WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.500 align:middle line:90% 00:00:00.500 --> 00:00:04.000 align:middle line:90% [SQUEAKING, RUSTLING, CLICKING] 00:00:04.000 --> 00:00:11.207 align:middle line:90% 00:00:11.207 --> 00:00:12.790 align:middle line:84% DAVID HSU: And this is a shorter video 00:00:12.790 --> 00:00:16.570 align:middle line:84% lecture introducing my class on Cities and Climate Action. 00:00:16.570 --> 00:00:19.420 align:middle line:84% Or this is really kind of an exploration, or maybe 00:00:19.420 --> 00:00:22.570 align:middle line:84% a rationale, perhaps, of why you should take this class-- 00:00:22.570 --> 00:00:27.640 align:middle line:84% MIT 11.165 for undergraduates, or 11.477 00:00:27.640 --> 00:00:29.330 align:middle line:90% for graduate students. 00:00:29.330 --> 00:00:30.580 align:middle line:90% This video lecture is really-- 00:00:30.580 --> 00:00:33.760 align:middle line:84% I'm going to use this as an example of all the future video 00:00:33.760 --> 00:00:35.180 align:middle line:90% lectures that are to come. 00:00:35.180 --> 00:00:37.990 align:middle line:84% So, for example, I'm not going to go over this slide. 00:00:37.990 --> 00:00:39.490 align:middle line:84% This slide has all the readings that 00:00:39.490 --> 00:00:40.960 align:middle line:90% are on the syllabus for today. 00:00:40.960 --> 00:00:44.170 align:middle line:84% I'll generally start my lectures with a slide like this, 00:00:44.170 --> 00:00:47.410 align:middle line:84% but I won't go into it because first, all these things 00:00:47.410 --> 00:00:48.370 align:middle line:90% are on the syllabus. 00:00:48.370 --> 00:00:52.480 align:middle line:84% Second, for all the students taking this class at MIT, 00:00:52.480 --> 00:00:55.610 align:middle line:84% you'll have the PDF slides available on the Canvas site. 00:00:55.610 --> 00:00:58.100 align:middle line:84% So you can go to the PDF slides and click on the links. 00:00:58.100 --> 00:00:59.320 align:middle line:84% You don't need to go click on the links 00:00:59.320 --> 00:01:00.760 align:middle line:84% for the ones on the syllabus because you already 00:01:00.760 --> 00:01:01.730 align:middle line:90% have the syllabus. 00:01:01.730 --> 00:01:05.890 align:middle line:84% But if I bring in other reports or articles or sources 00:01:05.890 --> 00:01:09.400 align:middle line:84% or papers, I'll put those references into the slides. 00:01:09.400 --> 00:01:11.590 align:middle line:84% And so if you want to follow up on other topics, 00:01:11.590 --> 00:01:17.120 align:middle line:84% just go to the slide and click on the link in the PDF. 00:01:17.120 --> 00:01:19.540 align:middle line:84% So why are we watching this short video today? 00:01:19.540 --> 00:01:21.370 align:middle line:84% I'm going to use the short videos in class 00:01:21.370 --> 00:01:25.460 align:middle line:84% to comment on or synthesize, but not recap the readings. 00:01:25.460 --> 00:01:27.138 align:middle line:84% So you do have to do the readings. 00:01:27.138 --> 00:01:28.930 align:middle line:84% But the point of watching the video lecture 00:01:28.930 --> 00:01:30.730 align:middle line:84% is to really set up our discussion, 00:01:30.730 --> 00:01:34.840 align:middle line:84% or to demonstrate something I want to highlight or explore. 00:01:34.840 --> 00:01:36.340 align:middle line:84% Quite often in my lectures, I really 00:01:36.340 --> 00:01:38.950 align:middle line:84% like doing a deep dive in a particular aspect 00:01:38.950 --> 00:01:39.790 align:middle line:90% of the readings. 00:01:39.790 --> 00:01:41.470 align:middle line:84% But that might not be necessarily 00:01:41.470 --> 00:01:43.850 align:middle line:84% what we want to talk about together in class. 00:01:43.850 --> 00:01:46.030 align:middle line:84% So I'll highlight things or explore things 00:01:46.030 --> 00:01:47.440 align:middle line:90% that I want to focus on. 00:01:47.440 --> 00:01:49.180 align:middle line:90% We can discuss it more in class. 00:01:49.180 --> 00:01:52.210 align:middle line:84% And then for the student leaders of the discussions, 00:01:52.210 --> 00:01:54.820 align:middle line:84% you can highlight something you want to explore or highlight, 00:01:54.820 --> 00:01:57.242 align:middle line:90% and we talk about it in class. 00:01:57.242 --> 00:01:59.200 align:middle line:84% What I'm hoping this is going to allow us to do 00:01:59.200 --> 00:02:01.330 align:middle line:84% is to allow you to watch or rewatch 00:02:01.330 --> 00:02:05.120 align:middle line:84% these videos on your own time or at your own pace. 00:02:05.120 --> 00:02:07.120 align:middle line:84% And hopefully, what it's going to allow us to do 00:02:07.120 --> 00:02:09.220 align:middle line:84% is to flip the classroom and enable us to have 00:02:09.220 --> 00:02:12.230 align:middle line:90% richer, longer discussions. 00:02:12.230 --> 00:02:14.325 align:middle line:84% We have about three hours of class time together. 00:02:14.325 --> 00:02:16.200 align:middle line:84% Given the number of people in the room today, 00:02:16.200 --> 00:02:18.242 align:middle line:84% I'm hoping we can use all three hours so everyone 00:02:18.242 --> 00:02:19.867 align:middle line:84% can feel like they're getting something 00:02:19.867 --> 00:02:20.870 align:middle line:90% out of the discussions. 00:02:20.870 --> 00:02:23.420 align:middle line:84% And the fun thing is sometimes the discussions 00:02:23.420 --> 00:02:26.650 align:middle line:84% go to different places than we expect, or than I expect. 00:02:26.650 --> 00:02:29.150 align:middle line:84% And ultimately, the reason why I'm making these short videos 00:02:29.150 --> 00:02:30.260 align:middle line:84% is that these videos are going to form 00:02:30.260 --> 00:02:31.820 align:middle line:84% the basis of a new digital course 00:02:31.820 --> 00:02:33.660 align:middle line:90% on Cities and Climate Action. 00:02:33.660 --> 00:02:37.250 align:middle line:84% Ultimately, I hope to make these videos available to faculty 00:02:37.250 --> 00:02:40.160 align:middle line:84% or students at other departments at other schools. 00:02:40.160 --> 00:02:42.950 align:middle line:84% I would argue that actually as urban planners, 00:02:42.950 --> 00:02:44.990 align:middle line:84% we need to get involved in climate change. 00:02:44.990 --> 00:02:46.850 align:middle line:84% But also, at the same time, we may not 00:02:46.850 --> 00:02:50.420 align:middle line:84% have the faculty or staff or student bandwidth 00:02:50.420 --> 00:02:53.100 align:middle line:84% to take a new course or offer new class. 00:02:53.100 --> 00:02:54.530 align:middle line:84% So I'm hoping these video courses 00:02:54.530 --> 00:02:55.970 align:middle line:90% will enable people to do that. 00:02:55.970 --> 00:02:58.490 align:middle line:84% At the same time, I think that a lot of other disciplines, 00:02:58.490 --> 00:03:01.250 align:middle line:84% like engineering and policy, could benefit 00:03:01.250 --> 00:03:02.570 align:middle line:90% from focusing on cities. 00:03:02.570 --> 00:03:06.050 align:middle line:84% Because cities, I'll argue to you in this next few slides, 00:03:06.050 --> 00:03:08.750 align:middle line:84% are a key scale or jurisdiction at which 00:03:08.750 --> 00:03:11.210 align:middle line:84% we can have a lot of opportunities 00:03:11.210 --> 00:03:14.070 align:middle line:90% to take climate action. 00:03:14.070 --> 00:03:16.010 align:middle line:84% So one reading I just want to focus in on, 00:03:16.010 --> 00:03:19.040 align:middle line:84% just to demonstrate how I'm going to delve deeper 00:03:19.040 --> 00:03:21.260 align:middle line:84% into certain readings, I want to introduce 00:03:21.260 --> 00:03:22.670 align:middle line:90% the textbook for this class. 00:03:22.670 --> 00:03:25.190 align:middle line:90% It's a book by David MacKay. 00:03:25.190 --> 00:03:27.260 align:middle line:90% He was a British physicist. 00:03:27.260 --> 00:03:29.960 align:middle line:84% I think he was the royal astronomer or royal physicist 00:03:29.960 --> 00:03:32.690 align:middle line:90% at some point in the UK. 00:03:32.690 --> 00:03:35.155 align:middle line:90% He wrote this book in 2009. 00:03:35.155 --> 00:03:36.530 align:middle line:84% And unfortunately, he passed away 00:03:36.530 --> 00:03:39.050 align:middle line:84% at a relatively young age in 2016. 00:03:39.050 --> 00:03:41.600 align:middle line:84% But this book is actually a fairly good legacy. 00:03:41.600 --> 00:03:42.920 align:middle line:90% It was wildly popular then. 00:03:42.920 --> 00:03:47.480 align:middle line:84% It's still fairly popular now, even 13 or 14 years later. 00:03:47.480 --> 00:03:49.860 align:middle line:84% And it's popular for a lot of reasons. 00:03:49.860 --> 00:03:54.500 align:middle line:84% It's accessible-- David MacKay made this book free, actually. 00:03:54.500 --> 00:03:56.750 align:middle line:90% He put it as a PDF on the web. 00:03:56.750 --> 00:03:58.610 align:middle line:90% It's actually fairly funny. 00:03:58.610 --> 00:04:01.490 align:middle line:84% A lot of students find this book quite entertaining. 00:04:01.490 --> 00:04:04.997 align:middle line:84% The evaluations of the course always highlight this textbook. 00:04:04.997 --> 00:04:06.830 align:middle line:84% Students really enjoy reading this textbook, 00:04:06.830 --> 00:04:08.660 align:middle line:90% so I hope you do, too. 00:04:08.660 --> 00:04:11.420 align:middle line:84% It actually uses a fairly simple but powerful 00:04:11.420 --> 00:04:13.730 align:middle line:90% back-of-the-envelope reasoning. 00:04:13.730 --> 00:04:16.130 align:middle line:84% Dave MacKay almost always starts with fairly basic 00:04:16.130 --> 00:04:18.920 align:middle line:84% physical principles, looks at empirical data, 00:04:18.920 --> 00:04:23.330 align:middle line:84% and uses simple reasoning or calculations or graphics 00:04:23.330 --> 00:04:28.640 align:middle line:84% to enable people to understand the key issues involved. 00:04:28.640 --> 00:04:30.200 align:middle line:84% In the first chapter, David MacKay 00:04:30.200 --> 00:04:32.667 align:middle line:84% makes the point that there's no economics in this book. 00:04:32.667 --> 00:04:35.000 align:middle line:84% And we can talk about whether or not that's good or bad. 00:04:35.000 --> 00:04:38.240 align:middle line:84% The one thing that has wildly changed since 2009 00:04:38.240 --> 00:04:41.390 align:middle line:84% is the cost of renewable energies and technologies, 00:04:41.390 --> 00:04:44.900 align:middle line:84% renewable energy technologies, have all declined since 2009. 00:04:44.900 --> 00:04:47.450 align:middle line:84% That's become a huge advantage for renewable energy 00:04:47.450 --> 00:04:50.130 align:middle line:90% over fossil fuel energies. 00:04:50.130 --> 00:04:51.680 align:middle line:84% And that's why the energy transition 00:04:51.680 --> 00:04:54.208 align:middle line:84% is going to happen more and more rapidly in our lifetimes. 00:04:54.208 --> 00:04:56.750 align:middle line:84% So we can discuss whether it's good or bad that this textbook 00:04:56.750 --> 00:04:58.220 align:middle line:90% has no economics. 00:04:58.220 --> 00:05:00.950 align:middle line:84% It simply focuses on the technological issues 00:05:00.950 --> 00:05:03.660 align:middle line:84% involved, rather than the economic issues. 00:05:03.660 --> 00:05:05.300 align:middle line:84% Similarly, it really doesn't focus 00:05:05.300 --> 00:05:07.730 align:middle line:84% on the political or policy aspects 00:05:07.730 --> 00:05:09.890 align:middle line:90% of some of these technologies. 00:05:09.890 --> 00:05:12.390 align:middle line:90% This is perhaps before-- 00:05:12.390 --> 00:05:15.313 align:middle line:84% well, climate change has always been fairly polarized in the US 00:05:15.313 --> 00:05:17.480 align:middle line:84% in a way that it's not polarized in other countries. 00:05:17.480 --> 00:05:20.720 align:middle line:84% But David MacKay makes an effort in this book basically 00:05:20.720 --> 00:05:23.270 align:middle line:84% not to focus on politics, as much 00:05:23.270 --> 00:05:25.730 align:middle line:84% as on the physical or technological solutions 00:05:25.730 --> 00:05:26.510 align:middle line:90% we need. 00:05:26.510 --> 00:05:29.720 align:middle line:84% He assumes that that will help drive the conversation, 00:05:29.720 --> 00:05:32.210 align:middle line:84% or help drive the policy changes needed. 00:05:32.210 --> 00:05:34.430 align:middle line:84% Obviously, we haven't had the policy changes 00:05:34.430 --> 00:05:35.930 align:middle line:90% we needed in the US. 00:05:35.930 --> 00:05:39.110 align:middle line:84% And Europe is slightly ahead, but perhaps 00:05:39.110 --> 00:05:41.270 align:middle line:84% has not moved as quickly as we'd like it to also. 00:05:41.270 --> 00:05:43.250 align:middle line:84% So we can discuss in this class whether or not 00:05:43.250 --> 00:05:48.080 align:middle line:84% we think the kind of lack of emphasis on politics and policy 00:05:48.080 --> 00:05:49.040 align:middle line:90% is also appropriate. 00:05:49.040 --> 00:05:51.290 align:middle line:84% But let me show you some of the strengths of the book. 00:05:51.290 --> 00:05:53.930 align:middle line:84% And I'll use one example I really like. 00:05:53.930 --> 00:05:56.600 align:middle line:84% I really-- let me-- before I do that, I'll just show you 00:05:56.600 --> 00:05:59.780 align:middle line:84% that because it's accessible, because he made the PDF free. 00:05:59.780 --> 00:06:02.450 align:middle line:84% You can download for free on the website. 00:06:02.450 --> 00:06:04.950 align:middle line:84% It shows you where to buy it in paper. 00:06:04.950 --> 00:06:07.160 align:middle line:84% But this is actually a volunteer thing, 00:06:07.160 --> 00:06:09.710 align:middle line:84% that somebody read the book, liked it enough. 00:06:09.710 --> 00:06:11.840 align:middle line:84% And because the content was free, 00:06:11.840 --> 00:06:14.390 align:middle line:84% made a separate web page for every single chapter. 00:06:14.390 --> 00:06:17.690 align:middle line:84% So you can access this book through the PDF on Download. 00:06:17.690 --> 00:06:19.400 align:middle line:90% You can buy a hard copy. 00:06:19.400 --> 00:06:21.440 align:middle line:84% I'll show you a hard copy in class today. 00:06:21.440 --> 00:06:23.360 align:middle line:84% Or you can simply look at the web pages. 00:06:23.360 --> 00:06:25.250 align:middle line:84% Or you can do some combination of all three 00:06:25.250 --> 00:06:26.160 align:middle line:90% to access the book. 00:06:26.160 --> 00:06:27.620 align:middle line:84% That's why it's quite accessible. 00:06:27.620 --> 00:06:30.380 align:middle line:84% And it's been translated into, it looks like, 00:06:30.380 --> 00:06:33.330 align:middle line:90% 10 or 12 other languages. 00:06:33.330 --> 00:06:36.000 align:middle line:84% To show you one aspect of the book I really like, 00:06:36.000 --> 00:06:39.750 align:middle line:84% I like the use of graphics in all of David McKay's work. 00:06:39.750 --> 00:06:42.630 align:middle line:84% You can see this very simple graph on the vertical axis 00:06:42.630 --> 00:06:45.420 align:middle line:84% is carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere. 00:06:45.420 --> 00:06:48.450 align:middle line:84% On the horizontal axis is time, going all the way back 00:06:48.450 --> 00:06:51.180 align:middle line:90% to about 1,000 AD. 00:06:51.180 --> 00:06:53.380 align:middle line:84% He focuses on this little section, 00:06:53.380 --> 00:06:56.040 align:middle line:90% which is between 1600 and 2000. 00:06:56.040 --> 00:06:58.080 align:middle line:84% And his puckish commentary in the caption 00:06:58.080 --> 00:07:00.330 align:middle line:84% here is, "I think something new may have 00:07:00.330 --> 00:07:03.330 align:middle line:90% happened between 1800 2000 AD. 00:07:03.330 --> 00:07:07.800 align:middle line:84% He marks the year 1769, which is when James Watt invented 00:07:07.800 --> 00:07:08.668 align:middle line:90% the steam engine. 00:07:08.668 --> 00:07:10.710 align:middle line:84% That's the beginning of the Industrial Revolution 00:07:10.710 --> 00:07:11.760 align:middle line:90% in the UK. 00:07:11.760 --> 00:07:15.420 align:middle line:84% And you can say-- you can see in the UK and countries 00:07:15.420 --> 00:07:17.580 align:middle line:84% like France, Germany, and the US, 00:07:17.580 --> 00:07:19.290 align:middle line:84% the Industrial Revolution begins, 00:07:19.290 --> 00:07:23.445 align:middle line:84% and carbon dioxide concentrations go straight up, 00:07:23.445 --> 00:07:24.960 align:middle line:90% almost exponentially. 00:07:24.960 --> 00:07:27.540 align:middle line:84% If you look at this graph, it's only to 2000. 00:07:27.540 --> 00:07:32.940 align:middle line:84% I think in 2020, we're about 415 or 420 parts 00:07:32.940 --> 00:07:34.540 align:middle line:90% per million in the atmosphere. 00:07:34.540 --> 00:07:37.230 align:middle line:90% So we've fully exceeded-- 00:07:37.230 --> 00:07:42.980 align:middle line:84% this growth has continued unabated for the last 22 years. 00:07:42.980 --> 00:07:45.400 align:middle line:84% But if you look at how he examines the issues, what 00:07:45.400 --> 00:07:48.730 align:middle line:84% I really like in a lot of his work and this textbook 00:07:48.730 --> 00:07:52.660 align:middle line:84% is that he uses graphics to illustrate different issues. 00:07:52.660 --> 00:07:55.780 align:middle line:84% For example, he takes world greenhouse gas emissions 00:07:55.780 --> 00:07:59.080 align:middle line:84% in his numbers from 2000-- about 34 gigatons 00:07:59.080 --> 00:08:02.350 align:middle line:90% of CO2 equivalent per year. 00:08:02.350 --> 00:08:05.560 align:middle line:84% And basically says that's the total area of greenhouse gas 00:08:05.560 --> 00:08:06.350 align:middle line:90% emissions. 00:08:06.350 --> 00:08:09.665 align:middle line:84% And if you compare that to the population of 2000 00:08:09.665 --> 00:08:12.670 align:middle line:84% at six billion people with what is seven point something now, 00:08:12.670 --> 00:08:15.010 align:middle line:84% or almost eight billion people on the planet, 00:08:15.010 --> 00:08:19.870 align:middle line:84% that basically averages to about five tons of CO2 equivalent 00:08:19.870 --> 00:08:21.110 align:middle line:90% per year per person. 00:08:21.110 --> 00:08:23.390 align:middle line:84% So you multiply this axis times this axis, 00:08:23.390 --> 00:08:24.520 align:middle line:90% and you get this result-- 00:08:24.520 --> 00:08:30.310 align:middle line:84% resulting area of 34 gigatons of CO2 equivalent per year. 00:08:30.310 --> 00:08:33.010 align:middle line:84% But we can also look at some of the numbers, 00:08:33.010 --> 00:08:34.210 align:middle line:90% and they've been updated. 00:08:34.210 --> 00:08:36.850 align:middle line:84% Our World in Data is a pretty useful website 00:08:36.850 --> 00:08:38.980 align:middle line:84% for looking at different sources of data. 00:08:38.980 --> 00:08:40.960 align:middle line:84% They use a slightly different definition 00:08:40.960 --> 00:08:42.309 align:middle line:90% of annual CO2 emissions. 00:08:42.309 --> 00:08:44.450 align:middle line:90% They exclude land use change. 00:08:44.450 --> 00:08:48.730 align:middle line:84% And so in 2000, they have about 25 billion tons 00:08:48.730 --> 00:08:50.610 align:middle line:90% of CO2 equivalent. 00:08:50.610 --> 00:08:52.540 align:middle line:84% Well, you can see what happens is basically 00:08:52.540 --> 00:08:57.100 align:middle line:84% it has gone straight up over the last 22 years 00:08:57.100 --> 00:08:58.990 align:middle line:90% till this slight dip from COVID. 00:08:58.990 --> 00:09:01.630 align:middle line:84% So if you look at their definition in data, 00:09:01.630 --> 00:09:08.080 align:middle line:84% it's 25 billion tons in 2000, almost 37 billion tons in 2019, 00:09:08.080 --> 00:09:09.850 align:middle line:84% until it slowly declines with COVID. 00:09:09.850 --> 00:09:13.510 align:middle line:84% And what we're hoping after COVID is that as our energy 00:09:13.510 --> 00:09:16.630 align:middle line:84% transition continues, we aren't bouncing up back 00:09:16.630 --> 00:09:18.820 align:middle line:84% to the same upward trajectory, which 00:09:18.820 --> 00:09:21.730 align:middle line:84% is going to result in more climate change. 00:09:21.730 --> 00:09:24.670 align:middle line:84% At the same time, you can use the original graphics. 00:09:24.670 --> 00:09:27.490 align:middle line:84% You can kind of drill down into the data little bit, 00:09:27.490 --> 00:09:31.060 align:middle line:84% as David MacKay does, and shows that these areas of greenhouse 00:09:31.060 --> 00:09:33.550 align:middle line:84% gas emissions are quite different. 00:09:33.550 --> 00:09:36.160 align:middle line:84% Even though the total area of greenhouse gas emissions 00:09:36.160 --> 00:09:39.040 align:middle line:84% is what counts, if you average over, let's say, 00:09:39.040 --> 00:09:41.950 align:middle line:84% different populations of people in different regions, 00:09:41.950 --> 00:09:44.980 align:middle line:84% you can see that even if the total area of Asia 00:09:44.980 --> 00:09:47.170 align:middle line:84% might be slightly larger than North America, 00:09:47.170 --> 00:09:49.315 align:middle line:84% there's many fewer people in North America who 00:09:49.315 --> 00:09:51.370 align:middle line:84% are emitting much more greenhouse gas 00:09:51.370 --> 00:09:52.960 align:middle line:90% emissions per person. 00:09:52.960 --> 00:09:54.490 align:middle line:84% And this is starting to highlight 00:09:54.490 --> 00:09:57.610 align:middle line:84% some issues perhaps of equity across different regions 00:09:57.610 --> 00:09:58.730 align:middle line:90% of the world. 00:09:58.730 --> 00:10:00.850 align:middle line:84% If you look at it by country, most 00:10:00.850 --> 00:10:03.040 align:middle line:84% of the people in North America are 00:10:03.040 --> 00:10:06.640 align:middle line:84% Americans, who are all in 2000 looks like emitting about 00:10:06.640 --> 00:10:10.060 align:middle line:90% 24 tons per person per year. 00:10:10.060 --> 00:10:14.200 align:middle line:84% Even though China has a larger population of nearly a billion 00:10:14.200 --> 00:10:17.170 align:middle line:84% people, those people on average are only 00:10:17.170 --> 00:10:19.490 align:middle line:84% emitting about four tons per person per year. 00:10:19.490 --> 00:10:23.020 align:middle line:84% So in 2000, by this measure, it looks like the average American 00:10:23.020 --> 00:10:26.140 align:middle line:84% is emitting about six times the average Chinese person. 00:10:26.140 --> 00:10:28.360 align:middle line:84% Having said that, the average Chinese person 00:10:28.360 --> 00:10:31.660 align:middle line:84% is still emitting twice as much as the average Indian person 00:10:31.660 --> 00:10:32.450 align:middle line:90% here. 00:10:32.450 --> 00:10:35.500 align:middle line:84% And so the area of greenhouse gas emissions from India 00:10:35.500 --> 00:10:39.040 align:middle line:84% is consequently roughly less than half 00:10:39.040 --> 00:10:42.020 align:middle line:90% of what it is from China. 00:10:42.020 --> 00:10:44.240 align:middle line:84% If we were to update this for 2019, 00:10:44.240 --> 00:10:45.620 align:middle line:90% you can see that's changed. 00:10:45.620 --> 00:10:49.740 align:middle line:84% In this graphic, China has become clearly the largest 00:10:49.740 --> 00:10:53.865 align:middle line:84% greenhouse emitter in the world, [INAUDIBLE] 00:10:53.865 --> 00:10:57.180 align:middle line:84% even emitting twice as much as the average Chinese person. 00:10:57.180 --> 00:10:59.350 align:middle line:84% You can also see some changes over time. 00:10:59.350 --> 00:11:01.680 align:middle line:84% You can see that the US is now emitting 00:11:01.680 --> 00:11:05.180 align:middle line:84% it looks like around 15 tons per person per year. 00:11:05.180 --> 00:11:06.930 align:middle line:84% They might be slightly different measures, 00:11:06.930 --> 00:11:09.900 align:middle line:84% but greenhouse gas emissions have declined in the US. 00:11:09.900 --> 00:11:11.310 align:middle line:90% They've gone up in China. 00:11:11.310 --> 00:11:13.300 align:middle line:84% And now, China is above the world average-- 00:11:13.300 --> 00:11:15.810 align:middle line:84% about 4.4 tons per year per capita. 00:11:15.810 --> 00:11:19.470 align:middle line:84% And if you look at India, India is still well below average. 00:11:19.470 --> 00:11:22.390 align:middle line:84% Sub-Saharan Africa is even smaller. 00:11:22.390 --> 00:11:25.740 align:middle line:84% And so what we're trying to do is look at how this might 00:11:25.740 --> 00:11:28.338 align:middle line:84% translate into national policy, or at least 00:11:28.338 --> 00:11:30.630 align:middle line:84% what we think the responsibility of different countries 00:11:30.630 --> 00:11:33.120 align:middle line:90% are to deal with climate change. 00:11:33.120 --> 00:11:36.210 align:middle line:84% If you look at historical greenhouse gas emissions, 00:11:36.210 --> 00:11:37.800 align:middle line:84% if you average all the greenhouse gas 00:11:37.800 --> 00:11:39.860 align:middle line:84% emissions over the last 120 years, 00:11:39.860 --> 00:11:41.700 align:middle line:84% you see the United States is clearly 00:11:41.700 --> 00:11:44.250 align:middle line:84% responsible for the largest area of greenhouse gas 00:11:44.250 --> 00:11:49.590 align:middle line:84% emissions per person per year over that time period. 00:11:49.590 --> 00:11:52.650 align:middle line:84% If you look at largest total historical or cumulative 00:11:52.650 --> 00:11:55.530 align:middle line:84% greenhouse gas emissions, again, the US 00:11:55.530 --> 00:11:58.950 align:middle line:84% really unfortunately number one here, double that of China, 00:11:58.950 --> 00:12:01.950 align:middle line:84% and looks like triple that of Russia. 00:12:01.950 --> 00:12:04.920 align:middle line:84% Having said that, this will change over 00:12:04.920 --> 00:12:08.010 align:middle line:90% time as annual emissions change. 00:12:08.010 --> 00:12:13.560 align:middle line:84% But what we're basically seeing here is the US is the largest-- 00:12:13.560 --> 00:12:16.830 align:middle line:84% has the largest responsibility for total historical greenhouse 00:12:16.830 --> 00:12:20.373 align:middle line:84% gas emissions over the last 170 years. 00:12:20.373 --> 00:12:22.290 align:middle line:84% And what are we doing in this kind of reading? 00:12:22.290 --> 00:12:25.103 align:middle line:84% I'm only digging down into this particular issue 00:12:25.103 --> 00:12:26.520 align:middle line:84% because I want to highlight what I 00:12:26.520 --> 00:12:28.620 align:middle line:84% want to try to do in this class, which is first, 00:12:28.620 --> 00:12:30.690 align:middle line:84% develop your basic numerical literacy. 00:12:30.690 --> 00:12:33.540 align:middle line:84% In this case, we're looking at greenhouse gas emissions 00:12:33.540 --> 00:12:36.030 align:middle line:90% per capita over time. 00:12:36.030 --> 00:12:40.950 align:middle line:84% I want to understand broad issues, like equity or climate 00:12:40.950 --> 00:12:43.980 align:middle line:84% action, which countries are responsible for climate action, 00:12:43.980 --> 00:12:45.870 align:middle line:90% by taking specific deep dives. 00:12:45.870 --> 00:12:48.210 align:middle line:84% So we looked a little bit at different data sources 00:12:48.210 --> 00:12:50.760 align:middle line:84% and different trends over time, or different ways 00:12:50.760 --> 00:12:52.675 align:middle line:90% to analyze the data. 00:12:52.675 --> 00:12:54.300 align:middle line:84% And ultimately, what we're trying to do 00:12:54.300 --> 00:12:56.970 align:middle line:84% is build a moral case for climate action. 00:12:56.970 --> 00:13:00.870 align:middle line:84% I take a US focus in the US because the US is the largest 00:13:00.870 --> 00:13:03.060 align:middle line:84% historical emitter of greenhouse gas emissions, 00:13:03.060 --> 00:13:07.710 align:middle line:84% and still on a per capita basis one of the highest emissions 00:13:07.710 --> 00:13:09.220 align:middle line:90% emitting countries in the world. 00:13:09.220 --> 00:13:11.070 align:middle line:84% So I would argue that actually leads 00:13:11.070 --> 00:13:13.470 align:middle line:84% to a moral case or a moral responsibility 00:13:13.470 --> 00:13:16.890 align:middle line:84% for us to take more climate action than other countries. 00:13:16.890 --> 00:13:19.650 align:middle line:84% If you look at countries like India 00:13:19.650 --> 00:13:21.840 align:middle line:84% or regions like sub-Saharan Africa, 00:13:21.840 --> 00:13:24.060 align:middle line:84% they are well below the global average. 00:13:24.060 --> 00:13:26.520 align:middle line:84% For them to develop or to even achieve 00:13:26.520 --> 00:13:28.230 align:middle line:84% a standard of living like our own, 00:13:28.230 --> 00:13:30.240 align:middle line:84% they really have nowhere to go but up, 00:13:30.240 --> 00:13:33.120 align:middle line:84% in terms of their greenhouse gas emissions. 00:13:33.120 --> 00:13:36.030 align:middle line:84% Honestly, if we want to achieve decarbonization, 00:13:36.030 --> 00:13:39.120 align:middle line:84% the US and other rich countries have nowhere to go but down. 00:13:39.120 --> 00:13:41.700 align:middle line:84% And that is the crux of our energy transition 00:13:41.700 --> 00:13:43.720 align:middle line:90% challenge going forward. 00:13:43.720 --> 00:13:47.460 align:middle line:84% And so let's talk about why we focus on cities. 00:13:47.460 --> 00:13:48.720 align:middle line:90% Quite often at MIT-- 00:13:48.720 --> 00:13:52.890 align:middle line:84% this is courtesy of my terrible, terrible PowerPoint skills. 00:13:52.890 --> 00:13:55.560 align:middle line:84% But if you-- what we talk about at MIT quite often 00:13:55.560 --> 00:13:58.260 align:middle line:84% is technology, policy, and markets. 00:13:58.260 --> 00:14:00.420 align:middle line:84% We talk about developing new technologies 00:14:00.420 --> 00:14:03.510 align:middle line:84% through our science and engineering research. 00:14:03.510 --> 00:14:07.770 align:middle line:84% We talk about trying to pass new policies through advocacy, 00:14:07.770 --> 00:14:10.320 align:middle line:84% or also based on our social science research. 00:14:10.320 --> 00:14:12.270 align:middle line:84% And we often talk about developing 00:14:12.270 --> 00:14:16.530 align:middle line:84% new markets for technologies through, let's say, 00:14:16.530 --> 00:14:21.120 align:middle line:84% commercialization or innovation or creating new technologies. 00:14:21.120 --> 00:14:23.130 align:middle line:84% But I would argue with you that cities 00:14:23.130 --> 00:14:25.870 align:middle line:84% have a role at the intersection of all of these. 00:14:25.870 --> 00:14:30.120 align:middle line:84% And as a scale, is this-- is a underappreciated scale, 00:14:30.120 --> 00:14:32.880 align:middle line:84% or an opportunity for us to try to affect all three 00:14:32.880 --> 00:14:34.050 align:middle line:90% of these areas. 00:14:34.050 --> 00:14:37.170 align:middle line:84% We know that technologies can be developed 00:14:37.170 --> 00:14:41.880 align:middle line:84% for certain situations or certain combinations 00:14:41.880 --> 00:14:42.408 align:middle line:90% of problems. 00:14:42.408 --> 00:14:44.700 align:middle line:84% Different cities are going to have different adaptation 00:14:44.700 --> 00:14:48.000 align:middle line:84% and mitigation needs that need to be met by technology. 00:14:48.000 --> 00:14:50.700 align:middle line:84% Cities are large enough to pass their own policies 00:14:50.700 --> 00:14:53.790 align:middle line:84% that can help shape the adoption of technology 00:14:53.790 --> 00:14:57.840 align:middle line:84% and how the markets develop in that particular region. 00:14:57.840 --> 00:15:00.750 align:middle line:84% And cities are large enough themselves to constitute 00:15:00.750 --> 00:15:02.790 align:middle line:90% a market for new technologies. 00:15:02.790 --> 00:15:07.480 align:middle line:84% Cities are responsible for most of the GDP in the world. 00:15:07.480 --> 00:15:10.710 align:middle line:84% And so we have the ability at the local level 00:15:10.710 --> 00:15:12.720 align:middle line:84% to shape technology and policy also. 00:15:12.720 --> 00:15:15.740 align:middle line:84% So the intersection of technology policy markets 00:15:15.740 --> 00:15:18.180 align:middle line:84% in this Venn diagram, I would argue to you 00:15:18.180 --> 00:15:22.510 align:middle line:84% that cities are a key venue for climate action. 00:15:22.510 --> 00:15:25.390 align:middle line:84% Another reason, quite simply, why we should look at cities 00:15:25.390 --> 00:15:26.860 align:middle line:84% is that's where all the people are. 00:15:26.860 --> 00:15:29.290 align:middle line:84% This is the graph of the percentage 00:15:29.290 --> 00:15:31.720 align:middle line:84% of urban and rural population as a proportion 00:15:31.720 --> 00:15:35.110 align:middle line:84% of the total population from the UN World Urbanization 00:15:35.110 --> 00:15:35.920 align:middle line:90% Prospects. 00:15:35.920 --> 00:15:39.010 align:middle line:84% You can see, then, every region in the world, 00:15:39.010 --> 00:15:41.050 align:middle line:84% if the blue is the rural population 00:15:41.050 --> 00:15:44.380 align:middle line:84% and red is the urban population, every region in the world-- 00:15:44.380 --> 00:15:46.840 align:middle line:90% Africa, Asia, and Europe-- 00:15:46.840 --> 00:15:50.500 align:middle line:84% Europe is already quite urbanized at 75% now, 00:15:50.500 --> 00:15:52.360 align:middle line:84% but will become even more urbanized 00:15:52.360 --> 00:15:55.330 align:middle line:84% by 2050, which is our mid-century target 00:15:55.330 --> 00:15:57.070 align:middle line:90% for decarbonization. 00:15:57.070 --> 00:15:59.320 align:middle line:90% Asia is right at 50%-- 00:15:59.320 --> 00:16:01.370 align:middle line:84% half and half between urban and rural population, 00:16:01.370 --> 00:16:04.660 align:middle line:84% but will become even more urban over the next 20 years. 00:16:04.660 --> 00:16:06.040 align:middle line:84% There will be mostly urbanization 00:16:06.040 --> 00:16:09.100 align:middle line:84% happening in Southeast Asia or India. 00:16:09.100 --> 00:16:12.820 align:middle line:84% And Africa is 42% urbanized, but by 2050, 00:16:12.820 --> 00:16:14.645 align:middle line:84% is going to be about 60% urbanized. 00:16:14.645 --> 00:16:16.270 align:middle line:84% That's mostly urbanization that's going 00:16:16.270 --> 00:16:19.210 align:middle line:90% to occur in sub-Saharan Africa. 00:16:19.210 --> 00:16:21.160 align:middle line:84% If you look at the Latin American Caribbean, 00:16:21.160 --> 00:16:25.720 align:middle line:84% already amazingly urbanized at 81%; North America at 82%. 00:16:25.720 --> 00:16:28.960 align:middle line:84% But both regions will be probably pushing 85% or 90% 00:16:28.960 --> 00:16:30.730 align:middle line:90% urbanized by 2050. 00:16:30.730 --> 00:16:35.410 align:middle line:84% And Oceania, which is Australia and New Zealand and the Pacific 00:16:35.410 --> 00:16:38.620 align:middle line:84% Islands, will probably stay roughly as urbanized as it is, 00:16:38.620 --> 00:16:41.170 align:middle line:90% which is already 68%. 00:16:41.170 --> 00:16:43.260 align:middle line:84% So the argument for focusing on cities 00:16:43.260 --> 00:16:45.010 align:middle line:84% is simply that's where all the people are. 00:16:45.010 --> 00:16:46.810 align:middle line:84% That's where all the economic activity is. 00:16:46.810 --> 00:16:48.352 align:middle line:84% That's what we should focus on to try 00:16:48.352 --> 00:16:50.836 align:middle line:90% to reduce our consumption. 00:16:50.836 --> 00:16:53.560 align:middle line:84% But we're going to focus on us studies in the class, 00:16:53.560 --> 00:16:55.330 align:middle line:84% partly simply because we're teaching 00:16:55.330 --> 00:16:56.920 align:middle line:90% in an American institution. 00:16:56.920 --> 00:16:59.050 align:middle line:84% Also, we've had recent climate developments, 00:16:59.050 --> 00:17:00.880 align:middle line:90% which are quite exciting to me. 00:17:00.880 --> 00:17:03.615 align:middle line:84% Here's an article by Miriam Wasser of WBUR, 00:17:03.615 --> 00:17:05.240 align:middle line:84% just simply saying what we need to know 00:17:05.240 --> 00:17:07.359 align:middle line:84% about the new Massachusetts climate law. 00:17:07.359 --> 00:17:11.240 align:middle line:84% That's going to affect our state energy policy quite a bit. 00:17:11.240 --> 00:17:14.697 align:middle line:84% This is a blog post from Amy Turner at Columbia University, 00:17:14.697 --> 00:17:17.030 align:middle line:84% focusing on how cities will be affected by the Inflation 00:17:17.030 --> 00:17:20.230 align:middle line:84% Reduction Act, which is our first major piece 00:17:20.230 --> 00:17:22.690 align:middle line:84% of climate legislation ever passed by climate-- 00:17:22.690 --> 00:17:25.450 align:middle line:84% by Congress ever since Congress learned 00:17:25.450 --> 00:17:26.950 align:middle line:84% about climate change and the problem 00:17:26.950 --> 00:17:30.000 align:middle line:90% for the first time 30 years ago. 00:17:30.000 --> 00:17:31.945 align:middle line:84% And so I welcome insights and comparisons 00:17:31.945 --> 00:17:32.820 align:middle line:90% with other countries. 00:17:32.820 --> 00:17:34.695 align:middle line:84% I've done work in a number of other countries 00:17:34.695 --> 00:17:37.120 align:middle line:90% on energy and energy transition. 00:17:37.120 --> 00:17:39.930 align:middle line:84% But we're going to focus mostly in this class on US cities, 00:17:39.930 --> 00:17:42.510 align:middle line:84% simply because we have the moral responsibility 00:17:42.510 --> 00:17:44.160 align:middle line:90% to take climate action. 00:17:44.160 --> 00:17:46.420 align:middle line:84% And also, because we're studying in a US institution. 00:17:46.420 --> 00:17:48.750 align:middle line:84% But, again, I welcome your insights and comparisons 00:17:48.750 --> 00:17:49.830 align:middle line:90% with other countries. 00:17:49.830 --> 00:17:52.770 align:middle line:84% I'll try to bring in comparisons with other places 00:17:52.770 --> 00:17:55.410 align:middle line:84% I've worked or other regions as appropriate, 00:17:55.410 --> 00:17:58.950 align:middle line:84% to try to illustrate some of these energy and climate issues 00:17:58.950 --> 00:18:01.562 align:middle line:84% and how they work in other cities around the world. 00:18:01.562 --> 00:18:03.270 align:middle line:84% And I also want to highlight that there's 00:18:03.270 --> 00:18:05.778 align:middle line:84% nothing in this class really should be off limits. 00:18:05.778 --> 00:18:08.070 align:middle line:84% And I just want to emphasize that different people will 00:18:08.070 --> 00:18:10.470 align:middle line:84% get different value from different readings. 00:18:10.470 --> 00:18:13.770 align:middle line:84% For some people, Bill Gates was a ruthless monopolist 00:18:13.770 --> 00:18:17.430 align:middle line:84% in '90s, a successful philanthropist in the aughts, 00:18:17.430 --> 00:18:20.940 align:middle line:84% and the, let's say, early teens of the century. 00:18:20.940 --> 00:18:22.530 align:middle line:84% And you might have heard most recently 00:18:22.530 --> 00:18:24.330 align:middle line:84% he had a terrible, terrible divorce, 00:18:24.330 --> 00:18:26.910 align:middle line:84% and maybe his reputation is somewhat damaged by that. 00:18:26.910 --> 00:18:28.950 align:middle line:84% But he's also known as somebody who's 00:18:28.950 --> 00:18:32.940 align:middle line:84% worked on child mortality and disease and climate change 00:18:32.940 --> 00:18:33.820 align:middle line:90% and pandemics. 00:18:33.820 --> 00:18:37.560 align:middle line:84% So he wrote an article in 2018 about "Climate Change 00:18:37.560 --> 00:18:40.260 align:middle line:84% and the 75% Problem," arguing that we 00:18:40.260 --> 00:18:42.960 align:middle line:84% need new technologies and innovation to solve 00:18:42.960 --> 00:18:45.450 align:middle line:84% large parts of climate change that we don't already 00:18:45.450 --> 00:18:47.400 align:middle line:90% know how to solve. 00:18:47.400 --> 00:18:50.190 align:middle line:84% At the same time, we have this article 00:18:50.190 --> 00:18:52.200 align:middle line:84% by Nikayla Jefferson and Leah Stokes, 00:18:52.200 --> 00:18:55.140 align:middle line:84% who's one of our graduates from DUSP at MIT. 00:18:55.140 --> 00:18:58.500 align:middle line:84% And it's titled "Our Racist Fossil Fuel Energy System." 00:18:58.500 --> 00:19:01.200 align:middle line:84% And I actually think it gives a number of good arguments 00:19:01.200 --> 00:19:04.410 align:middle line:84% why the fossil fuel energy system disproportionately 00:19:04.410 --> 00:19:05.862 align:middle line:90% affects Black Americans. 00:19:05.862 --> 00:19:07.320 align:middle line:84% This is an article that was written 00:19:07.320 --> 00:19:10.290 align:middle line:84% in July of 2020 right at the height of the Black Lives 00:19:10.290 --> 00:19:11.760 align:middle line:90% Matter protests. 00:19:11.760 --> 00:19:15.330 align:middle line:84% And it highlighted basically how the energy system 00:19:15.330 --> 00:19:18.120 align:middle line:84% affects different groups, especially Black Americans 00:19:18.120 --> 00:19:18.990 align:middle line:90% differently. 00:19:18.990 --> 00:19:21.360 align:middle line:84% Having said that, people had very different reactions 00:19:21.360 --> 00:19:22.040 align:middle line:90% to this article. 00:19:22.040 --> 00:19:25.680 align:middle line:84% I had one student who came from the fossil fuel industry, 00:19:25.680 --> 00:19:28.890 align:middle line:84% and she was quite offended by this article that she 00:19:28.890 --> 00:19:31.290 align:middle line:84% called "Our Racist Fossil Fuel Industry," which 00:19:31.290 --> 00:19:34.230 align:middle line:84% wasn't actually the title of the article, but just shows you 00:19:34.230 --> 00:19:36.090 align:middle line:90% how this label-- 00:19:36.090 --> 00:19:38.670 align:middle line:84% of labeling the energy system as racist, 00:19:38.670 --> 00:19:40.632 align:middle line:90% she took quite personally. 00:19:40.632 --> 00:19:42.090 align:middle line:84% And so I want to emphasize that you 00:19:42.090 --> 00:19:45.645 align:middle line:84% can look at both the articles by Bill Gates or Jefferson-Stokes, 00:19:45.645 --> 00:19:47.520 align:middle line:84% and you can have different reactions to them. 00:19:47.520 --> 00:19:49.350 align:middle line:84% But what I want us to do is try to read 00:19:49.350 --> 00:19:52.050 align:middle line:84% lots of different viewpoints and engage with them 00:19:52.050 --> 00:19:55.680 align:middle line:84% and think through what we agree with, what we don't agree with, 00:19:55.680 --> 00:19:57.630 align:middle line:84% and use that to shape our own viewpoints. 00:19:57.630 --> 00:19:59.887 align:middle line:84% And this is just to emphasize that the point 00:19:59.887 --> 00:20:02.220 align:middle line:84% of your education with is to develop your own critically 00:20:02.220 --> 00:20:03.570 align:middle line:90% reasoned viewpoint. 00:20:03.570 --> 00:20:05.910 align:middle line:84% But to develop your own critically reasoned viewpoint, 00:20:05.910 --> 00:20:07.500 align:middle line:84% you have to engage with evidence. 00:20:07.500 --> 00:20:09.390 align:middle line:84% You have to engage other people's viewpoints. 00:20:09.390 --> 00:20:11.098 align:middle line:84% And you have to engage with other people. 00:20:11.098 --> 00:20:13.410 align:middle line:84% So we're going to try to have nothing 00:20:13.410 --> 00:20:18.480 align:middle line:84% to be off limits this class, even as we try to engage things 00:20:18.480 --> 00:20:22.320 align:middle line:84% rationally and respectfully, respectful of other people's 00:20:22.320 --> 00:20:25.410 align:middle line:84% viewpoints, I want us to try to keep on working on developing 00:20:25.410 --> 00:20:29.310 align:middle line:84% our own critical reasoning, and trying to contrast how 00:20:29.310 --> 00:20:32.190 align:middle line:84% other people see some of the same issues, 00:20:32.190 --> 00:20:34.273 align:middle line:84% even if we don't agree with them. 00:20:34.273 --> 00:20:35.940 align:middle line:84% And so in our class, I want to emphasize 00:20:35.940 --> 00:20:40.500 align:middle line:84% that we're going to learn, question, and reason together. 00:20:40.500 --> 00:20:43.670 align:middle line:84% Finally, I wrote this article this summer 00:20:43.670 --> 00:20:46.950 align:middle line:84% with a number of colleagues around the planning discipline, 00:20:46.950 --> 00:20:49.850 align:middle line:84% including Chris Zegras, who's here at MIT. 00:20:49.850 --> 00:20:52.070 align:middle line:84% The article is titled "Planning the Built Environment 00:20:52.070 --> 00:20:54.560 align:middle line:84% and Land Use Towards Deep Decarbonization of the United 00:20:54.560 --> 00:20:55.640 align:middle line:90% States." 00:20:55.640 --> 00:20:57.710 align:middle line:84% And I wrote this article with my colleagues 00:20:57.710 --> 00:21:01.790 align:middle line:84% because we argue that deep decarbonization is basically 00:21:01.790 --> 00:21:04.130 align:middle line:90% our net zero goal for 2050. 00:21:04.130 --> 00:21:06.590 align:middle line:84% At the same time, we don't think that there's 00:21:06.590 --> 00:21:09.740 align:middle line:84% wide understanding of what we need to do to the built 00:21:09.740 --> 00:21:10.940 align:middle line:90% environment land use. 00:21:10.940 --> 00:21:14.240 align:middle line:84% And this is to say two things, that the built environment land 00:21:14.240 --> 00:21:17.600 align:middle line:84% use are going to be critical to realizing our energy transition 00:21:17.600 --> 00:21:18.980 align:middle line:90% goals. 00:21:18.980 --> 00:21:21.830 align:middle line:84% At the same time, if we don't address the built environment 00:21:21.830 --> 00:21:24.230 align:middle line:84% on land use, we may not reach those goals. 00:21:24.230 --> 00:21:26.060 align:middle line:84% And we think that decarbonization 00:21:26.060 --> 00:21:28.550 align:middle line:84% has implications for cities and the planning in terms 00:21:28.550 --> 00:21:32.900 align:middle line:84% of the scale of how we plan cities, the scope of what 00:21:32.900 --> 00:21:36.960 align:middle line:84% planners look at, the speed with which planning occurs. 00:21:36.960 --> 00:21:40.040 align:middle line:84% We need to achieve a decarbonization goal, which 00:21:40.040 --> 00:21:41.690 align:middle line:84% is basically changing our entire energy 00:21:41.690 --> 00:21:43.670 align:middle line:90% system 28 years from now. 00:21:43.670 --> 00:21:46.865 align:middle line:84% That's going to require planners to operate much faster. 00:21:46.865 --> 00:21:50.180 align:middle line:84% And we need to make sure that we remain relevant. 00:21:50.180 --> 00:21:53.780 align:middle line:84% If planners don't focus on mitigating greenhouse gas 00:21:53.780 --> 00:21:57.680 align:middle line:84% emissions, we will be left out of larger climate discussions 00:21:57.680 --> 00:22:00.840 align:middle line:84% happening in other disciplines or in government, 00:22:00.840 --> 00:22:04.070 align:middle line:84% which is much more focused on mitigation than adaptation. 00:22:04.070 --> 00:22:06.675 align:middle line:84% But planners have traditionally focused on adaptation. 00:22:06.675 --> 00:22:08.870 align:middle line:84% And finally, there's an open question 00:22:08.870 --> 00:22:12.620 align:middle line:84% of what the role of land use and built environment planning is. 00:22:12.620 --> 00:22:15.440 align:middle line:84% We know there's lots of different ways 00:22:15.440 --> 00:22:17.240 align:middle line:84% that we can affect decarbonization. 00:22:17.240 --> 00:22:19.610 align:middle line:84% This is what this article argues. 00:22:19.610 --> 00:22:21.350 align:middle line:84% Having said that, that means planners 00:22:21.350 --> 00:22:24.350 align:middle line:84% have to reconceptualize our role in planning cities, 00:22:24.350 --> 00:22:26.190 align:middle line:84% and cities and their energy system. 00:22:26.190 --> 00:22:27.840 align:middle line:84% So I hope you enjoyed this lecture. 00:22:27.840 --> 00:22:29.510 align:middle line:84% I hope you take this class, or I hope 00:22:29.510 --> 00:22:31.910 align:middle line:84% you watch the subsequent videos on why 00:22:31.910 --> 00:22:36.820 align:middle line:84% cities are a key venue for future climate action. 00:22:36.820 --> 00:22:46.000 align:middle line:90%