►
From YouTube: Jonathon Porritt introduction | #AWClimateAssembly
Description
For more information, please visit:
Facebook: http://fb.me/AdurandWorthingCouncils
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/adurandworthing
Website: https://www.adur-worthing.gov.uk
A
Thank
you
very
much
indeed,
and
delighted
to
take
part
in
your
proceedings
today.
I
think
these
engagement
opportunities
with
citizens
are
really
important,
and
I
hope
that
we're
going
to
see
a
lot
more
of
this
pattern
of
activities
so
as
to
bring
people
into
a
sense
of
shared
understanding
of
just
how
critical
climate
change
really
is
and
just
how
important
it
is
that
we
start
to
address
it
urgently,
as
what
many
people
now
refer
to
a
full-on
climate
emergency
rather
than
anything
else.
A
So
I've
been
asked
to
reply
we'll
give
you
an
introduction
to
two
particular
issues.
Firstly,
what
is
it?
What
is
climate
change
and,
secondly,
what
is
causing
the
emissions,
the
greenhouse
gases
behind
climate
change,
so
I'll
endeavor
to
do
justice
to
that
in
20
minutes,
which
means
talking
a
little
bit
fast,
but
I
hope
managed
to
be
so.
A
So
what
is
climate
change?
Well
importantly,
we
have
to
start
by
understanding
that
there
are
two
kinds
of
climate
change.
The
first
is
what
is
often
referred
to
as
natural
climate
change,
so
the
kind
of
background
effects
which
would
be
going
on
whether
or
not
humankind
lived
on
this
planet
and
some
of
those
background
effects,
for
instance,
are
altered
by
the
trajectory
of
the
earth
around
the
sun
by
huge
natural
phenomena,
particularly
volcanic
explosions.
A
They've
had
a
massive
impact
on
the
climate
over
millions
of
years,
and
these
background
effects
are
really
important
and
they
there's
no
point
pretending
they
don't
happen.
They
do
happen,
they're
an
important
part
of
the
total
climate
picture.
The
second
aspect
of
climate
change
are
referred
to
as
man-made
causes
for
climate
change
or
to
use
the
technical
jargon
anthropogenic.
I
will
use
man-made
as
it's
a
little
bit
easier
to
wrap
one's
head
around
and
the
man-made
causes
of
what
I'm
going
to
be
talking
about.
A
When
there
was
still
a
debate
about
climate
science
and
I'll
come
on
and
explain
why
there
really
isn't
any
longer
a
debate
about
climate
science,
those
people
who
thought
to
deny
that
the
climate
was
actually
changing
for
a
long
time
argued
that
it
was
down
to
natural
causes
and
they'd
come
up
with
some
pretty
fantastical
stuff
like
sunspot
activity
from
the
sun,
and
things
like
this,
when
it
became
just
untenable
to
go
on
pretending
that
the
man-made
element
wasn't
happening,
then
they
switched
sides,
then
they
began
to
say
well,
climate
change
might
be
happening,
but
it's
still,
these
natural
causes
it's
nothing
to
do
with
man-made
emissions.
A
A
That's
both
a
good
thing
in
that
I
have
to
do
my
homework
as
a
non-scientist.
Just
like
all
of
you
do
it's
a
bad
thing,
because
it
means
that
I've
had
to
work
really
hard
to
keep
up
with
the
science
of
not
just
climate
change,
but
many
many
different
issues
that
I'm
involved
in
today
as
a
full-on
sustainability
campaigner,
as
it
were
so
as
a
non-scientist.
A
I
have
always
been
completely
clear
that
I
have
to
get
my
information
from
what
I
describe
as
impeccably,
reliable
and
objective
sources,
because,
if
you're
a
layperson
like
me,
you've
got
to
go
to
the
places
that
you
can
really
trust,
and
I
have
always
over
the
last
40
years,
relied
on
those
kind
of
sources
most
particularly
when
it
comes
to
climate
change
on
two.
Firstly,
a
body
called
the
intergovernmental
panel
on
climate
change.
A
This
was
a
body
set
up
by
governments
to
advise
governments
on
the
science
of
climate
change,
essentially,
and
for
the
last
30
more
years
or
more,
it
has
been
the
preeminent
source
of
expertise
for
trying
to
understand
the
climate.
That
doesn't
mean
to
say
it
isn't
controversial.
You'll
still
hear
lots
of
people
question
the
ipcc,
the
intergovernmental
panel.
A
Some
people
question
it
because
they
think
it
moves
too
slowly
and
the
consensus.
Science
is
always
out
of
date
and
they
never
quite
spell
it
out
as
urgently
as
they
need
to
spell
it
out
and
many
campaigners
subscribe
to
that
view
and
other
people
dismiss
the
ipcc
because
they
see
it
as
a
group
of
self-interested
scientists
merely
seeking
to
further
their
own
research
work.
That's
a
pretty
stupid
position
in
my
opinion,
but
hey.
This
has
never
been
an
easier
area
of
debate.
A
So
the
ipcc
is
one
of
my
go-to
sources
and
the
second
is
the
royal
society
and
we
are
lucky
here.
In
the
uk
we
have
probably
the
most
august
science
body
anywhere
in
the
world,
the
first
scientific
institution
of
that
kind,
modeled
in
many
other
countries
since
then,
and
in
every
single
country
that
has
a
royal
society
equivalent.
The
consensus
about
climate
science
has
been
gradually
developed
and
matured
over
the
years
and
it
is
now
beyond
any
doubt
at
all.
A
So
sorry,
if
I'm
stressing
that,
but
it
is
really
important
to
understand
that
the
somewhat
labored
debates
you've
heard
over
the
years
in
the
media
were
in
in
no
respect
true
to
the
science
as
scientists
themselves
actually
understood
it.
So
what
is
climate
change
well
realistically,
in
order
to
make
most
sense
for
the
purposes
of
this
inquiry?
I
am
going
to
be
talking
about
climate
change
since
the
start
of
the
industrial
revolution.
So
that's
the
if
you
like
1750
onwards.
Clearly,
humankind
has
been
on
this
planet
a
lot
longer
than
that.
A
If
you
go
back
the
whole
200
000
years,
you
can
see
a
pretty
interesting
pattern
of
different
changes
in
the
climate
during
those
200
thousand
years,
including
of
course,
the
last
ice
age
about
eleven
and
a
half
thousand
years
ago,
which
some
people
in
northern
europe
managed
to
survive.
But
we're
really
talking
about
the
period
of
time
now
modern
history.
A
Since
the
start
of
the
industrial
revolution
worth
reminding
ourselves
that
the
start
of
the
industrial
revolution,
the
population
of
planet
earth,
was
one
billion
roughly
give
or
take
a
few
hundred
thousand,
but
roughly
one
billion,
and
we
are
now,
of
course,
at
7.7
billion.
A
A
Now,
essentially,
when
scientists
refer
to
climate
change,
they're
referring
to
disruption
in
the
way
the
climate
has
expressed
itself
really
since
the
last
ice
age.
So
if
you
go
back
to
that
period
eleven
and
a
half
thousand
years
ago,
that
period
is
known
as
the
holocene
epoch,
post,
the
last
ice
age
and
remarkably,
and
very
luckily
for
humankind.
A
A
So
you
will
get
very
familiar
with
some
of
this
jargon
over
the
course
of
your
five
weekends.
Gge
greenhouse
gas
emissions
is
pretty
central
to
everything
that
you
will
be
exploring,
and
when
we
talk
about
gge,
we
both
mostly
mean
co2
carbon
dioxide
emissions,
but
also
other
greenhouse
gases,
including
methane,
nitrous
oxide
and
so
on.
A
These
are
not
unimportant
if
you've
been
following
the
news
just
in
the
last
week,
you'll
have
noticed
that
the
concern
now
in
the
russian
arctic
is
these
incredible
forest
fires
going
on
there
unprecedented
forest
fires,
which
cause
huge
amounts
of
methane
to
be
red
emitted
from
the
permafrost.
So
it
isn't
just
co2
and
when
people
bundle
it
all
together,
they
usually
use
a
measure
called
co2e,
which
is
the
equivalent
of
all
those
gases.
A
A
It's
difficult
this
when
you
ask
people
about,
do
they
really
care
about
climate
change
and
if
they
say
they
don't
one
of
the
reasons
they
often
give
is
just
too
many
numbers.
I
don't
get
these
numbers
they're
just
out
there.
They
don't.
They
don't
seem
to
make
any
difference
to
me.
They
don't
touch
my
life
in
reality,
so
I
can't
really
connect
with
all
of
these
numbers
because
there's
somebody
else's
concern.
A
We
just
need
to
be
aware
that
those
numbers
are
absolutely
critical
and
you
will
hear
people
talk
about
the
volume
of
gases
that
we
put
into
the
atmosphere
every
year,
which
is
still
continuing
to
rise
and
has
to
plateau
pretty
soon
and
then
start
to
come
down.
You
will
hear
people
talk
not
just
about
the
volume.
That's
the
sheer
amount
of
gases
we
put
into
the
atmosphere,
but
concentration
that
is
absolutely
critical
in
this
whole
story
about
climate
change.
It's
a
bitter.
It's
an
extraordinary
story.
A
A
Most
scientists
now
reckon
that
the
safe
threshold
for
concentrations
should
be
no
more
than
350
parts.
So
obviously,
already
an
increase
on
industrial
pre-industrial
levels
and
where
we
are
today
is
at
around
412
parts
per
million,
possibly
even
a
little
bit
higher.
And
since
1958
it's
been
possible
to
measure
the
concentration
of
greenhouse
gases
in
the
atmosphere
incredibly
accurately.
A
A
So
people
talk
about
this
by
volume
they
talk
about
it
by
concentration
and,
lastly,
you
just
have
to
have
a
awareness
about
temperature,
because
what
is
happening
is
that,
as
you
put
more
of
these
gases
into
the
atmosphere,
they
have
this
greenhouse
effect
as
it's
called
those
greenhouse
gases
get
trapped
in
the
atmosphere,
and
that
means
that
the
heat
can't
escape.
As
in
a
greenhouse
and
the
more
of
the
gases
you
put
into
the
atmosphere,
the
more
heat
is
trapped.
A
A
These
are
ballpark
figures,
but
most
scientists
would
go
with
a
one
degree
c,
average
increase
since
then.
The
time
where
the
debate
about
climate
change
was
really
live,
scientists
came
to
the
conclusion
that
it
wouldn't
be
safe.
If
average
temperatures
increased
by
more
than
two
degrees
c
by
the
end
of
this
century.
So
that's
two
degrees
since
the
starting
industrial
revolution
and
we're
already
one
degree
c
into
that.
Okay,
and
at
that
time
everybody
settled
around
this
figure.
A
We
must
limit
the
average
temperature
increase
to
no
more
than
2
degrees
c
by
the
end
of
the
century.
Now,
in
the
last
10
years
that
consensus
has
been
challenged
and
the
majority
vast
majority
of
climate
scientists
now
do
not
believe
that
a
two
degree
c
average
temperature
increase
would
guarantee
a
stable
climate.
A
Indeed,
they
are
much
more
focused
on
no
more
than
a
1.5
degrees,
c,
average
temperature
increase
by
the
end
of
the
century.
Now
I
know
this
doesn't
sound
like
much.
What
is
the
difference
in
1.5
degrees,
c
and
2
degrees
c?
Well,
you
know,
if
you
think
about
the
way
we
see
these
changes
just
simply
twiddling
our
thermostats.
A
It
seems
absolutely
tiny,
but
when
you're
talking
about
the
vast
global
climate
system,
half
a
degree
c,
the
difference
between
1.5
and
2
is
actually
the
determining
factor
as
to
whether
or
not
we
can
look
forward
to
a
stable
climate
and
therefore
a
reasonable
prospect
for
humankind
to
continue
to
develop
and
improve
its
conditions
here
on
planet
earth.
That's
the
the
story.
A
A
Paris,
agreement
in
2015
was
all
about
the
commitments
governments
made
would
still
mean
that
average
temperatures
would
increase
by
more
than
3
degrees
c
by
the
end
of
the
century,
and
that
gives
you
a
sense
of
the
quandary
that
we're
in
now.
It
is
an
intense
and
extremely
difficult
place
where
we
find
ourselves
and
the
fact
that
we've
lost
the
last
30
years
in
effect
by
not
addressing
some
of
these
scientific
data
points
is
really
astonishing.
Okay,
very
quickly.
What
causes
these
emissions?
This
is
not
complicated.
A
I've
already
referred
to
the
fact
that
it's
essentially
the
economic
activity
of
more
and
more
people
on
planet
earth
that
is
causing
the
emissions
you
can
break
the
emissions
down
any
way
you
want,
and
obviously
we
have
very
detailed
figures
to
explain
exactly
where
the
emissions
are
coming
from.
Essentially
emissions
from
industry.
A
So
that's
everything
to
do
with
energy.
In
general,
both
electricity
and
heat
transport
manufacturing,
steel
production,
aluminium,
cement,
the
whole
host
of
economic
activities
that
make
up
our
modern
industrial
economy.
All
of
that
is
responsible
for
around
75
of
the
total
emissions
of
greenhouse
gases.
A
So
this
is
a
huge,
huge
issue
and
obviously
I'm
not
asked
to
touch
on
these
things
today,
but
just
bear
in
mind
that
this
is
big
stuff
meat
and
dairy
between
them.
So
these
two
huge
sectors
relating
to
the
the
protein
content
of
our
diet
between
them.
They're
responsible
for
about
13
to
14
of
total
greenhouse
gas
emissions.
A
That's
the
equivalent
of
all
the
cars
trucks,
lorries,
planes,
ships
that
make
our
economy
work
well,
when
we're
not
stricken
by
kovid
19
meat
and
dairy
is
the
equivalent
to
all
of
those
different
emissions.
So
it
is
an
absolutely
enormous
part
of
the
total
picture
and
I've.
No
doubt
you
will
spend
a
lot
of
time
thinking
about
that.
A
Okay,
so
that's
really
it
and
you
can
go
into
whatever
level
of
detail
you
like
about
the
proportion
of
emissions
from
different
sources.
For
me,
it's
just
really
critical
to
think
about
this
as
a
consequence
of
there
being
more
and
more
people
on
planet
earth
every
year,
so
80
million
more
people
at
the
end
of
every
year
than
there
were
at
the
start
of
the
year
and
more
and
more
economic
activity
from
increased
numbers
of
people.
A
That's
basically
it
it's
not
that
complicated
at
that
level,
and
what
that
means
is,
of
course,
that
we
have
to
address
both
of
those
issues
sometimes
referred
to
as
the
overpopulation
stroke
over
consumption
quandary
in
order
to
come
up
with
solutions
in
this
space.
So
that's
it!
It's
a
very
tough
challenge.
If
we're
going
to
succeed
in
decarbonizing
our
economies,
so
reducing
the
emissions
from
all
of
that
activity,
both
industrial
and
land
use
activity.
A
So
that's
all
I'm
going
to
say
by
way
of
my
introduction,
it
is
complicated
the
science
of
climate
change.
It's
not
immediately
obvious
what
is
happening
here
because
they're
talking
about
total
global
systems,
it's
complicated
by
definition,
and
although
it's
a
bit
easier
to
pin
down
where
those
emissions
come
from,
it
gets
complicated
when
you
try
and
work
out
what
we
should
be
doing
about
them
and
which
of
the
many
interventions
available
to
us
would
make
the
biggest
difference.