democracy from within. Stokes also co-founded Bright Line Watch, a project monitoring the health of American democracy through expert and public surveys.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● The Backsliders: Why Leaders Undermine Their Own Democracies – Susan C. Stokes ● Bright Line Watch – Ongoing surveys tracking the state of U.S. democracy ● Chicago Center on Democracy – University of Chicago research initiative ● The Precipice – Toby Ord ● Freedom House: Nations in Transit – Annual global democracy report ● V-Dem Institute – Democracy indices and data ● Project 2025 – The conservative blueprint shaping U.S. governance💬 Quote Highlights:“We live in a country where the government acts like an autocracy — and the people still act like it’s a democracy.” — Susan Stokes “Autocracy doesn’t arrive with a coup. It arrives through the ballot box.” “Income inequality is democracy’s most powerful poison.” “The courts, the press, the universities — they’re always the first targets.” “Democracy dies not with a bang, but with a thousand executive orders.” “If you invest in reducing inequality, you’re investing in democratic survival.”🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

Is net zero possible — and what’s really holding us back? In this second part of his conversation with Mark Lynas, clean energy expert Michael Liebreich dives deep into the technologies, policies, and economics of the energy transition. Together they explore Bad Idea #29: “The Green transition is failing.”Liebreich, founder of Bloomberg New Energy Finance and host of the Cleaning Up podcast, challenges magical thinking in climate policy and explains why achieving net zero demands realism, not slogans. From grid build-out and nuclear revival to hydrogen hype and global energy justice, this episode tackles the messy, pragmatic side of decarbonisation — and why optimism grounded in physics, finance, and fairness is our best bet for a sustainable future.🧠 Topics Discussed:● ⚡ The myth of an easy energy transition ● 🌍 Global energy inequality and why the Global South matters ● ☢️ The comeback of nuclear and the politics of fear ● 🔋 The limits of batteries and why grids need diversity ● 🌬️ Wind, solar, and the real bottlenecks of scaling clean power ● 🛢️ Fossil fuel phase-out: economics vs. ideology ● 🧮 The physics of net zero and why “energy realism” matters ● 💰 How finance, markets, and policy must align for decarbonisation ● 🚀 Why clean energy innovation — not austerity — is the path forward👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Michael Liebreich is the founder of Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), a leading provider of strategic research on the energy transition, and host of the influential podcast Cleaning Up. A former Olympic skier, investor, and advisor to the UK government on clean growth, Liebreich is known for his pragmatic, data-driven approach to climate and energy issues. Follow him on X/Twitter: @MLiebreich📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:● Bloomberg New Energy Finance – Market intelligence on the global energy transition ● Cleaning Up Podcast – Conversations with leaders in clean energy and climate policy ● The Liebreich Lecture (London Climate Week) – Annual keynote on energy and sustainability ● Mission Innovation – International initiative to accelerate clean energy innovation ● International Energy Agency (IEA) Net Zero Roadmap – Data and analysis on pathways to global net zero ● WePlanet – Global citizen movement advocating evidence-based solutions for climate and development💬 Quote Highlights:“Physics doesn’t negotiate. You can’t get to net zero by passing a law — you have to build stuff.” — Michael Liebreich“The energy transition is happening, but it’s not happening fast enough — and not fairly enough.” — Michael Liebreich“We need to be hard-headed about technology, but soft-hearted about people.” — Michael Liebreich🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on X/Twitter: @weplanetint

Are sharks really the monsters we’ve been taught to fear — or the ocean’s misunderstood guardians? In this episode, Mark Lynas sits down with Arzucan “Zuzu” Askin, National Geographic Explorer, conservation scientist, and co-founder of Miyaru NGO, to take on Bad Idea #28: “Jaws - aka sharks are scary”From diving daily with tiger sharks in the Maldives to pioneering the world’s first free-swimming shark ultrasounds, Zuzu shares what it’s really like to live and work among these ancient predators — and why our fear of them is one of conservation’s biggest barriers. 🧠 Topics Discussed: ● 🦈 The myth of the “man-eater”: why sharks aren’t scary, they’re essential ● 🎬 Jaws and how a single movie reshaped global shark perceptions ●🏝️ How the Maldives became the “Galápagos of the Indian Ocean” for sharks ● 🌊 The 2010 Maldives shark sanctuary — and how it saved populations ● 🤰 “Mama Shark”: the world’s first free-swimming ultrasound scans of tiger sharks ● 👩‍🔬 Shark pregnancies and live births — motherhood in the deep ● ⚖️ The fight to stop the return of shark fishing in the Maldives ● 🧴 Hidden sharks: in cosmetics, pet food, and even vaccines● 🧠 How sharks inspire biomedical and design innovation● 🐋 Collaborating with Dr. Sylvia Earle and Tongan scientists on whale research ● 🧩 What individuals can do to protect sharks — from banning fins to consumer choices👩‍🏫 Guest Bio: Arzucan “Zuzu” Askin is a conservation scientist, diver, and National Geographic Explorer based in the Maldives. She co-founded Miyaru NGO, the country’s first national-level shark conservation organisation, dedicated to protecting predatory shark species through research, education, and community engagement. Zuzu led the groundbreaking “Mama Shark” project, conducting the world’s first free-swimming ultrasounds on tiger sharks to study reproduction. She has worked with National Geographic, the Maldives Ocean Alliance, and partnered with researchers like Dr. Sylvia Earle to advance ocean science and storytelling.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● 🌐 Miyaru NGO – https://miyaru.org/ ● 📄 Ultrasound Scanning of Free-Swimming Tiger Sharks – Frontiers in Marine Science (2023) – https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2024.1500176/full ● 🐋 Mission Blue – https://missionblue.org/ ● 🧬 Blue Marine Foundation – https://www.bluemarinefoundation.com/ ● 🌊 Maldives Resilient Reefs – https://maldivesresilientreefs.com/ ● ✍️ Petition to Save the Maldives Shark Sanctuary – https://only.one/act/maldives-sharks ● 🎥 Jaws (1975) – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaws_(film) ● 🧴 Hidden Shark Ingredients – https://sharkallies.com/blogs/shark-allies-news/squalene ● 🧠 Sylvia Earle – https://missionblue.org/team/dr-sylvia-earle/ ● 🐳 Humpback Whale Research Project (Tonga) – https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237530779_Humpback_Whales_in_Tonga_An_Economic_Resource_for_Tourism 💬 Quote Highlights:“A lion would never let you do what a tiger shark lets you do underwater.” — Arzucan “Zuzu” Askin “When you show a shark as a mother, not a monster, people see them differently.” “Sharks are older than trees — and we’ve managed to wipe out most of them in a century.” “Europe is still one of the biggest exporters of shark fins and meat. That has to stop.” “If you’ve used sunscreen, cosmetics, or pet food today, you might have already used shark.” “An ultrasound image of a pregnant tiger shark — that’s conservation storytelling at its best.”🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation: 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

Can thinking about the end of the world make us better people? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with philosopher and existential risk researcher Dr SJ Beard to unpack Bad Idea #27: “There’s no hope for humanity’”Drawing on their new book Existential Hope (Polity), SJ argues that we need to look beyond fear and fatalism to build a future worth surviving for. They explore how the same forces driving environmental destruction, inequality, and technological danger also threaten humanity’s long-term survival — and how rediscovering our shared humanity could be the key to building resilience and hope in an age of crisis.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● 🌍 Why the same systems that harm people and planet now endanger our collective future ● 🧠 What “existential risk” really means — and why it’s about justice as much as survival ● 🏭 How extractive capitalism links everyday harm to global catastrophe ● 🤖 AI, technology, and the ethics of progress ● 💣 The limits of doom thinking and why apocalypse narratives can paralyse us ● 💡 The concept of existential hope — a practical philosophy for long-term survival ● ✊ Building solidarity, moral courage, and collective action as the real foundations of safety ● 🌱 Why saving humanity starts with saving our humanity👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Dr SJ Beard is a philosopher and senior research associate at the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) at the University of Cambridge. Their research explores the ethics of global catastrophic and existential risks — from AI and climate change to inequality and social justice. SJ’s new book, Existential Hope (Polity, 2024), argues that the same human capacities that create danger also give us the tools to survive and flourish. They are known for bringing humanity, empathy, and philosophical depth to one of the most urgent topics of our time.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● Existential Hope – https://www.sjbeard.com/existential-hope.html ● Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER), University of Cambridge – https://www.cser.ac.uk/ ● CSER Podcast: Existential Hope and Risk – https://www.cser.ac.uk/work/24-october-2025-conversations-on-existential-hope/ ● The Precipice by Toby Ord – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Precipice:_Existential_Risk_and_the_Future_of_Humanity ● Our Final Hour by Martin Rees – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Final_Hour ● Climate Endgame (PNAS, 2022) – https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2108146119 ● Effective Altruism Forum: Existential Hope and Moral Progress – https://forum.effectivealtruism.org 💬 Quote Highlights:“If we want to save humanity, we need to start by saving our humanity.” — SJ Beard “The same extractive systems that harm people and planet now are the ones that endanger our future as a species.” “Existential hope isn’t utopian — it’s pragmatic. It’s about building the moral and collective capacity to survive.” “Thinking about extinction isn’t just about avoiding the end; it’s about imagining a future worth existing in.”🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

Can we inoculate society against misinformation? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with Professor Sander Vanderlinden — social psychologist at the University of Cambridge and author of Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects Our Minds and How to Build Immunity — to take on Bad Idea #26: “Misinformation is just people being wrong on the internet.” They explore how false and misleading information spreads, why even credible institutions sometimes get things wrong, and what we can do to build mental immunity. From fake news to populism, pandemics to AI, this conversation dives deep into the psychology, politics, and future of truth itself.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● 🧩 What counts as “misinformation” — and why intent matters ● 🧠 How our brains are wired to believe and share bad information ● 🧾 The difference between misinformation and disinformation ● 🌡️ COVID-19, lab leaks, and how science self-corrects ● 📺 The weaponization of “fake news” and authoritarian censorship ● 🧍‍♀️ Why polarization and inequality make us more vulnerable to lies ● 📱 How social media algorithms reward outrage and extremism ● 🤖 AI, deepfakes, and the next frontier of disinformation ● 💡 Prebunking and “psychological inoculation” — how to fight back ● 🧘 The power of intellectual humility and open-minded thinking👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Professor Sander Vanderlinden is Professor of Social Psychology in Society at the University of Cambridge and Director of the Cambridge Social Decision-Making Lab. His research explores the psychology of misinformation, polarization, and belief formation. He authored the bestselling book Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects Our Minds and How to Build Immunity (2023) and co-authored The Psychology of Misinformation (2024). His work has been featured by the WHO, the UN, and major media worldwide.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects Our Minds and How to Build Immunity – https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/708295/foolproof-by-sander-van-der-linden/ ● The Psychology of Misinformation – https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/psychology-of-misinformation/2FF48C2E201E138959A7CF0D01F22D84 ● Cambridge Social Decision-Making Lab – https://www.sdmlab.psychol.cam.ac.uk/ ● Inoculation Science Project – https://inoculation.science ● Bad News Game –https://www.sdmlab.psychol.cam.ac.uk/research/bad-news-game ● Go Viral! Game (WHO x Cambridge) – https://www.who.int/news/item/23-09-2021-what-is-go-viral ● Cranky Uncle Game (by John Cook) – https://crankyuncle.com/game/ ● “Climate Endgame” (PNAS, 2022) – https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2108146119 ● European Digital Services Act – https://prighter.com/digital-governance/eu-dsa/  ● UK Online Safety Act – https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer 💬 Quote Highlights:“Misinformation isn’t just about being wrong — it’s about being misled.” — Sander Vanderlinden “Science can make mistakes, but it self-corrects. Disinformation never does.” “Populism feeds off distrust. Once institutions lose credibility, facts don’t matter anymore.” “We’ve known for thousands of years what misleading rhetoric looks like — Aristotle warned us about it.” “You can’t fact-check your way out of this crisis. We need to inoculate minds, not just correct them.”🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation: Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] Subscribe to new episodes:https://weplanet.org/podcast Follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:Is “climate catastrophism” itself a bad idea? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas is joined by longtime collaborator and eco-modernist thinker Ted Nordhaus, Executive Director of the Breakthrough Institute. Together they take on Bad Idea #21: “We must be climate catastrophists to motivate action.”Nordhaus — co-author of An Ecomodernist Manifesto — argues that apocalyptic climate narratives have backfired, fuelling political backlash and distracting from the real work of pragmatic, technology-driven decarbonisation. The pair explore what the science actually says about climate risk, why catastrophe is not inevitable, and how prosperity and resilience can coexist with climate action. It’s a provocative conversation about fear, facts, and the future — one that challenges both denialism and doomerism.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● 🌡️ What “climate catastrophism” means — and why Ted rejects it ● 📉 Why global emissions are likely to peak soon, and warming is unlikely to exceed 3°C ● 👥 How adaptation, technology, and prosperity have reduced climate vulnerability ● 🌪️ Why deaths from natural disasters are at record lows despite global warming ● 🧭 The limits of single-event attribution studies and the “50x more likely” fallacy ● 🌍 Collapse myths: why population, growth, and decarbonisation trends matter ● 🌳 The Amazon, coral reefs, and what biodiversity loss really means for humans ● 💣 Nuclear war, not climate change, as the real existential threat ● ⚙️ Why geoengineering could cause catastrophe if misused or terminated suddenly ● 🗳️ How climate catastrophism alienated working-class voters and fed political backlash ● ⚛️ Why nuclear and geothermal may be the unsung heroes of decarbonisation👨‍🏫 Guest Bio: Ted Nordhaus is the founder and Executive Director of the Breakthrough Institute, a California-based eco-modernist think tank pioneering pragmatic approaches to climate and energy. He co-authored An Ecomodernist Manifesto (2015) and The Death of Environmentalism (2004), which helped reshape modern environmental thinking. His work focuses on technological innovation, energy systems, and the political economy of decarbonisation.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● Why I’m No Longer a Climate Catastrophist – Ted Nordhaus (2024) ● An Ecomodernist Manifesto – Ted Nordhaus, Mark Lynas et al. ● The Death of Environmentalism – Ted Nordhaus & Michael Shellenberger ● Climate Endgame – Kemp et al. (PNAS, 2022) ● The Fate of Rome – Kyle Harper ● The Precipice – Toby Ord ● Breakthrough Institute – Official Website ● Mark Lynas & Ted Nordhaus in The Wall Street Journal – “Climate Change Isn’t the End of the World” ● The Cleaning Up Podcast – hosted by Michael Liebreich (related episode)💬 Quote Highlights“We don’t need to believe it’s the end of the world to act on climate — we just need to be pragmatic.” — Ted Nordhaus “The world is getting richer, safer, and more resilient — not more fragile.” “If you care about climate risk, don’t bet on apocalypse. Bet on human ingenuity.” “Geoengineering could turn climate change into a real catastrophe — if we start and then stop.” “The clean energy transition won’t be won by fear. It’ll be won by technology, prosperity, and persistence.”🌐 About WePlanet WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:Is green hydrogen the silver bullet for decarbonisation — or a trillion-dollar distraction? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas is joined by energy analyst, investor, and podcaster Michael Liebreich to unpack Bad Idea #24: “We’ll just use Hydrogen!” Liebreich, founder of Bloomberg New Energy Finance and co-host of the Cleaning Up podcast, makes the provocative case that green hydrogen is over-hyped, fundamentally flawed as a fuel, and destined to remain a niche solution rather than the backbone of a “hydrogen economy.” Together they explore the physics, economics, and politics of hydrogen — why hype keeps returning in 20-year cycles, what role hydrogen can play in industry and fertilisers, and why pragmatism, not techno-fantasy, must drive climate strategy.🧠 Topics Discussed: ● 💧 Why hydrogen is a “really crappy fuel” — and the laws of thermodynamics make it costly ● 📉 The difference between green, blue, grey, turquoise, and pink hydrogen ● 🏭 Current global hydrogen use: 100m tonnes/year, and why 0.1% is green ● 🚢 Why shipping liquid hydrogen is nearly impossible (density, leakage, energy loss) ● 💸 Hydrogen’s “missing trillions”: the cost gap with grey hydrogen ● 🛩️ Europe’s RED III mandate and the looming cost inflation in aviation fuels ● 🚛 Why trucks, steel, and shipping are unlikely to go hydrogen ● 🔋 The rise of electric trucks, batteries, and the hydrogen ladder framework ● ⚖️ Pragmatism vs. hype: why chasing bad ideas risks a climate backlash ● 🐢 The “Pragmatic Climate Reset”: think like a tortoise, not a hare👨‍🏫 Guest Bio: Michael Liebreich is founder of Bloomberg New Energy Finance, managing partner of EcoPragma Capital, and CEO of Liebreich Associates. A former Olympic skier, he is now one of the world’s leading clean-energy analysts. He is also co-host of the podcast Cleaning Up. His influential “Hydrogen Ladder” has shaped debate about where hydrogen makes sense — and where it doesn’t. Michael also writes extensively at Liebreich Associates Essays.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: ● Michael Liebreich – The Hydrogen Ladder ● Michael Liebreich – The Missing Trillions of Hydrogen ● Michael Liebreich – The Pragmatic Climate Reset (Part I & II) ● Hydrogen Economy – Jeremy Rifkin (2002) ● The Future of Hydrogen – IEA report (2019) ● TNO study on hydrogen costs – https://www.tno.nl/en/newsroom/2022/03/green-hydrogen-production-costs/ ● European RED III Directive – https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/renewable-energy/renewable-energy-directive-targets-and-rules_en● Porsche synthetic fuels project, Chile – https://newsroom.porsche.com/en/2022/company/porsche-chile-haru-oni-efuels-pilot-plant-26823.html💬 Quote Highlights:“Hydrogen is the Swiss Army knife of energy — there’s almost always something cheaper, safer, and more convenient.” — Michael Liebreich “If you care about the climate, the cleanest kilo of hydrogen is the one you never make.” — Michael Liebreich “For every $1/kg cost gap, hydrogen needs $100 billion per year in subsidies. That’s the missing trillions.” — Michael Liebreich“Politicians love hydrogen because it’s a get-out-of-jail-free card. But hype doesn’t change physics.” — Michael Liebreich “Think like a tortoise, not like a hare: go steady, pragmatic, and win the race.” — Michael Liebreich🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary Is civilisation inherently self-destructive? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas is joined by political scientist and existential risk researcher Dr Luke Kemp to tackle Bad Idea #23 "These are the best of times"Luke unpacks what history really tells us about the fate of past societies — and how those lessons do (and don’t) apply to today’s global risks like climate change, nuclear war, and AI. They explore the role of complexity, fragility, and inequality in collapse, and why we need to reject fatalism to build resilience and renewal instead.From ancient Rome to modern techno-capitalism, this episode explores whether doom is destiny — or a bad idea we need to outgrow.🧠 Topics Discussed ● 📜 What “collapse” actually means, and why it’s more often transformation ● 🏛️ Why Rome never really “fell” — and neither did most civilisations ● 🌍 Global risks vs. local collapses: what makes our world different ● 🔁 The role of feedback loops, fragility, and complexity ● 🌡️ Why climate change is a multiplier of collapse, not the root cause ● 💣 Nuclear war, AI, and engineered pathogens as existential risks ● 🤖 Why AI doom scenarios may be overhyped (and misdirected) ● 🧠 “Collapsology,” survivalism, and the new secular eschatologies ● 🌱 What real resilience looks like: democracy, equity, adaptability ● 🧘‍♀️ Why pessimism is lazy — and optimism is an active choice👨‍🏫 Guest BioDr Luke Kemp is a political scientist and risk researcher at the University of Adelaide and the University of Cambridge's Centre for the Study of Existential Risk. He co-led the influential 2022 paper Climate Endgame and has written widely on societal collapse, risk cascades, and global futures. A former adviser to the Australian government, Luke specialises in the intersection of history, complexity science, and future risk. His current work focuses on resilience and renewal in the face of polycrisis.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources ● 📝 Climate Endgame (2022 paper) – https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2204269119 ● 🌐 Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) – https://www.cser.ac.uk ● 🧠 Luke Kemp research profile – https://researcher.sydney.edu.au/researcher/51183 ● 📖 Jared Diamond – Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse:_How_Societies_Choose_to_Fail_or_Succeed ● 📖 Joseph Tainter – The Collapse of Complex Societies – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Collapse_of_Complex_Societies ● 📖 Kyle Harper – The Fate of Rome – https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691192062/the-fate-of-rome ● 📘 Our Final Hour – Martin Rees – https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/martin-rees/our-final-hour/9780465068630/ ● 📗 The Precipice – Toby Ord – https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/toby-ord/the-precipice/9780316484911/ ● 🎧 Collapse: The End of Everything (podcast series) – https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/brand/m001qbpr 💬 Quote Highlights“Collapse is rarely the end — it’s usually the start of something new.” — Luke Kemp “Rome didn’t fall — it transformed over centuries. That’s not a Hollywood ending, but it’s a real one.” “Climate change is a risk multiplier, not the root cause of collapse. The real danger is fragility and inequality.” “We need to stop treating resilience like a buzzword. It’s a system of systems — democratic, equitable, adaptive.” “The biggest myth is that doom is destiny. It’s not. We have choices.”🌐 About WePlanet WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at https://weplanet.org📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: https://www.weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary Can the sun save civilization? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with legendary climate author and activist Bill McKibben to take on Bad Idea #22: "Solar can’t power the world." McKibben, co-founder of 350.org and Third Act, makes a powerful case for solar as our best hope to avert climate catastrophe — and explains why a rapid, global energy transformation is not only possible, but already underway. They dive into the economics of solar, the moral urgency of ditching fossil fuels, the false promise of geoengineering, and why the shift to sun and wind can unlock a fairer, more democratic world. Bill’s new book Here Comes the Sun offers both realism and hope — and in this episode, he brings that rare combination to life.🧠 Topics Discussed ☀️ Why solar energy is the most transformative and hopeful technology of our time 📉 Why fossil fuel addiction is a moral and structural tragedy — not just an economic one 🏭 The deep political resistance to renewables, especially in the U.S. 🚩China's solar supremacy and its global influence via trade networks 🐝 Agrivoltaics: how solar panels can improve yields, pollination, and biodiversity 📦 Rooftop solar, virtual power plants, and why permitting matters 💰 Why oil companies hate renewables: no repeat customers 🧠 What activism must focus on now that clean energy is cheaper than fossil 🌍 The moral and technological failure of solar geoengineering 🙏 Climate, faith, and the spiritual case for solar 🎉 “Sun day”: a nationwide celebration and call to action for clean energy in the U.S.👨‍🏫 Guest Bio Bill McKibben is an author, environmentalist, and founder of 350.org and Third Act. He wrote the first popular book on climate change (The End of Nature, 1989) and has spent decades on the front lines of climate activism. His newest book, Here Comes the Sun: The Last Chance for the Climate and a Fresh Chance for Civilization, blends urgent science with hope — and charts a path toward a solar-powered future. Bill teaches at Middlebury College and has been described as “America’s leading environmentalist.”📚 Recommended Reading & Resources Here Comes the Sun – Bill McKibben The End of Nature – Bill McKibben Sunday.Earth – Join Bill’s solar celebration movement 350.org – Global climate movement Third Act – Organizing older Americans for climate action Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports IEA Reports on China’s solar exports and BYD’s global EV expansion 💬 Quote Highlights“We live on a planet where the cheapest way to make energy is to point a sheet of glass at the sun.” “Every wild natural place will be transformed by climate. The only way to save them is to power our world differently.” “Fossil fuels are expensive — in dollars, in lives, in politics. Solar is beautiful, cheap, and fair.” “You don’t have to be a sophisticated theologian to know: love your neighbour, and don’t drown them with emissions.” “Activism must now focus on speed — how fast can we make this transformation happen?”🌐 About WePlanet WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary Is it too late to stop climate change — or do we still have reasons for hope? In this episode, Mark Lynas talks with data scientist and author Hannah Ritchie, Deputy Editor of Our World in Data and author of Clearing the Air: The hopeful guide to solving climate change in 50 questions.Hannah tackles some of the biggest climate myths head-on: that we’re doomed to runaway warming, that renewables can never power the world, and that going plant-based won’t make a difference. With data-driven clarity, she explains why the transition to clean energy is moving faster than people think, how “ultra-processed” doesn’t always mean unhealthy, and why there are no deal-breakers in the fight against climate change.This conversation is both realistic and optimistic — a must-listen for anyone looking for evidence that solutions are within reach.🧠 Topics Discussed 🌍 Why we are not locked into 5–6°C of warming ⚡ The clean energy transition and the speed of solar & wind growth 🔋 How to solve renewables’ variability with storage, nuclear, and grids 🌱 Land use myths: why renewables won’t “cover the landscape” 🚗 Electric vehicles: efficiency gains and outdated myths 🥩 Meat substitutes, ultra-processed foods, and what the data actually shows 🏗 Cement, steel, and other “hard to abate” sectors ✈ Aviation’s future: biofuels, hydrogen, or carbon removal? 🌞 Solar geoengineering — risky gamble or necessary backup plan? 🌟 Why Hannah calls her book “a hopeful guide”👩‍🏫 Guest Bio Hannah Ritchie is Deputy Editor at Our World in Data and author of the Substack Sustainability by Numbers. Her new book Clearing the Air tackles 50 of the most common myths and half-truths about climate change with a data-driven approach. Hannah is known for making complex climate data accessible and empowering.📚 Recommended Reading & Referenced resourcesClearing the Air — Hannah RitchieNot the end of the World  — Hannah RitchieOur World in Data – Climate Change CollectionSustainability by Numbers Substack  — Hannah RitchieIPCC AR6 – Working Group III (Mitigation of Climate Change)Six Degrees, our final warning — Mark LynasSustainable Energy – Without the Hot Air — David MacKay💬 Quote Highlights“We are not headed for five or six degrees of warming. Every fraction of a degree we avoid reduces risk.” — Hannah Ritchie“Solar and wind are growing faster than any energy source in history. This transition can be much quicker than people think.” — Hannah Ritchie“Yes, the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow — but that’s a solvable problem.” — Hannah Ritchie“The idea that renewables will cover the landscape is just wrong. Powering a country with solar takes only a few percentage points of land.” — Hannah Ritchie"There are no deal-breakers. None of the questions I tackle suggest this is impossible — all are solvable.” — Hannah Ritchie🌐 About WePlanet WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📬 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 🐦 Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

We’re back. Season 2 of Saving the World from Bad Ideas is coming — and it’s bigger, bolder, and maybe even more controversial. This time once more , we’re joined by some of the sharpest minds on the planet.🌍 Bill McKibben on activism, power, and what we’ve learned from 30 years of climate campaigning. 🧠 Hannah Ritchie returns to dismantle more doomer myths with data. 🔥 Luke Kemp on civilisational risk and collapse. ⚡ Michael Liebreich on energy transitions without fantasy thinking. 💥 Ted Nordhaus on why he's no longer a 'climate catastrophist', degrowth, and the real way forward.If you're tired of bad ideas blocking good solutions — this season is for you. Subscribe now and be ready. 

In this special season finale of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, host Mark Lynas flips the script by inviting producer Rob on mic for the first time. Together, they look back on an exhilarating first season — what worked, what surprised them, what they learned, and where the podcast might go next.From nuclear debates and rewilding wolves to Just Stop Cooking and geoengineering taboos, Mark and Rob unpack the biggest ideas (and the most controversial guests). They also explore a meta bad idea: the notion that “bad ideas = bad people”, and why it’s crucial to challenge ideas without descending into tribalism or cancel culture.Expect behind-the-scenes stories, reflections on feedback, philosophical rabbit holes, and a few laugh-out-loud moments. Plus: what’s coming in Season Two — AI, decarbonising flying, oceans, and existential risks.🧠 Topics Discussed ● 🤝 Meta Bad Idea: Why “bad ideas ≠ bad people” (or not!)● 🎙️ Favourite guests & episodes: George Monbiot, Hannah Ritchie,, Luigi Boitani, and more ● ⚛️ Nuclear myths, green tribalism & the rise of a global pro-nuclear movement ● 🌍 Climate justice & cooking with charcoal — insights from Uganda ● 🐺 Wolves, rewilding, and de-romanticising nature ● 💥 Nuclear winter, biofuels, and the politics of bad ideas ● 🌡️ Planetary boundaries vs. ecomodernist optimism ● ✈️ Future topics: AI, sustainable aviation, oceans & rethinking activism ● 🧪 Why progress means embracing technology and complexity ● 📚 Blurbs, books, and podcast crossovers: Pinker, Grunwald, Richie, Robock & more👩‍🏫 Featured Guests (Season Highlights)Hannah Ritchie  – urgent optimismGeorge Monbiot – rewilding, food justice, and political powerSteven Pinker – enlightenment, science, and progressLuigi Boitani – wolves, coexistence, and ecological realismMike Grunwald – land-sparing and the biofuels disasterOliver Morton & Cynthia Scharf – talking about geoengineering (yes, talking!)Rebecca Wrigley – wildness without nostalgiaPatricia Nanteza – cooking fuel justice in AfricaAlan Robock – nuclear winter is real (and terrifying)Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow & Tea Törmänen – the global pro nuclear movement and how Finnish Greens embraced nuclear📚 Recommended Listening & Reading● The God Species – Mark Lynas● The Good Fight – podcast by Yascha Mounk● The Decouple Podcast – deep dives on nuclear and energy● Cleaning Up – with Michael Liebreich & Bryony Worthington● Clearing the air– upcoming book by Hannah Ritchie💬 Quote Highlights“Bad ideas don’t make bad people. We have to debate the idea, play around with thel as our toys instead of cancelling people. ” — Rob“There’s no simple slogan that can replace complexity. But there is humour.” — Rob“If you want to kill billions of people, you need a nuclear winter, not global warming.” — Mark“As an ecomodernist I would say, AI is a tool, and it can be used in good ways and bad ways...” — Rob🌐 About WePlanetWePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation💬 Feedback or guest suggestions? Email: [email protected]📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint🎧 Binge Season One wherever you get your podcasts. Season Two launches September 2025.

🔍 Episode SummaryCan Greens support nuclear power? Finnish environmentalist and WePlaneteer Tea Törmänen joins Mark Lynas to dismantle Bad Idea #19: “greens are anti-science.” With clarity, courage, and a wealth of lived experience, Tea shares her journey from feeling like an outcast in the environmental movement to helping make the Finnish Green Party officially pro-nuclear.Drawing from decades of activism, Tea explains how anti-nuclear sentiment became part of the environmentalist identity — and how that is now changing. She unpacks the myths around waste, safety, cost, and tribal loyalties, and shows how climate goals demand pragmatic, science-based solutions — including nuclear energy.From wolves to fast reactors, American football to European energy policy, this episode explores what it takes to change minds and movements — and why it’s time for Greens everywhere to evolve.🧠 Topics Discussed ● 🌱 How anti-nuclear views became “baked into” green identity ● 🧠 Tribalism, virtue, and the psychology behind environmental dogmas ● 🚧 Why Greens often oppose solutions more than problems ● 🗳️ How the Finnish Green Party became officially pro-nuclear ● ⚛️ Myths about nuclear waste and how Finland solved it ● ☢️ Radiation vs risk: what safety really looks like ● 🔁 Nuclear fuel recycling and “the waste of waste” ● 🧊 Why SMRs could decarbonize district heating ● 🌍 Building a global pro-nuclear environmental movement ● 🧬 From gene tech to clean heat — embracing science in climate action ● 💚 Finding your tribe when you don’t fit into one box👩‍🏫 Guest Bio Tea Törmänen is a Finnish environmentalist, science advocate, and movement builder. She’s a former chair of WePlanet Finland and played a key role in shifting the Finnish Green Party toward a pro-nuclear and pro-GMO stance. With a background in animal cognition research and a fierce commitment to evidence-based activism, Tea combines a passion for nature with a pragmatic embrace of clean technologies. She’s also a former a Finnish national team American football player and a wolf behaviour researcher.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources ● WePlanet.org ● Prescription for the Planet – Tom Blees ● Not Beyond Redemption – Tea’s upcoming work (TBD) ● Apocalypse Never – Michael Shellenberger ● The God Species – Mark Lynas ● Finnish Green Party platform (updated pro-nuclear position) ● POSIVA – Finnish nuclear waste repository project ● Barakah Nuclear Power Plant (UAE case study)💬 Quote Highlights“Being an environmentalist doesn't mean rejecting technology — it means embracing what works.”“Too much clean energy? That’s not a problem. That’s the solution.” “We solved nuclear waste in Finland. It was never a technical issue. It was political.” “You don't stop climate change by limiting options. You stop it by using all the best ones.” “I never fit in one tribe. Now I’ve found mine in WePlanet.”🌐 About WePlanet WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode SummaryAre we addicted to fossil fuels and can we just go cold turkey? Philosopher of science Maarten Boudry joins Mark Lynas to tackle Bad Idea #18:: “we’re addicted to fossil fuels”. Drawing from his new book The Betrayal of the Enlightenment, Boudry offers a bold and clear-eyed critique of the dominant climate narrative. He argues that moralising fossil fuels as an "addiction" obscures both the complexity of the climate challenge and the role fossil fuels played in liberating billions from poverty, hunger, and hard labour.Fossil fuels have undeniably caused environmental harm. But they also powered modern hospitals, clean water systems, food security, and global development. Denying this legacy may feel righteous, but it risks sabotaging both climate progress and justice for the Global South.This episode explores the psychology of pessimism, the limits of degrowth, the ways today's climate discourse often betrays Enlightenment values like reason, science, and human flourishing, and whether we need a new progressive movementWhether you're a climate activist, a policy wonk, or simply curious about how to save the world without losing our minds, this episode is for you.🧠 Topics Discussed ● 🛢️ Why calling fossil fuels “evil” is historically ignorant and morally lazy ● 🔥 Fossil fuels as a moral tragedy: the engine of progress and the cause of warming ● 💡 Climate change is a technical challenge, not a cosmic punishment● 🌍 Green colonialism: how Western elites block energy access in the Global South ● ☢️ Why serious climate policy must include nuclear energy ● 🧠 The evolutionary roots of pessimism — and why alarmism sells ● 🚫 The flaws of degrowth and “planetary boundaries” fundamentalism ● 📚 Enlightenment values and how the modern Left betrayed them ● 🐾 Why real environmentalism means innovation● 🧪 Why romanticising nature leads us away from real solutions👩‍🏫 Guest Bio Maarten Boudry is a philosopher of science at Ghent University and author of several books and essays challenging irrational beliefs — from religion to climate catastrophism. His latest work, The Betrayal of the Enlightenment (currently available in Dutch), critiques how the modern Left has abandoned Enlightenment ideals of reason, science, and human progress, often replacing them with pessimism, guilt, and technophobia.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources ● De Verraad van de Verlichting (Maarten Boudry) ● Maarten’s Substack● Enlightenment Now – Steven Pinker ● More from Less – Andrew McAfee ● The God Species – Mark Lynas ● Apocalypse Never – Michael Shellenberger ● We Are the Weather – Jonathan Safran Foer (for a contrasting perspective) ● Why We Disagree About Climate Change – Mike Hulme ● WePlanet’s “Just Stop Cooking” campaign💬 Quote Highlights“Fossil fuels aren’t evil. They’re the reason we have modern hospitals, schools, and food security.” — Maarten Boudry“You don’t solve climate change by going backwards. You solve it by going forward, with better tech.”“Calling something evil ends the conversation. It doesn’t start a solution.”“If nuclear isn’t part of your climate plan, then your climate plan isn’t serious.”“We romanticise nature as if it were kind — but nature gave us famine, disease, and child mortality.”🌐 About WePlanet WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode SummaryIs rewilding just about wolves and wilderness, headset against farmers and rural communities, or something much more hopeful and human? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas is joined by Rebecca Wrigley, Chief Executive of Rewilding Britain, to unpack Bad Idea #17: “Rewilding VS the people.”Together, they challenge some of the biggest myths surrounding rewilding. From fears of people being kicked off land to the notion that it’s anti-farmer. They reveal what rewilding actually means: restoring natural processes at scale, with people and communities at the heart. They discuss how rewilding is about practical solutions and land management to meet the challenges of the 21st century — from marine zones to city parks, from beavers to glow worms.Whether you’re a farmer, policymaker, activist, or someone with a window box, this episode shows that rewilding isn’t about returning to the past — it’s about releasing the future.🧠 Topics Discussed ● 🐺 The myth that rewilding is only about bringing back predators, and removing humans ● 🌱 What rewilding actually means — and why it’s for people too ● 🧑‍🌾 Rewilding and farming: from conflict to cooperation● 💡 Why rewilding should be part of our national infrastructure strategy ● 🌊 The ecological and economic case for marine rewilding● 🐻 Keystone species: beavers, lynx, deer, and the “beaver deceiver” ● 🌍 Rewilding Britain’s goal: 30% of land and sea for rewilding ● 🧭 How local rewilding networks are revitalising communities ● 🧬 Why rewilding is about future adaptation, not past restoration ● 🏡 How you can rewild your garden, park — or even your street👩‍🏫 Guest BioRebecca Wrigley is Chief Executive and co-founder of Rewilding Britain, an NGO driving systems change for the large-scale restoration of ecosystems on land and sea. With a background in conservation and community development in Uganda, Mexico, and the Pacific, she’s helped pioneer rewilding in the UK for the last decade. Under her leadership, Rewilding Britain now supporters rewilding across about 180,000 hectares and campaigns for policies that normalise rewilding as a productive, people-powered approach to land and marine use.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources ● Rewilding Britain ● Feral – George Monbiot ● “Wilding” (book & documentary) – Isabella Tree ● Ocean – BBC documentary on marine rewilding ● National Food Strategy (UK) ● Global Rewilding Alliance – globalrewilding.org ● Rewilding Europe – rewildingeurope.com ● Why Valley Wilding & Wild Ken Hill – community-based rewilding models ● Public Goods Subsidies in UK Agriculture Policy💬 Quote Highlights“Rewilding is not about going back to the past — it's about releasing the future.” — Rebecca Wrigley “Every ecosystem needs balance. In the absence of wolves, sometimes that means human stalkers managing deer.” “We subsidise sheep farming in the uplands — but ask nothing of that land in return. Rewilding can do so much more.” “You can rewild your garden, your local park, your street verge. It’s not just for landowners — it’s for everyone.” “Natural process-led management should be a discipline in every agricultural college.”🌐 About WePlanetWePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation 💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:Is industrial agriculture the villain it's made out to be? In this episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas sits down with award-winning journalist and author Michael Grunwald to explore Bad Idea #16: "We need to ditch intensive agriculture."Grunwald, whose latest book We Are Eating the Earth dives deep into the global land crisis, makes the provocative case that abandoning intensive agriculture in favour of romanticised low-yield farming could be catastrophic for both climate and biodiversity. They unpack the real trade-offs behind organic and regenerative farming, expose the hidden environmental costs of biofuels and biomass, and explain why yield and land-use efficiency must be at the heart of any serious green food policy.If you're passionate about climate, nature, or what ends up on your plate, this conversation will challenge your assumptions — and give you new tools for thinking about agriculture, food systems, and the future of the planet.🧠 Topics Discussed:● 🗺️ Why land, not just carbon, is the key environmental constraint of our time● 🌽 Corn ethanol, biomass power and the case against biofuels●🕵️How global institutions like the IPCC got food and land use wrong● 🤔 The myth of regenerative agriculture as a climate solution●🥩 Beef, land use and the real environmental cost of meat● 🌾 Why high-yield agriculture is essential to save nature● 🧬 Cultivated meat, GMOs and other high-tech food fixes● 🤯 Sri Lanka's organic farming disaster: a cautionary tale● 🌍 The moral case for better — not just different — agriculture👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Michael Grunwald is a long-time investigative journalist and bestselling author of The Swamp and The New New Deal. His new book, We Are Eating the Earth, tackles the global agricultural land crunch and the myths we tell ourselves about food, farming, and the environment. A former senior writer for Politico, Time, and The Washington Post, Grunwald lives in Miami and has received numerous awards for his reporting.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources: We Are Eating the Earth – Michael Grunwald💬 Quote Highlights:"Every farm, even the most romantic organic one, is a kind of environmental crime scene." — Michael Grunwald"The idea that regenerative ag can reverse climate change is a nice story — but it's not backed by science or math." — Michael Grunwald"The goal isn't to make farming pretty. The goal is to make food with less land, so we can spare nature." — Michael Grunwald"If we don’t double yields again, we’re going to need a second planet." — Michael Grunwald🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected]📩 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast👁️ Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

SPECIAL: This episode dives into our new campaign, JUST STOP COOKING with WePlanet Africa lead, Patricia Nanteza. 🔍 Episode Summary:What happens when climate policies from the Global North collide with the lived reality of energy poverty in Africa?Mark Lynas is joined by Patricia Nanteza, WePlanet’s Africa Lead, to expose one of the most dangerous and overlooked injustices in climate policy today: the effective ban on clean cooking solutions in sub-Saharan Africa. The message being sent to millions of Africans is clear — just stop cooking.Together they unpack the story behind WePlanet’s new campaign and report, Just Stop Cooking, which reveals how blanket bans on fossil fuel finance, pushed by Global North governments and institutions like the World Bank, are blocking support for LPG. This fuel is one of the only practical clean cooking options available to millions of people right now.The consequences are devastating. Forests are being destroyed, indoor air pollution is killing women and children, and communities are being left with no safe alternatives. All of this is enforced through a climate double standard, backed by Western green NGOs that claim to speak for Africa without ever listening to it.If you believe climate justice means justice for everyone, this episode will challenge what you think you know — and show you why real solutions must come from the ground up.🧠 Topics Discussed:🔥 Why 80% of Africans still rely on wood and charcoal to cook🌲 The link between deforestation and cooking fuels🫁 Indoor air pollution: the silent killer of 700,000 africans each year💀 Carbon monoxide tragedies caused by indoor cooking🔒 How World Bank fossil fuel bans block LPG rollout🌍 Western NGOs pushing unrealistic energy leapfrogging narratives🚫 The hypocrisy of Europe expanding LNG while blocking LPG for Africa📊 The economics of charcoal: an illegal, lucrative, and deforestation-fueled market🧪 Why LPG is the only scalable transitional fuel today🧭 The roadmap to full electrification — but not overnight🤬 The anger and injustice behind Western climate finance decisions👩‍🏫 Guest Bio:Patricia Nanteza is the Africa Lead for WePlanet, based in Uganda. A passionate science communicator, she has spent years advocating for pragmatic, locally appropriate energy and technology policies that serve Africa’s people — not foreign ideology. She previously led biotechnology campaigns across the continent and continues to champion pro-science voices in Africa’s development debates.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:Just Stop Cooking – WePlanet Report WHO Report: Household Air PollutionIEA Clean Cooking OutlookAfrican Development Bank: Mission 300 Program💬 Quote Highlights:“You tell us: don’t use charcoal, don’t use LPG, and electricity isn’t available. So you’re basically telling Africans: just stop cooking.” — Patricia Nanteza“If you want to help us protect our forests, give us viable alternatives. Right now, that alternative is LPG.” — Patricia Nanteza“Western NGOs campaign for zero fossil fuel investment in Africa — while their own countries build new LNG terminals.” — Mark Lynas“We didn’t cause climate change. But now we’re told to sacrifice our basic right to cook, in the name of solving it.” — Patricia Nanteza🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement championing evidence-based solutions for climate, development, and prosperity. We fight bad ideas with better ones. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📬 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 🐦 Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:Hurricanes. Floods. Fires. Tornadoes. Are extreme weather disasters getting worse because of climate change — or is that just the story we tell?In this provocative episode, Mark Lynas sits down with climate scientist and policy scholar Roger Pielke Jr., one of the most polarising voices in climate debates over the last 30 years. Roger explains why the costs of disasters are rising — but not primarily because extreme weather is increasing. Instead, it's us — where we build, how we build, and what we place in harm’s way.Together, they unpack why pointing this out has gotten Roger attacked, investigated, and effectively blacklisted in parts of the climate community. They discuss hurricanes, attribution studies, politicisation of science, the breakdown of trust in expertise, and why nuance is often unwelcome in highly charged public debates.This is a must-listen for anyone who cares about evidence-based climate science — and why getting the science right matters, even when it’s inconvenient.🧠 Topics Discussed:🌪️ Why rising disaster costs are mostly driven by exposure, not more extreme weather☣️ The politicisation of hurricanes as climate symbols📉 Why the IPCC still sees no detectable global trend in tropical cyclones🌡️ What extreme weather is linked to climate change (hint: heatwaves & rainfall)🧪 The shaky science behind attribution studies🔥 Why being “accurate but inconvenient” can get you cancelled💰 Roger’s congressional investigation over alleged fossil fuel funding🎯 How the academy became ideologically uniform — and why that’s dangerous🇺🇸 The crisis of public trust in science amid US culture wars🏳️‍🌈 The transgender athlete controversy as another case study in politicised science🧭 How to rebuild trust in expertise after the populist backlash👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Roger Pielke Jr. is a political scientist, climate policy expert, and Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. For three decades, he has published widely on science, risk, and policy, often challenging simplistic narratives on extreme weather and climate change. He is the author of The Honest Broker and writes extensively on his Substack, also titled The Honest Broker.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:The Honest Broker – Roger Pielke Jr.Normalizing the Impacts of Disasters – Pielke et al. (original research paper)IPCC AR6 Working Group 1 – Chapter 12 (Extreme Events)World Weather Attribution – attribution study critiques💬 Quote Highlights:“If you want to see the signal of climate change, don’t look at extreme events — look at temperature and precipitation. That’s where the evidence is.” — Roger Pielke Jr.“We’ve built more hotels on the beach. Of course the costs go up when storms hit. That’s exposure, not stronger hurricanes.” — Roger Pielke Jr.“When science becomes partisan, we put a target on our backs. The expert community needs support from everyone — right, left, and centre.” — Roger Pielke Jr.“Evidence-based fairness — not identity politics — is the only way to regulate transgender athletes in sport.” — Roger Pielke Jr.🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement challenging bad ideas and championing evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected]📬 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast🐦 Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:Energiewende — is Germany a shining example of how to lead the global energy transition, or a cautionary tale of how not to do it?In this unnerving episode, Mark Lynas is joined by German energy analyst and activist Noah Jakob Rettberg for a deep dive into one of Europe’s most consequential policy blunders: Germany’s nuclear shutdown.Noah explains how the Energiewende — once celebrated as a green transition — has resulted in skyrocketing electricity prices, energy insecurity, and creeping deindustrialization. He reveals how anti-nuclear ideology within Germany’s Green Party has led to the dismantling of 12.5 GW of clean energy capacity, just when Europe needs it most.They explore whether Germany’s nuclear plants can be restarted, what it would take politically, and why this is not just a fight about energy — but about the very future of liberal democracy in Europe.🧠 Topics Discussed:🇩🇪 The political origins of Germany’s Energiewende and anti-nuclear ideology 💶 The economic fallout: high prices, lost industry, and rising emissions 💡 Why Germany’s electricity consumption is falling — and why that’s not a good sign 🔋 Battery storage, hydrogen myths, and the brutal math of a “Dunkelflaute” 🪓 How decommissioning is erasing 12.5 GW of clean energy — and fast 🔧 The Radiant Energy restart plan: 9 reactors, €15B, 8 years 🧱 What it would take to reverse course legally and politically 🌍 Why this is Europe’s problem, not just Germany’s 🚨 How energy policy could undermine NATO, rearmament, and European stability🧑‍🔬 Guest Bio: Noah Jakob Rettberg is a leading figure in Germany’s pro-nuclear movement and an advisor to Nuklearia. He is a contributor to the Radiant Energy Group’s report on restarting Germany’s nuclear fleet and a frequent commentator on European energy policy.📚 Recommended Reading & Listening:Radiant Energy Group – Report on Nuclear Restarts in GermanyTacheles für die Zukunft – Florian Blümm (DE)The Grim Fairy Tale of German Electricity (one of our DECOUPLE podcast favorites)NukleariaThe Restart German Nuclear ConferenceNoah Rettberg Speech at the Conference📝 Quote Highlights:“Every day that passes is vandalism of clean energy infrastructure.” — Mark Lynas“We don’t even have a tenth of a thousandth of the battery storage needed. And yet they believe we’ll run the grid this way.” — Noah Jakob Rettberg“Europe needs Germany. And a strong Germany needs power. This is a battle for liberal democracy.” — Noah Jakob Rettberg“You could restart nine reactors for less than what they’re spending on hydrogen-ready gas plants.” — Noah Jakob Rettberg🌐 About WePlanet: WePlanet is a citizen and science movement that challenges conventional thinking to defend evidence-based solutions to environmental challenges. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation: 💬 Got thoughts on Germany’s energy future? Email us: [email protected] 📬 Sign up for updates: weplanet.org/podcast 📸 Follow us on Twitter: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:What if the largest living space on Earth was being plundered before we even understood it?In this timely episode, Mark Lynas speaks with marine conservationist Callum Roberts, Professor at the University of Exeter and lead author of a new Nature commentary calling for full protection of the high seas. They challenge the pervasive (and dangerous) idea that the deep ocean is just a lifeless void — free for mining, overfishing, and exploitation. Callum explains why the high seas cover nearly half the planet’s surface and are a critical part of Earth’s life-support system: absorbing heat, producing oxygen, sequestering carbon, and hosting the largest migration on the planet.From deep-sea mining to human slavery in high-seas fisheries, this is a shocking exposé of the last, vast wilderness on Earth — and why leaving it alone might be the smartest thing we’ve ever done.🧠 Topics Discussed:🌊 What the high seas actually are — and why they cover 43% of Earth’s surface🧬 The astonishing biodiversity of the deep sea, much of it still unknown☠️ Why mining polymetallic nodules could destroy ecosystems forever💥 The false promises of “low-impact” deep-sea extraction💸 Why deep-sea fisheries are only viable due to massive subsidies📉 The case for full protection — not just 30% — of the high seas🔒 The failure of the International Seabed Authority to act as a neutral regulator🐟 What’s really inside your fish fingers (hint: could be 150-year-old deep-sea fish)🧑‍🌾 Why aquaculture may be better — but not if it’s farmed salmon🚨 Slavery, human trafficking, and illegal fishing on the high seas👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Callum Roberts is Professor of Marine Conservation at the University of Exeter and one of the world’s leading experts on the impact of fishing and human activity on the ocean. His books include The Unnatural History of the Sea and Reef Life, and he sits on the board of the Maldives Coral Institute. His latest work calls for a paradigm shift in how we govern the high seas — toward full ecological protection.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:Nature Commentary: Protect the High Seas Completely (2024)The Unnatural History of the Sea – Callum RobertsReef Life: An Underwater Memoir – Callum RobertsThe Outlaw Ocean Project – Ian UrbinaManta Trust – High Seas Marine LifeOSPAR Marine Protected Areas💬 Quote Highlights:“The high seas cover 43% of the planet — and yet remain largely unprotected, poorly governed, and misunderstood.” — Callum Roberts“Mining the deep sea is like strip-mining the last untouched rainforest on Earth — except it’s darker, colder, and more mysterious.” — Callum Roberts“Most of what we eat from the deep sea is only possible because we massively subsidize it — often more than the fish are worth.” — Callum Roberts“The ocean is Earth’s life support system — it gives us oxygen, absorbs our heat, and locks away our carbon. We mess with it at our peril.” — Mark Lynas🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global science-and-citizen movement promoting evidence-based solutions to protect climate, nature, and prosperity. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:Send feedback or questions: [email protected] 📬 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 🐦 Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:What if Earth came with a dashboard warning light — and it just started flashing red?In this pivotal episode, Mark Lynas sits down with Johan Rockström, one of the world’s leading Earth system scientists and co-architect of the planetary boundaries framework — the closest thing we have to that planetary dashboard.Together, they retrace the origin story of one of the most important scientific ideas of our time: that there are nine critical systems holding Earth in a stable, livable state… and that we’ve already pushed several of them past their limits.From tipping points to nitrogen overshoot, and from nuclear war scenarios to political pushback, Johan offers a bracing but hopeful overview of where we stand — and what it will take to keep our only home within its safe operating space. This isn't just an academic discussion. It's a user's manual for the future of civilization.🧠 Topics Discussed:🌍 What the nine planetary boundaries are — and why they matter🧪 How Rockström and Will Steffen integrated Earth systems, tipping points, and Holocene stability into a new framework🌡️ Why climate is just one boundary — and not even the most urgent🧬 Why the framework avoids assumptions about human needs or technology📉 The accelerating collapse of planetary resilience🧭 The boundaries as a “safe operating space” — not a call for de-growth🧱 Why sustainability constraints can drive innovation and prosperity☣️ How nuclear war would break multiple boundaries at once📊 The objective, precautionary science behind the threshold levels🛑 Johan’s critique of the Breakthrough Institute’s pushback — and what’s changed since👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Johan Rockström is Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and Professor of Earth System Science at the University of Potsdam. He is a globally recognised expert in resilience, tipping points, and sustainability, and co-originated the planetary boundaries framework — a cornerstone of Earth system science used by scientists, policymakers, and businesses around the world.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity (2009)Breaking Boundaries: The Science of Our Planet – Netflix & BookThe God Species – Mark Lynas (2011)Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)Stockholm Resilience Centre – Planetary Boundaries PortalGlobal Commons Alliance – Earth Commission💬 Quote Highlights:“If you breach a boundary, you enter the danger zone. Cross too far, and you risk irreversible Earth system change.” — Johan Rockström“We don’t set boundaries based on what humans need — we set them based on what the planet can tolerate.” — Johan Rockström“The real tipping point is when Earth stops being our best friend — and starts amplifying the damage we’ve done.” — Johan Rockström“We’ve made no progress. Zero. Halfway through the decisive decade, the curves are still heading in the wrong direction.” — Johan Rockström“This isn’t about constraint vs growth — it’s about whether the playing field still exists for us to grow on.” — Mark Lynas🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement promoting bold, science-based solutions for climate, nature, and human prosperity. We challenge bad ideas and elevate the best ones. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📬 Subscribe for future episodes updates: weplanet.org/podcast 🐦 Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:In this revealing and deeply reflective conversation, Mark Lynas sits down with journalist and essayist Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow, whose new book Atomic Dreams dives into the unexpected rise of climate-conscious pro-nuclear activism.They explore the cultural and political history of nuclear power in the United States, the generational shift in attitudes, and the motley crew of environmentalists, influencers, policy wonks and iconoclasts who make up the new pro-nuclear movement. From Diablo Canyon to Pandora’s Promise, from James Hansen to Mothers for Nuclear, this episode is a journey through energy tribalism, climate urgency, and the evolving story of what it means to be an environmentalist.🧠 Topics Discussed:☢️ Why nuclear energy has always been a cultural lightning rod🌍 How climate change changed minds — including Rebecca’s📚 What Rebecca learned while researching Atomic Dreams👩‍👧‍👦 The unexpected story of Mothers for Nuclear🧠 Conversion stories: what turns anti-nuclear people pro?💥 The legacy of anti-nuclear protest movements in the US🔥 The fascination (and frustration) of figures like Michael Shellenberger🎞️ The influence of Pandora’s Promise and the rise of "nuclear celebrities"🧪 Radiation fears, hormesis, and scientific uncertainty🇺🇸 Why nuclear hasn't been dragged into America’s culture wars (yet)🏞️ Indigenous perspectives and land justice at Diablo Canyon💸 The political shift in DC and the growing bipartisan support for nuclear⚛️ Advanced reactors, thorium dreams, and the internal divisions of the pro-nuclear tribe👩‍🏫 Guest Bio:Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow's work has appeared in The Nation, Dissent, The New York Times, The New Yorker, and many others. Her new book, Atomic Dreams: The New Nuclear Evangelists and the Fight for the Future of Energy (out April 8, 2025), explores the people, politics, and passions behind the return of the nuclear energy debate in the age of climate crisis.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:https://www.rebeccatuhusdubrow.netAtomic Dreams – Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow (Penguin Random House)The Death of Environmentalism – Nordhaus & Shellenberger (PDF)Whole Earth Discipline – Stewart Brand (2009)Pandora’s Promise – Documentary Film (2013)Mothers for NuclearStand Up for NuclearJames Hansen’s testimony to the US Senate (1988)💬 Quote Highlights:“If we trust Hansen on the science of climate change, maybe we should listen when he says nuclear needs to be part of the solution.” — Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow“The people in this movement aren’t all engineers — some of them are hippies, mothers, influencers, even ex-models.” — Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow“I came to see the pro-nuclear world as a tribe of its own, with factions, language, and competing visions.” — Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow“You can’t just get off fossil fuels without causing massive human suffering. That’s the reality that changed my mind.” — Mark Lynas“The strange thing is, nuclear power hasn’t yet become a culture war issue in the US — and that might be its saving grace.” — Mark Lynas🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement promoting bold, science-based solutions for climate, nature, and human prosperity. We challenge bad ideas and elevate the best ones. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Feedback or questions? Email: [email protected] 📬 Subscribe for future episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 🐦 Follow us on Twitter/X: @weplanetint

In this timely and far-reaching episode, Mark Lynas sits down with Cynthia Scharf — senior fellow at the Center for Future Generations and former UN climate advisor — to delve into one of the most contentious issues in climate policy: solar geoengineering.Cynthia explains what solar radiation modification (SRM) is, how it could theoretically cool the planet by mimicking volcanic eruptions, and why even discussing it remains taboo. She argues that ignoring SRM may pose greater risks than researching it — especially as global temperatures surge and climate impacts escalate. They discuss the science, the politics, the ethics, and the terrifying prospect of a lone actor dimming the sun without global consent.This is a deeply informed, emotionally honest conversation about a technology born of desperation — and the governance void we urgently need to address.🧠 Topics Discussed:🌞 What is SRM, and how would stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) work?🌋 The Pinatubo analogy: can we cool the planet like a volcano?🚫 Why there is no international framework to stop a country from deploying SRM⚖️ Whether solar geoengineering could exacerbate global inequality🧪 Why scientific research on SRM is desperately underfunded🧬 Governance dilemmas: who sets the global thermostat?⚠️ Termination shock: the catastrophic risk of stopping SRM suddenly💸 The role of private actors and the risks of unregulated experimentation🧠 Why we need both physical and social science research to understand impacts👩‍🎓 The role of youth, future generations, and public engagement in shaping decisions👩‍🏫 Guest Bio:Cynthia Scharf is a senior fellow at the Brussels-based Center for Future Generations and the former head of strategic communications on climate change in the office of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. She previously worked with the Carnegie Climate Governance Initiative (C2G) to initiate global dialogue on the governance of solar geoengineering. Her expertise lies at the intersection of diplomacy, climate risk, and intergenerational ethics.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:The Planet Remade – Oliver MortonCarnegie Climate Governance Initiative (C2G)UNEP Report on Solar Radiation Modification (2023)IPCC AR6 mentions of SRMNature Climate Change article on termination shockCenter for Future Generations💬 Quote Highlights:“These are technologies born of desperation. And we’re entering desperate times.” — Cynthia Scharf“There is no law — no treaty, no mechanism — to stop a country from deploying SRM today.” — Cynthia Scharf“Solar geoengineering is not a solution. At best, it might be a supplement to reduce suffering in the short term.” — Cynthia Scharf“We should be doing publicly funded research, not leaving this to Silicon Valley billionaires or private companies.” — Cynthia Scharf“The governance vacuum is terrifying. Who decides the temperature of the planet? Based on what legitimacy?” — Cynthia Scharf🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is an international environmental movement that champions science-based solutions for climate, nature, and prosperity. From clean energy to smart agriculture, we challenge bad ideas and promote better ones. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Feedback? Thoughts? Email us: [email protected] 📬 Subscribe to new episodes: weplanet.org/podcast 🐦 Follow us on Twitter/X/Bluesky: @weplanetint

🔍 Episode Summary:In this urgent and wide-ranging conversation, Mark Lynas is joined by leading climate scientist and nuclear winter expert Alan Robock to confront one of the most dangerous myths of our time: that nuclear weapons keep us safe.Alan lays out why deterrence is a flawed and suicidal strategy, how even a "limited" nuclear war would trigger global famine and societal collapse, and why the existence of nuclear weapons means their eventual use is a matter of when, not if. They also discuss the atmospheric science of nuclear winter, parallels to the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs, the threats posed by solar geoengineering, and why total nuclear abolition is not only possible — but urgently necessary.This is a masterclass in existential risk — and why we ignore it at our peril.🧠 Topics Discussed:🚫 Why nuclear deterrence is a myth — and how luck has saved us so far☠️ Nuclear winter: how cities burning would darken and freeze the planet🌾 Nuclear famine: why over a billion people could starve even after a "small" war🔥 From Hiroshima to today: how firestorms drive catastrophic global cooling🌍 The Southern Hemisphere’s relative survival — and why it’s not so simple✊ The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and ICAN’s Nobel Peace Prize🛰️ How volcanic eruptions and wildfire smoke prove the nuclear winter theory🦖 What the dinosaurs can teach us about the end of the world🛑 Geoengineering: why "climate intervention" may be as dangerous as the problem💬 Why humanity must choose: the end of nuclear weapons or the end of us👽 The Drake equation, Fermi paradox — and why advanced civilizations may self-destruct👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Alan Robock is a Distinguished Professor of Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University. He is one of the world’s leading authorities on nuclear winter, climate modeling, and the atmospheric consequences of both nuclear war and geoengineering. Alan is a veteran campaigner for nuclear disarmament and an award-winning researcher committed to educating the world about the existential threats we face.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:Earth in Flames: Nuclear Winter and How to Prevent It – Alan Robock & Brian Toon (out June 2025)Nature Food (2022) – Global famine after nuclear war paperICAN – International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear WeaponsTreaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (UN)The Open Philanthropy ProjectFuture of Life Institute💬 Quote Highlights:“Deterrence only works if you’re willing to commit suicide. That’s not a strategy — that’s madness.” — Alan Robock“Nuclear winter is not a theory from the 1980s. It’s physics. Block the sun, and the planet freezes.” — Alan Robock“Even a limited nuclear war could kill two billion people by famine alone.” — Alan Robock“You can dismantle nuclear weapons. We had 70,000 once. Now we have 12,000. We can go to zero.” — Alan Robock“The existence of nuclear weapons guarantees their eventual use — unless we abolish them.” — Alan Robock

🔍 Episode Summary:In this compelling conversation, Mark Lynas speaks with world-renowned conservation biologist Luigi Boitani to tackle one of the most polarizing debates in wildlife conservation: whether humans and wolves can truly coexist.Luigi, who has spent over five decades studying wolves across Europe and North America, explains why the return of the wolf is not an ecological anomaly — but a natural recovery. Together, they explore the myths that surround wolves, the emotional bonds humans have forged with them, and the hard compromises needed for real coexistence. From debunking the Yellowstone "miracle" story to examining the politics of wolf conservation across Europe, this episode goes far beyond fairy tales to face the real challenges — and opportunities — of living alongside large carnivores again.🧠 Topics Discussed:🐺 What really defines "wolf habitat" — and why wolves don't need wilderness🌍 How wolves recolonized Europe without reintroductions❤️ Why humans have a deep emotional connection to wolves — and always have📉 Debunking the Yellowstone 'trophic cascade' myth🔀 The true meaning of coexistence — and why compromise is essential🚫 Why political myths about wolves are driving bad policy across Europe🏞️ Why rewilding efforts in places like the UK are emotionally compelling — but complicated🐑 Conflict with livestock: guarding dogs, electric fences, and the limits of compensation🧬 The risks of wolf population fragmentation from border fences👥 How science can inform, but not replace, political decisions👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Professor Luigi Boitani is Professor Emeritus of Conservation Biology at the University of Rome Sapienza and Chair of the Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe (IUCN SSC). He is one of the world's leading experts on wolf conservation, human-wildlife coexistence, and large carnivore management. His research has shaped European policy and global understanding of large predator recovery.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe — IUCN Specialist GroupYellowstone Wolves — book referenced by Luigi BoitaniIUCN Guidelines on Human-Wildlife Conflict and Coexistence💬 Quote Highlights:“The best definition of wolf habitat is anywhere there's something to eat — and where you’re not shot.” — Luigi Boitani“Be honest: the real reason we want wolves back is because we love them, not because of ecosystem services.” — Luigi Boitani“Coexistence means compromise. Without it, we’re just dreaming.” — Luigi Boitani“Even today, most human cultures feel the charisma of the wolf — and build it into their myths and beliefs.” — Luigi Boitani“The Yellowstone story is beautiful, but even the scientists admit: we don’t really know what’s going on.” — Luigi Boitani🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement advancing bold, evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Feedback or thoughts? Email: [email protected]📬 Subscribe for updates: weplanet.org/podcast🐦 Follow us on Twitter/X: @WePlanetInt

🔍 Episode Summary:What if the bad idea… is thinking we can still save the Arctic?In this sobering but illuminating conversation, Mark Lynas speaks with renowned polar climate scientist Julienne Stroeve to explore one of the most consequential but misunderstood climate tipping points: the melting of the Arctic.Together, they unpack the science behind sea ice loss, permafrost thaw, Greenland melt, and the feedback loops that could push the climate system toward runaway warming. Julienne, who has spent decades conducting fieldwork and analysing satellite data, explains why the idea that we can still "save" the Arctic is, sadly, a myth — and what that means for global sea level rise, extreme weather, and the fate of species like polar bears.From icebreaker expeditions to geoengineering schemes, this episode takes you to the frontlines of a rapidly disappearing world.🧠 Topics Discussed:🧊 Why the Arctic sea ice is already committed to disappearing in summer📉 The science behind Greenland’s melt — and how fast it’s accelerating🌊 Sea level rise: how much, how soon, and where it hits hardest🐻 Polar bears, permafrost, and the myth of adaptation💣 The risk of tipping points and feedback loops (albedo, methane, etc.)❄️ What past interglacial periods tell us about a future without Arctic ice🌍 Why what happens in the Arctic doesn’t stay in the Arctic🌀 Jet streams, polar vortexes, and extreme weather in a warming world🧪 Geoengineering: what might work, what probably won’t🛰️ The role of satellites and field data in improving climate models🇺🇸 The growing threat of political interference with science in the US👩‍🔬 Guest Bio:Dr. Julienne Stroeve is a polar climate scientist and professor currently affiliated with the University of Manitoba and University College London. Her work focuses on satellite remote sensing, Arctic sea ice, climate modeling, and the impacts of climate change on polar systems. She has participated in numerous field expeditions, including the landmark MOSAiC expedition, and is one of the world’s leading experts on Arctic cryosphere dynamics.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:Why the Arctic Is Already Lost – Science commentary by Julienne Stroeve (via Science.org)MOSAiC Expedition Overview – AWINSIDC – National Snow and Ice Data CenterNASA Earth Observatory – Arctic Sea IceArctic Report Card – NOAAArticle: Why Geoengineering the Arctic is a Bad Idea – The Conversation💬 Quote Highlights:“The Arctic is warming four times faster than the global average.” – Julienne Stroeve“The idea that we can still save the Arctic is a bad one. It’s already on a committed trajectory of decline.” — Julienne Stroeve“What happens in the Arctic doesn’t stay in the Arctic. It reshapes weather patterns across the globe.” — Julienne Stroeve“Greenland is now the largest contributor to sea level rise — and that contribution is accelerating.” — Julienne Stroeve“At 2.7 degrees of global warming, parts of the world will become uninhabitable.” — Julienne Stroeve“I used to be hopeful. But now? I think we’ll wait for disaster — and then act.” — Julienne Stroeve🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement advancing bold, evidence-based solutions for climate, nature, and human development. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Feedback or thoughts? Email: [email protected] 📬 Subscribe for updates: weplanet.org/podcast

🔍 Episode Summary:In this powerhouse episode, Mark Lynas is joined by long-time friend and environmental journalist George Monbiot for a brutally honest conversation on where we are — and how we fight back. Together they challenge the idea that environmental progress is automatic or guaranteed, and instead delve into the deep political, economic, and social forces that shape our chances for a better future.Monbiot argues that unless we confront power, capitalism, and the failure of incrementalism, we’re simply sleepwalking into authoritarianism and ecological collapse. From colonialism to neoliberalism, from fascism to the failures of the left, this is a sweeping conversation on what went wrong — and how we can make things right, through a positive politics of belonging.This one pulls no punches.🧠 Topics Discussed:🏛️ Why environmentalism fails without confronting power🛑 The myth of inevitable progress — and how it can be reversed⚡ Technology is not enough: the limits of "techno-fix" thinking💰 A crash course in the real origins of capitalism📉 Why incremental change is a losing strategy📢 What neoliberalism really is — and how it disempowers citizens🧱 Private sufficiency, public luxury: a new vision for the future🧠 Why the left keeps losing — and what must change🎯 Popper’s paradox, politics of belonging, and how to counter fascism📲 How social media is supercharging authoritarianism😤 Can we still win? Yes — but only if we act boldly👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:George Monbiot is a columnist for The Guardian, environmental activist, and author of several books including Regenesis, Out of the Wreckage, and The Invisible Doctrine (with Peter Hutchison). He’s one of the most influential and outspoken voices on the British left — and he’s spent four decades fighting for ecological justice, democratic reform, and systemic change.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:The Invisible Doctrine – George Monbiot & Peter HutchisonRegenesis – George MonbiotOut of the Wreckage – George MonbiotThe Road to Serfdom – Friedrich HayekLand for the Many – Report edited by George MonbiotOur podcast episode with Hannah Ritchie – Why the World Isn’t Ending💬 Quote Highlights:“Progress is not inevitable. And if you don’t confront power, you lose — every time.” — George Monbiot“Capitalism didn’t start with commerce. It started with slavery and extraction.” — George Monbiot“If we fail to offer a positive politics of belonging, the fascists will offer a negative one — and people will choose it.” — George Monbiot“Incrementalism is not a theory of change. It’s an excuse for failure.” — George Monbiot“We need a politics of private sufficiency, public luxury.” — George Monbiot🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement advocating for bold, science-based solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. We fight bad ideas with better ones. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Got thoughts on this episode? Email us: [email protected] 📬 Subscribe for future episodes: weplanet.org/podcast

🔍 Episode Summary:In this searing and deeply compelling conversation, Mark Lynas speaks with Vijaya Ramachandran, economist and Director for Energy and Development at the Breakthrough Institute, to unpack what she calls one of the worst “bad ideas” shaping today’s climate discourse: the blanket opposition to fossil fuel development in the Global South.From indoor air pollution to energy inequality, and from misguided climate justice campaigns to blatant geopolitical hypocrisy, Vijaya takes aim at the idea that development must be sacrificed for the climate. She explains why poor countries need more energy — including some fossil fuels — in order to fight poverty, save lives, and build resilience to climate shocks.If you think climate justice means banning gas in Africa, you might want to listen to this first.🧠 Topics Discussed:🔥 Why LPG (liquified petroleum gas) is clean cooking, not dirty energy🫁 3.8 million deaths a year from household air pollution🌲 How clean fossil fuels can save forests and reduce emissions🧮 The carbon math: Germany’s LNG expansion vs all of Africa’s LPG🤯 The World Bank’s fossil fuel financing ban — who it really affects💸 Hypocrisy in action: Norway, Germany, and the United States⚖️ Why energy inequality is a moral and not just technical issue🧱 Fossil fuels for fertiliser, cement, steel, and climate adaptation🚫 The limits of leapfrogging: why renewables alone aren’t enough🧬 What real climate justice would look like for developing nations🌍 Could “green colonialism” break the Paris climate consensus?👩‍🏫 Guest Bio:Vijaya Ramachandran is Director for Energy and Development at the Breakthrough Institute and an economist who has written for Nature, Foreign Policy, and The Economist. Her research focuses on energy access, development, and the geopolitics of climate finance. She's a fierce advocate for energy equity and pragmatic climate solutions rooted in the needs of the world’s poorest.📚 Recommended Reading & Resources:Foreign Policy – The Green Colonialism Essay by Vijaya RamachandranHow the West Is Pushing Africa Away from Gas – Breakthrough InstituteWhy LPG Is Good for the Climate – WePlanet article by Mark LynasOur World in Data – Energy AccessIEA Clean Cooking Investment TrackerEnergy for Growth HubWorld Bank report on Indoor Air Pollution💬 Quote Highlights:“LPG saves lives. It’s better for women, better for children, and even better for the climate when you look at the alternatives.” — Vijaya Ramachandran“You can’t cook with wind and solar. That’s the reality for hundreds of millions of people.” — Vijaya Ramachandran“The World Bank’s fossil fuel financing ban only hurts the poorest — and it won’t solve climate change.” — Mark Lynas“Climate justice has become what Western NGOs want, not what poor people actually need.” — Vijaya Ramachandran🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global citizen and science movement dedicated to bold, science-based solutions for climate and development. We believe in energy abundance, food security, and global prosperity — without environmental collapse. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Email feedback: [email protected] 📬 Sign up for updates: weplanet.org/podcast

🔍 Episode Summary:In this thought-provoking episode, Mark Lynas is joined by science writer and The Planet Remade author Oliver Morton for a candid conversation about geoengineering — the controversial set of technologies that could help us cool the planet.Oliver argues that not talking about solar geoengineering might itself be a bad idea, especially as climate change accelerates and overshoot scenarios become more likely. They explore how stratospheric aerosols, inspired by volcanic eruptions, could reflect sunlight and reduce warming, and why such solutions are currently taboo in many environmental circles.The episode tackles moral hazard, global equity, the politics of climate action, and why global South leadership is essential for legitimate discussion. Mark even finds himself inching toward changing his own mind — again.🧠 Topics Discussed:🌍 Why the conversation around geoengineering has barely moved since The Planet Remade (2015)🌡️ Solar vs. carbon dioxide removal (CDR) geoengineering🌋 Volcanoes, aerosols, and the science behind reflecting sunlight🤐 The dangers of not talking about solar geoengineering🎭 Climate discourse, moral hazard, and the “technofix” taboo⚖️ Why global South voices are critical to the legitimacy of the debate🔥 Whether the current warming justifies reconsidering “unthinkable” options💣 Nuclear weapons, termination shock, and existential risk🎵 Meatloaf, billiards, and asteroid jokes (yes, really)🧑‍🔬 Guest Bio: Oliver Morton is a senior editor at The Economist, former science writer for Nature, and author of The Planet Remade: How Geoengineering Could Change the World. He has an asteroid named after him — and no, it's not headed toward Earth.📚 Recommended ReadingThe Planet Remade – Oliver MortonPaul Crutzen’s 2006 paper on stratospheric aerosolsIPCC Special Report on 1.5°CReports by the Degrees Initiative📝 Quote Highlights:“If we have to wait until everyone agrees on how to act in order to address climate change, we are not going to address climate change.” — Oliver Morton“People say the world is burning but refuse to even consider options that might stop it from burning. That’s a hard position to defend.” — Mark Lynas🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a citizen and science movement that challenges conventional thinking to defend evidence-based solutions to environmental challenges. Learn more at ⁠weplanet.org⁠.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Got thoughts on geoengineering? Email us: ⁠[email protected]⁠📬 Sign up for updates: weplanet.org/podcast

🔍 Episode Summary:In the inaugural episode of Saving the World from Bad Ideas, Mark Lynas is joined by renowned psychologist and best-selling author Steven Pinker to challenge the pervasive myth that the world is in terminal decline.Steven makes the case for progress as a measurable, empirical reality, highlighting how improvements in health, literacy, poverty, and safety have transformed human life — even if we rarely hear about them. Together, they explore the psychological biases behind pessimism, the rise of reactionary politics, the dangers of nuclear weapons, and the pitfalls of modern progressive movements.From Enlightenment ideals to eco-modernism, it's a wide-ranging conversation on how to make the world better — rationally.🧠 Topics Discussed:📈 What progress really means — and how we can measure it📰 Why the media distorts our sense of reality⚙️ The Enlightenment roots of knowledge-driven human improvement🧨 Why nuclear weapons remain an existential threat🧠 How to rebuild a rational, empirical environmental movement🧵 The rise of wokeism and internal collapse of progressive institutions🇺🇸 Trumpism, authoritarianism, and global democratic backsliding🌿 Is eco-modernism the future of environmentalism?👥 How to lead change without tribalism or culture war👨‍🏫 Guest Bio:Steven Pinker is Professor of Psychology at Harvard University and the author of numerous influential books, including:Rationality: What It Is, Why It Seems Scarce, Why It MattersEnlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and ProgressThe Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has DeclinedHe’s a prominent public intellectual, defender of Enlightenment values, and an optimist — but not the naive kind.📚 Recommended Reading:Enlightenment Now – Steven PinkerThe Better Angels of Our Nature – Steven PinkerWhole Earth Discipline – Stewart BrandApocalypse Never – Michael Shellenberger🎵 Tom Lehrer’s song "We Will All Go Together When We Go"💬 Quote Highlights:“The news by its very nature is bound to oversample bad things and neglect good things.” — Steven Pinker“Not all cultures are going to agree with the latest cause from elite left-wing urban American universities.” — Steven Pinker“Nuclear weapons can end civilization in a matter of hours. It’s astonishing that literally the end of the world is not an issue.” — Steven Pinker“Let's treat environmental problems as challenges to be solved, not moral failings to be punished.” — Mark Lynas🌐 About WePlanet:WePlanet is a global movement of citizens and scientists dedicated to defending the science and solutions we need to protect our environment and civilisation. Learn more at weplanet.org.📥 Join the Conversation:💬 Got thoughts? Email us: [email protected] 📬 Join our podcast mailing list: weplanet.org/podcast