I'm John Bachelors with Professor Stephen Kuhnen. He's the author of the very helpful

unsettled what climate science tells us what it doesn't and why it matters.

He is also author of a new paper from Hoover.

He is a senior fellow.

The factual context for climate and energy policy, not by 2050, maybe by 2100 net zero.

And yet, we need backups, we need everything that we can possibly imagine.

All the nuclear, all the possibly imagine all the nuclear all the renewables all the gas fields

because the demand of electricity rises with the success of the population or not

So what is to be done? The one I'm keen on, Stephen right away,

improved communications to the public. Yes, yes and yes. And what can be done about that?

Absolutely. You you know this is the problem or the issue is at the intersection of two fields,

climate science and energy.

Both of them are complicated and nuanced,

and you cannot reduce them to sound bites.

The planet is dying or wind and solar are the way to fix this.

And it takes, I think, a fair bit of explanation. I do that when I was teaching at NYU. I would

teach master students in both those subjects, climate and energy, and just by laying out the facts which took a few weeks

They would come out with their eyes open and gee

It's not what I thought it was and so I think part of it is just getting the factual data out

It's very difficult to do that in the mainstream media and meets with respect to climate.

Even if you simply quote the IPCC, the UN panel on climate science,

but quote an inconvenient fact that they assert, you'll never get it

...