Translator: Peggy Berthier Auditor: Cristina Bufi-Pöcksteiner
We are history, and we must do it.
We do it because we are in a particular stage,
we have an extreme crossroads.
On the one hand, we have a future that can be dramatic;
on the other side
we have a future that can give us
an extraordinary increase in the quality of life.
There is nothing in between.
And who obliges us to this choice so extreme
is the environment that surrounds us.
We think the environment
– we all know that it is in a state of deterioration –
like it was something that basically does not concern us.
If we lose the environment, we will lose a beauty,
but not our ability to survive.
And we forget that we are part of the ecosystem.
If the ecosystem collapses, we collapsed too.
And one of the ways
where there is already showing that this is happening
It is pushing us to the unpublished conflicts.
Adolf Hitler had a predominant role
in the worst tragedy of human history:
70 million dead.
Only his story
He has allowed us to take a leap forward
in understanding the difference between peace and war.
Yes, because until Adolf Hitler
it was thought that the question
It was only decided by the elite, from the equipment.
It lacked a fundamental element of the equation,
that is, ordinary people.
Only it’s a strange thing happened:
Adolf Hitler did not come to power in a coup.
He tried in 1923, was put in prison,
He wrote Mein Kampf [My Struggle],
in which he said all he wanted to do.
Ten years later he was freely elected,
although its voters
They knew exactly what he wanted to do.
So the question has emerged: “What happened?”
It happened that ordinary people counts.
The German middle class,
ie the portion of the population
absolute best educated in the world between the wars,
freely voted Adolf Hitler,
because it was under a heavy socio-economic stress,
caused among other things by the 1929 crisis.
Here, we take this reasoning and proiettiamolo on environmental degradation,
in particular on climate change.
Climate change
is the aspect of environmental degradation which is discussed more,
but it is essential to understand that they are neither alone nor isolated.
This scheme,
who became famous among scientists in 2009,
shows new areas
where we risk crossing, taking resources,
the self-healing capacity of the planet.
In some sectors, which are then red triangles,
we have passed too
this threshold of self-regeneration of the planet.
The sector that relates to climate change
is the triangle pointing upwards.
severe situation, but it is not the most serious:
there are two that are in much worse conditions.
One is too technical, the nitrogen cycle;
but we understand each other well, it is the loss of biodiversity.
Well, we have to understand that we have entered a vicious cycle:
the more you alter the climate, the more we lose biodiversity;
but the more we lose biodiversity, the more the climate is altered.
And then, the prospect that we face is this.
This is the graph of the loss of species
in the last 200 years.
Over the past 50 it took surge:
naturalists speak of the Great Acceleration,
or Sixth Transition Biotic.
“Transition Biotic” is a big word for saying “Mass Extinction.”
We are in the sixth extinction of Massa,
which differs from its predecessor for two reasons:
The first is that, with certainty, because we are;
the second is that there was never a so fast.
We are quite familiar
with the last episode of mass extinction:
that of the dinosaurs, probably caused by an asteroid.
We are used to seeing documentaries
where there is an asteroid
comes, it hits the Earth, big explosion, shock wave,
and we have the impression
that the whole tragedy is consumed in two minutes.
The tragedy was there: the loss of eight species of ten.
But it lasted from 30 to 100 thousand years.
That is, if you implement some prospects,
some climate change scenarios considered realistic,
we will lose eight species out of ten by the end of this century.
Only that we are wonderful human:
instead of doing it in one hundred thousand years we do it in 250,
since it started the Industrial Revolution.
The subject of this exhibition is: “But to me why care?”
Why do I care about is explained, much better than I or scientists,
this anonymous painter of murals London.
I have the honor to present my desktop.
Every day when I go to the office
I turn the computer on this, to remind me to identify work right.
He tells us, [and] we all know:
Bees are under pressure, they are decimating.
Only that bees are not just a nice presence to contemplate,
They are also a function in the ecosystem.
Every piece of this extraordinary balance, we call ecosystem,
It has a function that we can not do without.
The bees pollinate.
We think of these.
It is difficult that we mobilize ourselves to bees,
let alone mobilize for this: it is called phytoplankton.
Still, the phytoplankton is threatened by a phenomenon
what scientists call the “brother of climate change.”
In fact, they call it the evil brother of climate change.
It is ocean acidification.
The greenhouse effect is caused
by an excess of carbon dioxide, which inject into the atmosphere.
One third of this carbon dioxide is absorbed by the oceans.
There, it becomes carbonic acid,
It is making it difficult for phytoplankton produce their skeletons.
A function that is called biocalcification.
So far for phytoplankton it is difficult to reproduce,
but there will be a fatal threshold where it will become impossible.
It will happen all at once.
When this happens, the phytoplankton disappears.
And the question is: “And me?
I’m not going to dinner mica, with phytoplankton! “
Yet, the phytoplankton is at the base of the marine food chain.
If it disappears phytoplankton,
consequently, very quickly, disappearing marine life.
And again: “And me?”
Be ‘, 12% of humanity lives of sea products.
The 17% of the protein we consume come from the sea.
But they are still numbers that are not afraid.
The fact is that marine life produces 55% of the oxygen we breathe.
Then, these phenomena are produced in this field suddenly.
The causes are accumulated in the shadows,
and then the consequences are out all together.
We take note of this,
we take account of our argument about Hitler
and we see this scenario.
I show glaciers in the Himalayas; They will melt.
They will not dissolve gradually,
in proportion to the increase of the temperature:
collapse, for a mechanism that would take too long to explain here.
And the question then is: “But to me?”
Ah, the loss of the beauty of the alpine landscape,
yaks, Tibetan culture …
They are extraordinary losses:
but nothing, in comparison to the loss of function of glaciers.
The glaciers have a function: regulate the outflow of downstream waters.
In this region, if there were no glaciers (it is monsoon)
the climate is characterized
by alternating between disastrous droughts and floods.
They are suddenly less glaciers,
which in this flat region irrigate
where they are allocated one billion and 400 million people.
These are in a situation similar to that of the German middle class.
Indeed, the German middle class has made the choices he has accomplished
because he has lost the value of his savings:
and were 40 million.
These Forgiveness: water; rice; roads; schools; health –
They are a billion and 400 million,
in an area where four countries – Russia, China, India and Pakistan –
They have the atomic bomb.
Houston, we have a problem!
But perhaps you will think that this is a political delirium, as I am.
The scientists also think,
those who keep the watch of the Apocalypse.
17 Nobel prizes for physics,
who in 2015 laid the Apocalypse clock
the same distance as they were during the missile crisis in Cuba,
that is, during the worst period of tension of the Cold War.
You may think this is a scenario for the future,
but unfortunately it is a scenario for the present.
These are the desert areas of North Africa.
Here, the people have become accustomed to live compatibly with the desert.
But inside there is a band, an active end
where there is the desert, there is desertification.
Visualize and sovrapponetela to these dynamics.
This is where the conflicts and hunger are concentrated.
This is where the terrorist dynamics are concentrated.
This is where all forms of illegal trafficking are concentrated.
And here it is where they come from migrations that bother us so much.
There is an obvious coincidence; spieghiamola in practice.
This is Lake Chad, in the heart of the Sahel.
He always had a historical tendency to variability.
Except that, in the last 50 years, it has shrunk to 18 times.
Around the Lake Chad there are four fragile states.
Close your eyes and imagine
if it closed into the Mediterranean of 18 times in 50 years.
Our economy goes into a tailspin.
Just imagine the economy of four fragile states.
So it is not surprising if proliferates Boko Haram.
It is in a stressful situation that arise this type of phenomena
and that come the origins of certain attacks that strike us.
And Boko Haram has had its role in migration that so concern us.
Well, but we can do it, we can make history.
Just the sum of small choices sustainability of each of us
to solve this dilemma.
And with something paradoxical.
We can say:
“The situation is serious, then I load the sacrifice to change something.”
No, what he asks of us, nature is not a sacrifice;
It is just to live better.
I show two pyramids:
the first is well known, the “food pyramid.”
This we also find in the magazines at the hairdresser,
It is the one that tells us what proportion should we feed on each type of food.
Little red meat, gradually up to many fibers, etc.
If we work alongside this pyramid
the impact on the environment pyramid
the production of each food category,
coincide perfectly.
But in the sense that the more a food is harmful to us,
the more his production is harmful to the environment.
It seems a coincidence; it is not.
It is the paradigm of how we relate to the environment.
We may be of individual mechanized transport obese.
The thing is the same.
But this is just the tip of the iceberg.
If we all are nourished,
not making a sacrifice,
but as truly it allows us to feel good, we create sustainability.
But [it is] only sustainability:
we also create a redistribution of access to protein
and allow the poor to access them.
But if we also create this form of justice,
we also create peace,
because in a world in which every child
has access to that amount of protein that is needed to go to school,
Boko Haram, immigration and Isis are not there.
Thank you.
(Applause)
We are history, and we must do it.
We do it because we are in a particular stage,
we have an extreme crossroads.
On the one hand, we have a future that can be dramatic;
on the other side
we have a future that can give us
an extraordinary increase in the quality of life.
There is nothing in between.
And who obliges us to this choice so extreme
is the environment that surrounds us.
We think the environment
– we all know that it is in a state of deterioration –
like it was something that basically does not concern us.
If we lose the environment, we will lose a beauty,
but not our ability to survive.
And we forget that we are part of the ecosystem.
If the ecosystem collapses, we collapsed too.
And one of the ways
where there is already showing that this is happening
It is pushing us to the unpublished conflicts.
Adolf Hitler had a predominant role
in the worst tragedy of human history:
70 million dead.
Only his story
He has allowed us to take a leap forward
in understanding the difference between peace and war.
Yes, because until Adolf Hitler
it was thought that the question
It was only decided by the elite, from the equipment.
It lacked a fundamental element of the equation,
that is, ordinary people.
Only it’s a strange thing happened:
Adolf Hitler did not come to power in a coup.
He tried in 1923, was put in prison,
He wrote Mein Kampf [My Struggle],
in which he said all he wanted to do.
Ten years later he was freely elected,
although its voters
They knew exactly what he wanted to do.
So the question has emerged: “What happened?”
It happened that ordinary people counts.
The German middle class,
ie the portion of the population
absolute best educated in the world between the wars,
freely voted Adolf Hitler,
because it was under a heavy socio-economic stress,
caused among other things by the 1929 crisis.
Here, we take this reasoning and proiettiamolo on environmental degradation,
in particular on climate change.
Climate change
is the aspect of environmental degradation which is discussed more,
but it is essential to understand that they are neither alone nor isolated.
This scheme,
who became famous among scientists in 2009,
shows new areas
where we risk crossing, taking resources,
the self-healing capacity of the planet.
In some sectors, which are then red triangles,
we have passed too
this threshold of self-regeneration of the planet.
The sector that relates to climate change
is the triangle pointing upwards.
severe situation, but it is not the most serious:
there are two that are in much worse conditions.
One is too technical, the nitrogen cycle;
but we understand each other well, it is the loss of biodiversity.
Well, we have to understand that we have entered a vicious cycle:
the more you alter the climate, the more we lose biodiversity;
but the more we lose biodiversity, the more the climate is altered.
And then, the prospect that we face is this.
This is the graph of the loss of species
in the last 200 years.
Over the past 50 it took surge:
naturalists speak of the Great Acceleration,
or Sixth Transition Biotic.
“Transition Biotic” is a big word for saying “Mass Extinction.”
We are in the sixth extinction of Massa,
which differs from its predecessor for two reasons:
The first is that, with certainty, because we are;
the second is that there was never a so fast.
We are quite familiar
with the last episode of mass extinction:
that of the dinosaurs, probably caused by an asteroid.
We are used to seeing documentaries
where there is an asteroid
comes, it hits the Earth, big explosion, shock wave,
and we have the impression
that the whole tragedy is consumed in two minutes.
The tragedy was there: the loss of eight species of ten.
But it lasted from 30 to 100 thousand years.
That is, if you implement some prospects,
some climate change scenarios considered realistic,
we will lose eight species out of ten by the end of this century.
Only that we are wonderful human:
instead of doing it in one hundred thousand years we do it in 250,
since it started the Industrial Revolution.
The subject of this exhibition is: “But to me why care?”
Why do I care about is explained, much better than I or scientists,
this anonymous painter of murals London.
I have the honor to present my desktop.
Every day when I go to the office
I turn the computer on this, to remind me to identify work right.
He tells us, [and] we all know:
Bees are under pressure, they are decimating.
Only that bees are not just a nice presence to contemplate,
They are also a function in the ecosystem.
Every piece of this extraordinary balance, we call ecosystem,
It has a function that we can not do without.
The bees pollinate.
We think of these.
It is difficult that we mobilize ourselves to bees,
let alone mobilize for this: it is called phytoplankton.
Still, the phytoplankton is threatened by a phenomenon
what scientists call the “brother of climate change.”
In fact, they call it the evil brother of climate change.
It is ocean acidification.
The greenhouse effect is caused
by an excess of carbon dioxide, which inject into the atmosphere.
One third of this carbon dioxide is absorbed by the oceans.
There, it becomes carbonic acid,
It is making it difficult for phytoplankton produce their skeletons.
A function that is called biocalcification.
So far for phytoplankton it is difficult to reproduce,
but there will be a fatal threshold where it will become impossible.
It will happen all at once.
When this happens, the phytoplankton disappears.
And the question is: “And me?
I’m not going to dinner mica, with phytoplankton! “
Yet, the phytoplankton is at the base of the marine food chain.
If it disappears phytoplankton,
consequently, very quickly, disappearing marine life.
And again: “And me?”
Be ‘, 12% of humanity lives of sea products.
The 17% of the protein we consume come from the sea.
But they are still numbers that are not afraid.
The fact is that marine life produces 55% of the oxygen we breathe.
Then, these phenomena are produced in this field suddenly.
The causes are accumulated in the shadows,
and then the consequences are out all together.
We take note of this,
we take account of our argument about Hitler
and we see this scenario.
I show glaciers in the Himalayas; They will melt.
They will not dissolve gradually,
in proportion to the increase of the temperature:
collapse, for a mechanism that would take too long to explain here.
And the question then is: “But to me?”
Ah, the loss of the beauty of the alpine landscape,
yaks, Tibetan culture …
They are extraordinary losses:
but nothing, in comparison to the loss of function of glaciers.
The glaciers have a function: regulate the outflow of downstream waters.
In this region, if there were no glaciers (it is monsoon)
the climate is characterized
by alternating between disastrous droughts and floods.
They are suddenly less glaciers,
which in this flat region irrigate
where they are allocated one billion and 400 million people.
These are in a situation similar to that of the German middle class.
Indeed, the German middle class has made the choices he has accomplished
because he has lost the value of his savings:
and were 40 million.
These Forgiveness: water; rice; roads; schools; health –
They are a billion and 400 million,
in an area where four countries – Russia, China, India and Pakistan –
They have the atomic bomb.
Houston, we have a problem!
But perhaps you will think that this is a political delirium, as I am.
The scientists also think,
those who keep the watch of the Apocalypse.
17 Nobel prizes for physics,
who in 2015 laid the Apocalypse clock
the same distance as they were during the missile crisis in Cuba,
that is, during the worst period of tension of the Cold War.
You may think this is a scenario for the future,
but unfortunately it is a scenario for the present.
These are the desert areas of North Africa.
Here, the people have become accustomed to live compatibly with the desert.
But inside there is a band, an active end
where there is the desert, there is desertification.
Visualize and sovrapponetela to these dynamics.
This is where the conflicts and hunger are concentrated.
This is where the terrorist dynamics are concentrated.
This is where all forms of illegal trafficking are concentrated.
And here it is where they come from migrations that bother us so much.
There is an obvious coincidence; spieghiamola in practice.
This is Lake Chad, in the heart of the Sahel.
He always had a historical tendency to variability.
Except that, in the last 50 years, it has shrunk to 18 times.
Around the Lake Chad there are four fragile states.
Close your eyes and imagine
if it closed into the Mediterranean of 18 times in 50 years.
Our economy goes into a tailspin.
Just imagine the economy of four fragile states.
So it is not surprising if proliferates Boko Haram.
It is in a stressful situation that arise this type of phenomena
and that come the origins of certain attacks that strike us.
And Boko Haram has had its role in migration that so concern us.
Well, but we can do it, we can make history.
Just the sum of small choices sustainability of each of us
to solve this dilemma.
And with something paradoxical.
We can say:
“The situation is serious, then I load the sacrifice to change something.”
No, what he asks of us, nature is not a sacrifice;
It is just to live better.
I show two pyramids:
the first is well known, the “food pyramid.”
This we also find in the magazines at the hairdresser,
It is the one that tells us what proportion should we feed on each type of food.
Little red meat, gradually up to many fibers, etc.
If we work alongside this pyramid
the impact on the environment pyramid
the production of each food category,
coincide perfectly.
But in the sense that the more a food is harmful to us,
the more his production is harmful to the environment.
It seems a coincidence; it is not.
It is the paradigm of how we relate to the environment.
We may be of individual mechanized transport obese.
The thing is the same.
But this is just the tip of the iceberg.
If we all are nourished,
not making a sacrifice,
but as truly it allows us to feel good, we create sustainability.
But [it is] only sustainability:
we also create a redistribution of access to protein
and allow the poor to access them.
But if we also create this form of justice,
we also create peace,
because in a world in which every child
has access to that amount of protein that is needed to go to school,
Boko Haram, immigration and Isis are not there.
Thank you.
(Applause)
Please follow and like us: