Not the End of the World
My Summary
Highlights
‘Three minutes with Hans Rosling will change your mind about the world.’6 It changed mine. — location: 312
As Dr Kate Marvel, a climate scientist at NASA, puts it: ‘I unequivocally reject, scientifically and personally, the notion that children are somehow doomed to an unhappy life.’7 — location: 371
The problem is that people mistake optimism for ‘blind optimism’, the unfounded faith that things will just get better. Blind optimism really is dumb. And dangerous. If we sit back and do nothing, things will not turn out fine. That’s not the kind of optimism that I’m talking about. — location: 397
I’ve heard various other terms for this ‘conditional’ or effective optimism: ‘urgent optimism’, ‘pragmatic optimism’, ‘realistic optimism’, ‘impatient optimism’. All these terms are grounded in inspiration and action. — location: 406
Criticism is essential for an effective optimist. — location: 416
As my colleague Max Roser puts it: ‘The world is much better; the world is still awful; the world can do much better.’10 All three statements are true. — location: 473
In 1987, the UN defined sustainable development as ‘meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’. — location: 513
As the Native American proverb goes: ‘Take only what you need and leave the land as you found it.’ Similarly, the ancient Kenyan proverb: ‘Treat the Earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children.’ — location: 540
The Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius had fourteen children. Nine of them died before he did. Charles Darwin lost three of his children. — location: 562
In most countries – even many of the poorest – it’s more likely than not that a girl will finish primary school and get a basic education.fn3 — location: 632
Air pollution is one of the world’s biggest killers. Researchers estimate that it kills at least 9 million people every year. — location: 657
Food production is responsible for one-quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions; it uses half of the world’s habitable land, 70% of the world’s freshwater withdrawals, and the leading driver of biodiversity loss. — location: 678
referred to as depopulation and degrowth — location: 704
So, rapid population growth is behind us, the world is not facing an uncontrolled ‘population explosion’. — location: 725
In The Population Bomb, Paul R. Ehrlich argued that the optimal global population was around 1 billion people. — location: 727
Would it be possible to achieve this by just redistributing the world’s money? No: the global economy would have to be at least five times bigger than it is today. That’s right: to lift everyone out of poverty, with a level of equality like Denmark, the global economy would need to increase five-fold. If everyone in the world lived on $30 per day with zero inequality (so the richest and poorest both get $30), the global economy would need to more than double. — location: 759
These substances – the most well known being chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) – were being used in refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, aerosol sprays and industry. By measuring concentrations of chlorine molecules throughout the lower atmosphere, they realised that these gases were not breaking down. Instead, they were rising through into the higher stratosphere.18 There, UV radiation would break the chlorine atoms free, allowing them to react with ozone, and destroying it. — location: 923
Forty-three countries signed the Montreal Protocol in 1987, agreeing to phase out ozone-depleting substances from 1989 onwards. The first countries to take action were mostly richer ones that were the main industrial producers – the US, Canada, Japan, most of Europe and New Zealand. Their aim was to halve global production by 1999 before working towards a total phase-out later.22, 23 — location: 939
In 2009, it became the first international convention – of any kind, not just environmental – to achieve universal ratification from every country in the world. The success of this international — location: 946
Montreal protocoll
This journey is often called the ‘Environmental Kuznets Curve’:fn4 plot an environmental metric against income and it forms an upside-down ‘U’ (it’s low when we’re poor; it rises to reach its peak at middle incomes; then falls again as we get richer). There are lots of environmental metrics where this Kuznets Curve doesn’t hold true. — location: 990
In 2020, nine-year-old Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah became the first person in the world to have ‘air pollution’ on her death certificate. She died of asthma, and a London Coroner’s Court concluded that air pollution played a large role. — location: 1008
Some scientists think this number could be even bigger: some of the most recent and widely cited studies estimate that at least 9 million people die every year from the air they breathe.27, 28 To put these numbers into context, this is similar to the death toll from smoking: around 8 million.29 It’s six or seven times higher than the number of people that die in road accidents: 1.3 million. Hundreds of times more than the number that die from terrorism or war each year. Air pollution is the silent killer that doesn’t get enough headlines. — location: 1015
Our first step towards clean air is a tried-and-tested one: reduce poverty and make sure no one is using old, traditional fuels. — location: 1077
There is no single estimate of how much air pollution costs us in monetary terms; it depends on what ‘price’ we put on poor health and early death. But most studies come up with a similar order of magnitude: trillions of dollars are lost globally every year from ill health, sick days, loss of productivity, crop losses and other ‘hidden’ impacts.36 In a 2022 report by the World Bank, this figure was $8.1 trillion, which was equal to 6% of global GDP.37 — location: 1096
As I write, the UK is seeing a surge in popularity for open wood fires and stoves. These seem like an eco-friendly way to heat your home – it’s what we used to do before we started burning fossil fuels – and feel more ‘natural’ and ‘primitive’. But burning wood is what many of the world’s poorest are trying to move away from. It creates large amounts of pollution inside your house, and also contributes to pollution outdoors. It’s much worse than gas or electricity. Burning these solid fuels was once a massive problem that we solved. Let’s resist the temptation to roll back this progress: it might feel like the eco-friendly thing to do, but the data tells us that it’s not. — location: 1212
The notion that we could keep the rise below 1.5°C seemed delusional. And yet the target made it into the final agreement. — location: 1237
Without a major, unexpected technological breakthrough, we will go past this target. — location: 1241
have moved at in the last few years, and what this means for the future. One organisation – the Climate Action Tracker – follows every country’s climate policies, and its pledges and targets. — location: 1246
In a world without climate policies, we’d be heading towards 4 or 5°C, at least. — location: 1254
Death rates from disasters have actually fallen since the first half of the 20th century. And not just by a little bit. They have fallen roughly 10-fold. — location: 1280
So, our ancestors were slowly tweaking the Earth’s thermostat for millennia, even before we started to dig fossil fuels out of the ground. — location: 1338
landscapes for thousands of years, and releasing carbon at the same time. If we look at estimates for how much carbon we have released over the last 10,000 years through deforestation and the conversion of grasslands into farmland, it amounts to around 1,400 billion tonnes of CO2.7 So, our ancestors were slowly tweaking the Earth’s thermostat for millennia, even before we started to dig fossil fuels out of the ground. — location: 1335
If we look at estimates for how much carbon we have released over the last 10,000 years through deforestation and the conversion of grasslands into farmland, it amounts to around 1,400 billion tonnes of CO2.7 So, our ancestors were slowly tweaking the Earth’s thermostat for millennia, even before we started to dig fossil fuels out of the ground. — location: 1336
The world has already passed the peak of per capita emissions. It happened a decade ago. Most people are unaware of this. — location: 1364
China tops the emissions list. This is not surprising because it’s home to the most people. It emits around 29% of the world’s emissions. The US is in second place at 14%. The European Union (which tends to participate in climate negotiations as a group) is next at 8%, followed by India at 7%, and then Russia at 5%. — location: 1384
We can already see the inequalities. India is responsible for 7% of emissions but is home to 18% of the world population. The US contributes 14% of emissions but is home to just 4% of people. It is almost a direct mirror image of the entire continent of Africa, which is home to 17% of the world’s population but emits just 4%. — location: 1386
The picture is also skewed when we look at each country’s historical responsibility. To do this we add up all of a country’s emissions since 1750. The US is way out in front, having contributed 25% of the world’s emissions. The EU comes in second at 17%. China slips down the list to third place, having contributed only half as much as the US. India is even further down, having emitted just 3%. — location: 1389
In the UK we now emit about the same as someone in the 1850s. — location: 1438
We’re going to compare electricity sources based on a metric called the ‘levelized costs of energy’ (LCOE). You can think about LCOE as the answer to the question: what would be the minimum price that my customers would need to pay so that the power plant would break even over its lifetime? — location: 1488
When comparing the land use of energy sources, we need to think about more than just the space used by the plant itself – the area that the coal plant or solar panel physically takes up. We also need to include the land used to mine the materials, extract the fuels, handle the waste at the end. A large assessment by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe estimated the land needed by each source to produce one unit of electricity, when we consider all of these steps of the supply chain.26 — location: 1572
Of course, that’s not our only option with solar PV, which we can also put on roofs. Then, the only land use is for mining. In that case, solar PV is almost as good as gas and is much better than coal. — location: 1581
estimate that we currently use around 0.2% of the world’s ice-free land for electricity production – most of it for the mining of fossil fuels. (That’s small, considering we use 50% of the world’s ice-free land for farming.) — location: 1590
In a world with low-carbon electricity, we could reduce this number. If the world moved to 100% nuclear, we’d need just 0.01% of the world’s land. If we used solar panels on roofs, it’d be 0.02% to 0.06%. — location: 1592
The bulk of our transport emissions come from roads. Road vehicles are responsible for 74% of the world’s transport emissions. — location: 1621
In Norway, 88% of car sales in 2022 were electric. In Sweden, 54%. In the UK, it was 23%. The US has been lagging behind, with just 8% of new cars being electric (although Joe Biden’s new climate deal could change this quickly). In China in 2022, nearly two-thirds (29%) of new sales were electric. This is a massive leap from 2020, when it was just 6%. — location: 1661
The price of lithium-ion batteries has fallen by more than 98% over the last three decades. — location: 1666
To have a good chance of keeping global warming below 1.5°C, we can only emit around 500 billion tonnes.44 And — location: 1728
Producing 100 grams of protein from beef emits around 50 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents.45 — location: 1740
‘moral licensing’: it explains the psychological trick we play on ourselves where we justify one behaviour because we’ve made a sacrifice somewhere else. — location: 1903
Things to stress less about The reputation of being a climate data person is hard to shake. Doctors at a party get asked about everyone’s potential life-ending illnesses. I get asked ‘Is this really bad for the environment?’ or ‘What’s worse: this or that?’ These questions often go really deep – right down to the behaviours that emit just grams of CO2. I’m happy to answer them, not least because I’ve geeked out on all the relevant numbers. The book How Bad are Bananas? The Carbon Footprint of Everything by Mike Berners-Lee was the bible I used to carry everywhere with me.51 I was desperate to understand and optimise every tiny detail of my carbon footprint. I wanted to know if I should use the hand dryer or a paper towel. (The answer is paper towel if you’re just using one sheet, but hand dryer if you go for two.) Is it more climate-friendly to read a book or watch TV? (It’s definitely reading a book.) Should I use the dishwasher or the sink? (Unless you use cold water, or hot water very sparingly, the dishwasher wins.) These comparisons are fun and nerdy. But sometimes they can do more harm than good. I can justify spending a lot of time on them because it’s my job. But people shouldn’t be stressed out by every tiny decision they make. It can get overwhelming. Tackling climate change feels like a massive sacrifice that has taken over our lives. That would be okay if all of these actions were really making a difference, but they’re not. It’s misplaced effort and stress, sometimes even at the cost of the few actions that really will matter. There is a concept called ‘moral licensing’: it explains the psychological trick we play on ourselves where we justify one behaviour because we’ve made a sacrifice somewhere else. So, we go for the steak because we’ll recycle the plastic wrapper it comes in. Or, we’ll drive rather than cycle across town because we used the ‘eco-friendly’ setting on the washing machine. When we ask people what they think are the most effective things they can do to reduce their carbon footprint, they often mention the stuff that has the smallest impact.52 Recycling, using more efficient light bulbs, not leaving their television on standby or hanging their washing out to dry. They often miss the big stuff: eating less meat, switching to an electric car, taking one less flight, insulating their home or investing in low-carbon energy.53 That’s why understanding the numbers is important. Not so we can stress about how much CO2 we’re emitting by watching Netflix, but by helping people understand the handful of behaviour changes that really make a difference. So, what should we all stress less about when it comes to climate change? In no particular order, here is a list of common things that people think make a big difference, but usually have a small impact on their carbon footprint. Sure, continue doing them if you want to (I do some), but don’t stress and definitely don’t do them instead of the big things that really do matter. ➤ Recycling your plastic bottles (see Chapter 7) ➤ Replacing old light bulbs with energy-efficient ones ➤ You don’t have to stop watching TV, streaming movies or using the internet ➤ How you read: whether it’s Kindle, paper or audiobook, it doesn’t matter ➤ Washing your dishes in the dishwasher, it doesn’t matter much ➤ Eating local food (see Chapter 5) ➤ Eating organic food (this can be worse for your carbon footprint – see Chapter 5) ➤ Leaving your television or computer on standby, it doesn’t matter much ➤ Leaving your phone charger plugged in, it doesn’t matter much ➤ Plastic or paper bag – your plastic bag actually has a lower carbon footprint, but it doesn’t matter much fn7 — location: 1889
‘If we split the world’s food production equally between everyone we could each have at least 5,000 calories a day. More than twice what we need. Or, to put it another way, we produce enough food for a global population twice the size that it is today.’ — location: 2432
Science Heroes: it ranks the giants of the scientific world according to estimates of how many lives they’ve saved. — location: 2498
Around four in 10 adults in the world are overweight. — location: 2584
The world produces 3 billion tonnes of cereals every year. Less than half of this goes towards human food; 41% is fed to livestock, and 11% is used for industrial uses, like biofuels. — location: 2590
Only half of the world’s cereals goes directly to human food Poorer countries use nearly all of their cereals for direct human food. Richer countries divert more and more towards animal feed and industrial uses, such as biofuels. — location: 2599
Measuring ‘calorie efficiency’ tells us what percentage of the calories we feed an animal is converted into ‘eatable’ products for humans. These figures are quite shocking. For beef, it’s just 3%. — location: 2617
For lamb, it’s around 4%. Better than cows, but still crushingly bad. Pork is almost 10%. For chicken, it’s 13%. Even for the most efficient of animals, the vast majority – more than 80% – of calories are wasted. — location: 2622
As seen in Chapter 3, the food system is responsible for one-quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. — location: 2651
The leading data source – the UN’s FAO – suggests that we passed the peak around the year 2000. Other studies have built on this work, finding the same: the world has already passed the peak. — location: 2683
Researchers mapped out scenarios of how this would change if everyone in the world adopted different diets. Still, it gives us an interesting look at what our global land use could look like. Simply cutting out beef and lamb (but still keeping dairy cows) would nearly halve our need for global farmland. We’d save 2 billion hectares, which is an area twice the size of the United States. — location: 2803
What you eat matters much more than where it has come from Transport and packaging emissions are usually a small part of the carbon footprint of our food. Eating a more plant-based diet is more climate-friendly than trying to eat more locally. Emissions are measured in kilograms of carbon dioxide-equivalents per kilogram of food.fn13 — location: 3018
Importing Spanish lettuce to the UK during winter months reduces emissions three- to eight-fold.40 Tomatoes produced in greenhouses in Sweden use 10 times as much energy as importing tomatoes from Southern Europe when they are in season. — location: 3028
Once again, what you choose to eat and making sure that it actually gets eaten matters much more than what it’s wrapped in. The carbon footprint of the plastic packaging is tiny compared to the footprint of the food wrapped inside it. Just 4% of food’s emissions come from packaging. — location: 3086
Do We Need Pandas? The uncomfortable truth about biodiversity, — location: 3188
This wave of mammal extinctions stretched across the globe from around 52,000 to 9,000 BC in an event called the Quaternary Megafauna Extinction. — location: 3207
One of the most widely cited estimates is around 8.7 million species on Earth today: 2.2 million in the ocean, and 6.5 million on land. — location: 3281
Around three-quarters of our crops depend on pollinators to some extent, but only one-third of the total food we produce does.17, 18, 19 This is because many of our largest producing crops – staples such as wheat, maize and rice – are not dependent on them at all. These staple crops are pollinated by the wind. — location: 3313
We first need to understand what we mean by a ‘mass extinction’. A mass extinction event is when 75% of all species go extinct in a relatively short period of time.fn4 Here, when I say ‘short’, I mean something in the realm of 2 million years. A crazily long period of time for us humans to grapple with, but a blink of an eye in the planet’s 4.5-billion-year history. — location: 3395
An asteroid struck Yucatán in Mexico. — location: 3420
Overhunting and agriculture have been responsible for 75% of all plant, amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal extinctions since 1500. — location: 3492
In 2021, around 16% of the world’s land was in a ‘protected area’.39 These are areas of land that are classified as spots of scientific protection. That means the world met the UN’s 2020 target for the amount of land that is protected. In December 2022, at COP15 – the biodiversity equivalent of the Paris Climate Agreement – countries signed a deal to make sure this increased to 30% by 2030 (they call it ‘30 by 30’). — location: 3522
Plastic is derived from the Greek plastikos, meaning ‘capable of being shaped or moulded’, — location: 3613
Baekeland filed his patent for Bakelite in 1907, and it was granted on 7 December 1909. The birthday of plastics as we know them. — location: 3640
Looking at the other continents, around 8% of plastics come from African rivers, 5% from South America, 5% from North America. Europe and Oceania combined contribute less than 1%. — location: 3781
This means that around 2% of global plastic waste is traded.fn6 The other 98% is handled domestically. — location: 3810
The world now produces more seafood from fish farming than wild catch Most of the growth in seafood production in recent decades has come from aquaculture. This is good for the protection of wild fish stocks. — location: 4303
Coral bleaching happens when corals expel the algae they rely on to harvest sunlight. This starves them of their energy source, and they can ultimately die. They do this when they’re exposed to extreme warming. — location: 4403
It’s better to look for fish with certification labels from organisations like the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) or the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC). — location: 4451
Most fish perform well on other environmental metrics too. They’re nearly all better than chicken. — location: 4553
flounder and lobster can have a very high footprint. If — location: 4554
‘natural fallacy’: — location: 4657
the charity evaluator GiveWell is my most trusted reference.2 — location: 4707
Created by Niall Bell (niall@niallbell.com)