Welcome to Zero. I am Akshadrati. This week, dictators, Democrats and disasters.

The time we have to take action on climate change is in short supply.

Emissions of greenhouse gases need to peak within the next three years if we're to stay

off the worst effects of climate change. We only have until 2030 to stem devastating climate change.

It comes with a massive warning. It is now or never.

And the lack of time raises the question, are democracies up to the challenge?

Do we have the time to let the natural course of consensus building and debate play out?

Or should governments around the world suspend the normal course of democracy in favor of

climate action? Is an eco-authoritarian model the way to go? In my travels to China, for all the country's many problems, it was stunning to see how much progress it has made on green technologies.

It has a plan to reach zero emissions within decades, and the country typically delivers on its promises.

That's made many in the environmental movement question whether more of us

should be taking the authoritarian route to zero. I wanted to put these questions to Dan

Feurano, the author of Can Democracy Handle Climate Change, one of my favorite books on the subject.

He's also the director for the Center for Environmental Policy at American

University. Dan comes down strongly in favor of democracy, but readily admits that no government

is doing enough to meet the challenges of climate change. And he worries that if left unchecked,

democracies themselves may fall victim to the stresses and strains caused by our warming planet.

A final note before we begin.

We open our conversation talking about the scientist James Lovelock, who was still alive at the time of recording,

which sadly passed away at the age of 103.

Dan Feurino, welcome to Zero.

It's great to be here. Thanks for having me.

...