Logo

    346. Two (Totally Opposite) Ways to Save the Planet

    en-usAugust 23, 2018
    What are the main challenges of the modern environmental movement?
    Who are the 'Prophets' and 'Wizards' in environmental debates?
    How does technology influence the discussion on nuclear energy?
    What concept did William Vogt emphasize regarding natural resource limits?
    Why is collaboration crucial between different environmental perspectives?

    Podcast Summary

    • The Debate Between Prophet and Wizard in EnvironmentalismBoth the Prophet and Wizard perspectives in environmentalism have merit, but a balanced approach that acknowledges both the potential of technology and the importance of preserving the natural world is likely the best solution.

      The modern environmental movement faces significant challenges in meeting the needs of a growing global population for food, water, energy, and addressing climate change. These challenges have led to ongoing debates between two contrasting worldviews: the "Prophet" who urges drastic action to save the planet, and the "Wizard" who trusts technology to find solutions. While both perspectives have merit, it's essential to recognize that the reality is likely more nuanced and that both sides may have overestimated their understanding of the future. Charles Mann's latest book, "The Wizard and The Prophet," explores this debate and its implications for the future. The population bomb warnings of the past have not materialized as predicted, but the planet's finite resources do present real limits. The challenge is to find a balanced approach that acknowledges both the potential of technology and the importance of preserving the natural world.

    • Two Perspectives: The Wizard and The ProphetThe wizard and the prophet represent contrasting views on energy solutions for the future, with the wizard advocating for technological innovation and the prophet emphasizing ecological limits and population control. Both perspectives offer valuable insights, but the prophet's ideas should be critically examined for potential classist and racist undertones.

      The ongoing debate about energy solutions for the future revolves around two contrasting perspectives: the wizard, who believes in technological innovation and next-generation nuclear power, and the prophet, who emphasizes the importance of respecting ecological limits and population control. William Vogt, the prophet in this context, was a pioneering figure in the modern environmental movement, advocating for population control and sustainable practices, but his ideas were rooted in a controversial and often problematic perspective. His work, while influential, should be critically examined for its potential classist and racist undertones. Despite the challenges and limitations, both perspectives offer valuable insights as we navigate the complex issues of energy, food, water, and climate change.

    • From French Literature to Ornithology: William Vogt's Unconventional JourneyWilliam Vogt's work on Peruvian guano islands led to the discovery of El Nino and La Nina, emphasizing the importance of addressing environmental issues like nitrogen pollution and dead zones, which remain relevant today.

      William Vogt, a college graduate with a degree in French literature, defied odds and became an influential ornithologist. His work on the Peruvian guano islands led to the discovery of natural oscillations in ocean currents, known as El Nino and La Nina, which impacted bird populations and the production of bird poop for fertilizer. Vogt recognized the concept of carrying capacity, the idea that the world has natural limits to production. Despite not accurately predicting a global famine, Vogt's work highlighted the importance of addressing environmental issues, such as nitrogen pollution and dead zones, which continue to be relevant today.

    • Borlaug's Agricultural Advancements Led to Increased Global PopulationBorlaug's inventions, including the use of 'shuttle breeding,' led to the Green Revolution, significantly increasing global food production and allowing for population growth.

      While William Voigt raised concerns about overpopulation and impending famine, Norman Borlaug's discoveries led to a significant increase in the global population through agricultural advancements. Borlaug, born into a poor family in Iowa, was determined to escape labor-intensive farming. The invention of the cheap tractor allowed him to attend college and study plant pathology and genetics. During World War II, he worked on creating waterproof materials, and later, he tried to boost wheat production in Mexico using unconventional methods called "shuttle breeding." Despite not knowing Spanish or having prior experience with wheat, Borlaug's innovations led to the Green Revolution, resulting in increased food production in Mexico, the American Middle West, India, Pakistan, and eventually, the International Rice Research Institute. The consequences were profound: wheat production in Mexico quadrupled, the American Middle West became an agricultural powerhouse, and global food production soared. However, these advancements also led to potential negative consequences, such as increased reliance on monoculture and the use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides.

    • The Green Revolution: Saving Lives but Creating Inequality and Environmental DegradationThe Green Revolution led by Norman Borlaug ended famines and saved hundreds of millions of lives, but it also caused income inequality and environmental degradation, highlighting the ongoing tension between technological innovation and sustainability.

      The Green Revolution led by Norman Borlaug brought about an end to famines in many parts of the world, saving hundreds of millions of lives. However, it also led to income inequality and environmental degradation. The land became more valuable, leading to displacement of small farmers and the concentration of wealth. Borlaug acknowledged these downsides but saw the upside of saving lives as a justification. The debate between the wizard, Borlaug, and the prophet, William Vote, represents the ongoing tension between technological innovation and environmental sustainability. While Borlaug's work has been crucial in feeding the world's growing population, it's essential to address the negative consequences and find a balance between progress and sustainability.

    • Climate justice: A human rights perspectiveClimate justice advocates emphasize the importance of addressing environmental issues as human rights injustices and seek fairness in the transition to renewable energy while acknowledging historical emissions injustices committed by richer countries.

      The debate between prophets of doom and technologists regarding environmental issues is not a simple technology versus anti-technology conflict, but rather a preference for different kinds of technology. Mary Robinson, a modern-day prophet and former president of Ireland and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, emphasizes the importance of addressing climate justice. She argues that environmental problems are human rights injustices, largely committed by rich countries against poorer ones. To find a middle ground, climate justice advocates acknowledge the historical injustice of emissions caused by richer countries but also strive for fairness in ensuring that poorer countries and people benefit from the transition to renewable energy. Collaboration and solidarity between these two camps are essential to finding scalable solutions. However, there is a sense of urgency to move away from coal, oil, and gas as quickly as possible to ensure a safe future.

    • Fossil fuel industry tactics vs renewable energy progressDespite fossil fuel industry efforts to delay climate action, renewable energy is becoming increasingly competitive and affordable. Global cooperation and technological innovation offer solutions to address climate change.

      The fossil fuel industry is using tactics similar to those of the tobacco industry to delay action on climate change. However, the renewable energy economy is becoming increasingly competitive and affordable. To address climate change, the global community must come together and take action, as seen in the successful Montreal Convention to protect the ozone layer. Technology, particularly renewable energy, is our salvation and has been throughout history. While technology can create problems, humans are capable of recognizing and fixing them. It's essential to remain optimistic about the power of human ingenuity to solve the challenges we face. The argument for a return to a more natural state may have merit, but it's important to remember that technology has also been the solution to many problems throughout history. Instead of focusing solely on the negative impact of technology, we should strive to use it to create sustainable solutions for a better future.

    • Consensus on solutions for global issuesThere's agreement on addressing global challenges through education, healthcare access, and a mix of large-scale and small-scale solutions, while being open to all potential answers.

      While there may be disagreements on certain issues like climate change and population growth, there is consensus on solutions such as educating girls and women and improving access to healthcare. The past is often romanticized, but it's important to remember the hardships and challenges that came with it. To address current global issues like population growth and climate change, we need a combination of large-scale top-down solutions and small-scale bottom-up approaches. It's crucial to approach these problems with a sincere desire to find solutions, rather than using them as political pawns. For instance, if we're genuinely concerned about the harm caused by climate change, we should be open to exploring all potential solutions, including geoengineering. Ultimately, it's about finding a balance and working together to create a better future for all.

    • Focusing on individual behavior change isn't enough to address climate issuesIndividual actions are important but not enough to solve the climate crisis. We need systemic changes that respect human rights, local consent, and equitable access to clean energy.

      While individual behavior change is important in addressing climate issues, it's not enough on its own. Listening to indigenous communities and implementing large-scale solutions that respect human rights and local consent are crucial. Behavior change alone, such as recycling or vegetarianism, while beneficial, won't solve the climate crisis. Instead, we need to focus on systemic changes, like transitioning to renewable energy in a way that respects land and water rights. The failure to do so can lead to human rights abuses and resistance from local communities. Nuclear power, while carbon-free, also has its challenges, including safety concerns and end-of-life disposal issues. Ultimately, a more effective approach would be to combine individual behavior change with systemic solutions that prioritize human rights, local consent, and equitable access to clean energy.

    • Nuclear Energy Debate: Wizards vs. ProphetsThe nuclear energy debate is not solely about safety concerns or waste disposal, but rather values, leading to a stalemate. Effective communication and collaboration are crucial for finding middle ground solutions.

      The ongoing debate between nuclear energy supporters, or "wizards," and environmentalists, or "prophets," has led to a stalemate, resulting in the continued use of expensive and aging nuclear power stations, while cheaper renewable energy alternatives become more prevalent. The underlying issue is not primarily about safety concerns or waste disposal, but rather about values, such as the desire for decentralized, democratic energy solutions and opposition to large corporations. The lack of collaboration and creativity in finding middle ground solutions, as well as the entrenchment of advocacy groups, contributes to the persistence of this impasse. Regarding colonizing Mars, both the wizards and prophets might find appeal in the prospect, with the former seeing it as an opportunity to apply advanced technology and the latter as a chance to establish a sustainable, eco-friendly society. However, the success of such a venture would depend on effective communication and collaboration between these two perspectives.

    • The Importance of Choosing the Right Science Advisor for Colonizing a New PlanetConsidering diverse perspectives and expertise is crucial when choosing a science advisor for colonizing a new planet, as demonstrated by Borlaug's focus on resource management and Smil's vision of transforming the entire planet.

      When establishing a human colony on a new planet, the choice of a science advisor is crucial. Borlaug, known for his work on increasing agricultural productivity, and Vaclav Smil, an expert in energy and the environment, represent contrasting visions for terraforming a new world. Borlaug focuses on making the most of limited resources, while Smil advocates for transforming the entire planet to make it habitable. If personal confinement was not a factor, the speaker would choose Smil due to his deep understanding of potential mistakes and the importance of resource management in a hostile environment. However, the speaker also acknowledges the value of humor and a good working relationship, which Borlaug is known for, making the decision a complex one. Ultimately, the choice between these two scientists highlights the importance of considering various perspectives and expertise when tackling the challenges of colonizing a new planet.

    Recent Episodes from Freakonomics Radio

    EXTRA: In Praise of Maintenance (Update)

    EXTRA: In Praise of Maintenance (Update)

    We revisit an episode from 2016 that asks: Has our culture’s obsession with innovation led us to neglect the fact that things also need to be taken care of? 

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Martin Casado, general partner at Andreessen Horowitz.
      • Ruth Schwartz Cowan, professor emerita of history and sociology of science at University of Pennsylvania.
      • Edward Glaeser, professor of economics at Harvard University.
      • Chris Lacinak, founder and president of AVPreserve.
      • Andrew Russell, provost of SUNY Polytechnic Institute.
      • Lawrence Summers, professor and president emeritus of Harvard University; former Secretary of the Treasury and former director of the National Economic Council.
      • Lee Vinsel, professor of science, technology, and society at Virginia Tech.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 16, 2024

    602. Is Screen Time as Poisonous as We Think?

    602. Is Screen Time as Poisonous as We Think?

    Young people have been reporting a sharp rise in anxiety and depression. This maps neatly onto the global rise of the smartphone. Some researchers are convinced that one is causing the other. But how strong is the evidence?

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 12, 2024

    601. Multitasking Doesn’t Work. So Why Do We Keep Trying?

    601. Multitasking Doesn’t Work. So Why Do We Keep Trying?

    Only a tiny number of “supertaskers” are capable of doing two things at once. The rest of us are just making ourselves miserable, and less productive. How can we put the — hang on a second, I've just got to get this.


    Come see Stephen Dubner live! 

    “A Questionable Evening: A strategic interrogation from two people who ask questions for a living,” featuring Stephen Dubner and PJ Vogt from Search Engine.

    Thursday, Sept. 26th, at the Bell House in Brooklyn, NY. 

    https://www.eventbrite.com/e/a-questionable-evening-evening-with-stephen-dubner-and-pj-vogt-tickets-1002544747327

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Olivia Grace, senior product manager at Slack.
      • Gloria Mark, professor of computer science at the University of California, Irvine.
      • David Strayer, professor of cognition and neural science at the University of Utah.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 05, 2024

    What Is the Future of College — and Does It Have Room for Men? (Update)

    What Is the Future of College — and Does It Have Room for Men? (Update)

    Educators and economists tell us all the reasons college enrollment has been dropping, especially for men, and how to stop the bleeding. (Part 3 of our series from 2022, “Freakonomics Radio Goes Back to School.”)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Zachary Bleemer, assistant professor of economics at Princeton University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • D'Wayne Edwards, founder and President of Pensole Lewis College.
      • Catharine Hill, former president of Vassar College; trustee at Yale University; and managing director at Ithaka S+R.
      • Pano Kanelos, founding president of the University of Austin.
      • Amalia Miller, professor of economics at the University of Virginia.
      • Donald Ruff, president and C.E.O. of the Eagle Academy Foundation.
      • Morton Schapiro, professor of economics and former president of Northwestern University.
      • Ruth Simmons, former president of Smith College, Brown University, and Prairie View A&M University.
      • Miguel Urquiola, professor of economics at Columbia University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 29, 2024

    EXTRA: Why Quitting Is Usually Worth It

    EXTRA: Why Quitting Is Usually Worth It

    Stephen Dubner appears as a guest on Fail Better, a new podcast hosted by David Duchovny. The two of them trade stories about failure, and ponder the lessons that success could never teach.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 26, 2024

    The University of Impossible-to-Get-Into (Update)

    The University of Impossible-to-Get-Into (Update)

    America’s top colleges are facing record demand. So why don’t they increase supply? (Part 2 of our series from 2022, “Freakonomics Radio Goes Back to School.”)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Peter Blair, professor of education at Harvard University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • Zachary Bleemer, assistant professor of economics at Princeton University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • Amalia Miller, professor of economics at the University of Virginia.
      • Morton Schapiro, professor of economics and former president of Northwestern University.
      • Miguel Urquiola, professor of economics at Columbia University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 22, 2024

    What Exactly Is College For? (Update)

    What Exactly Is College For? (Update)

    We think of them as intellectual enclaves and the surest route to a better life. But U.S. colleges also operate like firms, trying to differentiate their products to win market share and prestige points. In the first episode of a special series originally published in 2022, we ask what our chaotic system gets right — and wrong. (Part 1 of “Freakonomics Radio Goes Back to School.”)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Peter Blair, faculty research Fellow of the National Bureau of Economic Research and professor of education at Harvard University.
      • Catharine Hill, former president of Vassar College; trustee at Yale University; and managing director at Ithaka S+R.
      • Morton Schapiro, professor of economics and former president of Northwestern University.
      • Ruth Simmons, former president of Smith College, Brown University, and Prairie View A&M University.
      • Miguel Urquiola, professor of economics at Columbia University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 15, 2024

    EXTRA: Here’s Why You’re Not an Elite Athlete (Update)

    EXTRA: Here’s Why You’re Not an Elite Athlete (Update)

    There are a lot of factors that go into greatness, many of which are not obvious. As the Olympics come to a close, we revisit a 2018 episode in which top athletes from a variety of sports tell us how they made it, and what they sacrificed.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 12, 2024

    600. “If We’re All in It for Ourselves, Who Are We?”

    600. “If We’re All in It for Ourselves, Who Are We?”

    Tania Tetlow, a former federal prosecutor and now the president of Fordham University, thinks the modern campus could use a dose of old-fashioned values.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 08, 2024

    599. The World's Most Valuable Unused Resource

    599. The World's Most Valuable Unused Resource

    It’s not oil or water or plutonium — it’s human hours. We've got an idea for putting them to use, and for building a more human-centered economy. But we need your help.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 01, 2024

    Related Episodes

    392. The Prime Minister Who Cried Brexit

    392. The Prime Minister Who Cried Brexit

    In 2016, David Cameron held a referendum on whether the U.K. should stay in the European Union. A longtime Euroskeptic, he nevertheless led the Remain campaign. So what did Cameron really want? We ask him that and much more — including why he left office as soon as his side lost and what he’d do differently if given another chance. (Hint: not much.)

    Logo

    © 2024 Podcastworld. All rights reserved

    Stay up to date

    For any inquiries, please email us at hello@podcastworld.io