Immediate
actions are needed to limit the greenhouse gas emissions that are
driving climate change that helps fuel wildfires, a Monash University
study says.
Change In Length Wildfire Season
A future scenario of high greenhouse-gas emissions and no climate change–mitigation policy, with an increase in the global mean surface temperature of 2.2°C to 4.4°C relative to the 2019 level.
The report, which analysed numerous studies on
wildfires over the past 20 years, says global climate change is fueling
the three essential conditions for wildfires – fuel, oxygen and an
ignition source. The world is seeing inconsistent rainfall, increased
drought and hotter temperatures, leading to more flammable vegetation.
It
says the global mean carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from wildfires
accounted for about 22 per cent of the carbon emission from burning
fossil fuels between 1997-2016. The inconsistent approach to global
forest management and the conversion of tropical savannas to
agricultural lands is damaging the world’s ability to absorb CO2 and
cool the climate.
The report says projections suggest
that if high greenhouse gas emissions continue, wildfire exposure could
substantially increase to over 74 per cent of the global land mass by
the end of the century.
However, if immediate climate mitigation efforts are taken
to limit the global mean temperature increase to 2.0˚C or 1.5˚C, a
corresponding 60 per cent and 80 per cent, respective increase in
wildfire exposure could be avoided, the report says.
Reaching
the 1.5°C target would require reducing global net CO2 emissions by
about 45 per cent from 2010 levels by 2030 and reaching net zero around
2050. The 1.5°C target remains achievable if CO2 emissions decline by
7.6 per cent per year from 2020 to 2030.
The report says
the devastating health impacts are illustrated by several large and –
in some cases – unprecedented recent wildfires. These include the
2019-2020 Australian wildfires, the 2019 and 2020 Amazon fires in
Brazil, the 2018 and 2020 wildfires in the western US, the 2017-2018
wildfires in British Columbia, Canada, and the ongoing record-breaking
wildfires on the US West Coast.
Along with the increased
eye irritation, corneal abrasions and respiratory impacts of the smoke,
the psychological effects are equally as serious with post-traumatic
stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and insomnia common. The
psychological consequences of wildfire events can persist for years,
with children and adolescents particularly vulnerable.
A 20-year study
on adults exposed to an Australian bushfire disaster as children in
1983 found an increase in psychiatric morbidity in adulthood, with
wildfire events associated with subsequent reductions in children’s
academic performance.
The
report says the current exchange between wildfires and climate change
is likely to form a reinforcing feedback loop, making wildfires and
their health consequences increasingly severe, unless we can come
together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Instrumental
to this study was the collaboration with Xu, Rongbin, Yu, Pei,
Abramson, Michael from Monash University, School of Public Health and
Preventive Medicine; Johnston, Fay; Menzies Institute for Medical
Research, University of Tasmania; Samet, Jonathan; Colorado School of
Public Health; Bell, Michelle; Yale University, School of Forestry and
Environmental Studies, Haines, Andy; London School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicine, Public Health, Environments and Society Ebi, Kristie;
University of Washington School of Public Health, Department of Global
Health.
Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 650,000
years there have been seven cycles of glacial advance and retreat, with
the abrupt end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the
beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization.
Most of
these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in
Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet
receives.
Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
The current warming trend is of particular significance because most
of it is extremely likely (greater than 95% probability) to be the
result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia.
Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have
enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different
types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale.
This body of data, collected over many years, reveals the signals of a
changing climate.
This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in
ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that
atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial
Revolution. (Credit: Luthi, D., et al.. 2008; Etheridge, D.M., et al.
2010; Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.) Find out more about ice cores (external site).
The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the
atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA.
There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must
cause Earth to warm in response.
Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain
glaciers show that Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas
levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean
sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks.
This ancient,
or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring
roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery
warming. Carbon dioxide from human activity is increasing more than 250
times faster than it did from natural sources after the last Ice Age.
The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling
Global Temperature Rise
The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.05 degrees Fahrenheit (1.14 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere. Most of the warming occurred in the past 40 years, with the six warmest years on record taking place since 2014. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight months out of that year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months.
Warming Ocean
The ocean has absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 100 meters (about 328 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.6 degrees Fahrenheit (0.33 degrees Celsius) since 1969. Earth stores 90% of the extra energy in the ocean.
Image: Flowing meltwater from the Greenland ice sheet
Shrinking Ice Sheets
The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost an average of 279 billion tons of ice per year between 1993 and 2019, while Antarctica lost about 148 billion tons of ice per year.
Decreased Snow Cover
Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and the snow is melting earlier.
Image: Republic of Maldives: Vulnerable to sea level rise
Sea Level Rise
Global sea level rose about 8 inches (20 centimeters) in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century and accelerating slightly every year.
Extreme Events
The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.
Ocean Acidification
Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30%. This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the ocean. The ocean has absorbed between 20% and 30% of total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions in recent decades (7.2 to 10.8 billion metric tons per year).
The Reserve Bank has warned both climate change and lowering
emissions pose considerable risk to financial stability while regulators
assessing the threat have been delayed by the nation's worst recession
since World War II.
The central bank laid out a list of concerns
about the future resilience of the global economy in a financial
stability report released on Friday morning, describing climate change
as an "ongoing challenge for the financial system".
The RBA has warned about considerable risks from climate change. Credit: Peter Braig
"Climate
change is exposing financial institutions, and the financial system
more broadly, to risks that will rise over time and, if not addressed,
could become considerable," the report said. "These risks for financial
stability may arise from both the physical and transition risks of
climate change."
The report said the financial system was
generally resilient, but there were pre-existing risks including several
common to institutions across the world such as cyber risks from
criminal and state-sponsored groups and long-term risks from climate
change.
"Addressing
these [climate change risks] early will help to both mitigate the
transition risks and reduce the scale of the challenge that physical
risk poses to financial stability in future."
APRA's
assessment requires major banks, superannuation funds, insurers and
other financial institutions to estimate the physical impact of a
changing climate on their balance sheet and the risks of a global move
towards lower carbon emissions.
Financial institutions with high
exposure to industries like power and mining are expected to have higher
transition risk as the economy moves to lower carbon. There are also
risks involved in new technologies displacing emissions-intensive
practices and consumers picking greener products.
The RBA warned in 2019
that if transition changes occur too abruptly this could leave some
firms facing large losses and "broader dislocation in financial
markets".
APRA
executive board member Geoff Summerhayes said in February in a letter
to all regulated entities the watchdog would provide better clarity on
regulatory expectations around climate-related risks, which he said
extended to all sectors of the economy.
"Those
effects are being transmitted directly as well as indirectly, through
changing policies, technological developments, investment and consumer
preferences. They pose financial risks, as well as provide new business
opportunities, to all APRA-regulated entities," Mr Summerhayes said.
A
2018 APRA climate change survey found while many larger businesses
understood the financial risks and opportunities, there was an
industry-wide deficit of data able to quantify the liability risks of
climate change.
The RBA is part of the Network for Greening the
Financial System, which in June published a set of climate scenarios to
help with risk assessment. The research found climate change could
"obscure the assessment of correct monetary policy settings".
The
RBA's report notes the NGFS recommended "central banks strengthen their
analytical tool kits and enhance their communication strategies to help
accustom households, firms, governments and financial market
participants to the risks of climate change for the economy and the
financial system".
Major industry superannuation fund HESTA chief executive Debby Blakey wrote to Australia's top 200 listed companies in September
pressuring them to commit to lowering carbon emissions in line with the
Paris Agreement for net zero by 2050. Ms Blakey said that as a
long-term investor the fund has "an absolute responsibility to take into
account these issues".
However, Assistant Minister for Superannuation, Financial Services and Financial Technology Jane Hume has been critical of funds
for forgetting "their job isn't to rebuild the economy or create jobs
or reframe the climate debate or require industrial relations changes at
companies they invest in".
RBA governor Philip Lowe warned in February
climate change would have a "profound" impact on the economy, leaving
businesses with stranded assets, and encouraged the government to
protect the country from a warming environment.
Australia is a world leader in chopping down trees and
wiping out animals: two questionable accomplishments that are tightly
connected.
Land clearing and habitat loss are the biggest drivers of animal extinction and in recent years, Australia's aggressive rate of land clearing has ranked among the developed world's fastest.
We've
driven 29 mammals to extinction since European colonisation and more
than 1,700 others are threatened or endangered. The once abundant koala
is rapidly vanishing from New South Wales and Queensland.
But
how much land are we clearing? Getting a fix on this figure is tough.
The only nationally consistent data comes from the Federal Government's
National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA).
There are questions over the methodology used in that system — which we'll get to.
First,
let's look at the numbers state-by-state so you can get a picture of
how much land has been cleared, right across Australia, from 2010 until
the most recently available data in 2018.
Here they are, from lowest to highest.
('Primary' refers to forests 30 years and older. 'Reclearing' refers to any forest younger than that.)
Australian Capital Territory
One tree equals 1,000 hectares or 1,000 rugby union fields. (ABC: Emma Machan)
Land clearing in the ACT was the lowest of any Australian state or territory between 2010 and 2018.
Imagine a strip of land 1-kilometre wide, and 15-kilometres long — that's equivalent to the 1500 hectares cleared in the ACT.
And it was all reclearing.
Why so low? ACT is tiny, and since 2011 its forestry industry figures are reported as part of New South Wales.
Northern Territory
One tree equals 1,000 hectares or 1,000 rugby union fields. (ABC: Emma Machan)
This time our 1-kilometre-wide piece of cleared land would stretch 318km, say from Canberra to just beyond Sydney.
The majority of the 31,800 hectares cleared in the NT was for agriculture.
However,
that figure comes with some very big caveats because during that same
period, more than 82,000 hectares were granted approval for clearing
under pastoral land clearing applications in the NT.
Either some of those landholders still haven't cleared that land, or it hasn't been picked up by NGA survey methods.
Tasmania
Land clearing in Tasmania between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)
If
we convert Tasmania's 66,500 cleared hectares to a 1-kilometre-wide
strip of land, it would be 665-kilometres long or the distance from
Melbourne to Canberra.
While Tasmania's area of
land clearing is more than double the Northern Territory's, the total
land area of Tasmania is only one-twentieth the size.
Native forest logging has been a flashpoint in Tasmania for decades.
Youtube Tasmania's forest wars
But in 2012, a peace deal was struck between loggers and protestors.
From
a relative high point of 14,500 hectares cleared in a year back in
2008, only 5,300 hectares were cleared in 2018, according to NGA data.
The
moratorium on logging of around 356,000 hectares of that forest lifted
in April of this year, and there are fears that the forestry wars of old
could kick off again.
South Australia
Land clearing in South Australia between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares.(ABC: Emma Machan)
A total of 108,700 hectares was cleared in South Australia.
If
we go back to our 1-kilometre-wide strip of land, South Australia's
total clearing stretches almost 1,100km from Newcastle to Melbourne.
More
than 90 per cent of that land was classified as reclearing, meaning it
had been cleared at least once in the previous 30 years.
Victoria
Land clearing in Victoria between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)
A total of 177,900 hectares were cleared in Victoria, with 16,300 of that classified as forest over 30 years old.
This time our 1-kilometre-wide piece of land would stretch from Hobart to the southern suburbs or Brisbane.
Like Tasmania, native forest logging in Victoria has been a hotly contested issue.
In
2019, Premier Dan Andrews committed to ending native forest logging in
the state by 2030, and in the wake of last season's devastating
bushfires there have been calls to bring that end forward.
But
in April this year, the Victorian environment department updated and
extended five regional forest agreements (RFAs) covering native forest
logging in different parts of the state.
Timber
harvesting operations done in accordance with RFAs "are not subject to
certain Commonwealth legislative requirements", according to the
Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP).
"This streamlines regulatory processes for the timber industry," according to the Department.
Combined
with hotter summer extremes this has resulted in the collapse of some
species including around 16,000 hectares of northern jarrah forest.
New South Wales
Land clearing in New South Wales between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)
More than 88,000 hectares of primary forest was cleared in New South Wales.
Reclearing takes the state's entire land clearing tally to 663,000 hectares.
That
makes our 1-kilometre wide strip of cleared land almost 7,000
kilometres long, roughly stretching from Perth to Cairns via Brisbane.
In
2017, New South Wales relaxed its native vegetation clearing laws,
however the impact that has had on land clearing is expected to show up
in the reporting periods for 2019 and 2020.
A
leaked report from the Natural Resources Commission last year suggested
that land clearing may have surged by as much as 13 times.
The main driver of clearing in New South Wales is agriculture.
Queensland
Deforestation in Queensland between 2010 and 2018, where one tree represents 1,000 hectares. (ABC: Emma Machan)
The total area of land cleared in Queensland was 2,446,600 hectares.
Our
1km wide strip of cleared land would stretch for a whopping 24,466
kilometres — roughly all the way around Australia twice (minus Tassie).
Of that cleared land, 370,900 hectares were forests over 30 years old.
The
vast majority of clearing in Queensland is for agriculture — over 90
per cent of cleared forest was replaced by pasture in the years
2016-2019.
In contrast to New South Wales,
Queensland's land clearing laws were tightened in 2018 and it's expected
that clearing figures will drop significantly in the coming reporting
periods.
But the data shows we've had a net increase in tree cover
Despite
the clearing of more than 3.5 million hectares nationally during the
2010-2018 period, according to the National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA)
data there has been a net increase in tree cover in Australia during
that time.
To get to that conclusion, they have
compared the amount of cleared land (3.78 million hectares) with the
amount of land allowed to regrow (4.19 million hectares), to come up
with a "net forest clearing" figure of negative-401,000 hectares.
Again,
the lion's share of that regrowth — 2.7 million hectares —has
reportedly happened in Queensland, and to a lesser extent in New South
Wales.
But critics say this does not represent what
is happening in our forests from a wildlife conservation or carbon
storage perspective.
The issue is that a mature
forest can be cleared in one place, and an equivalent area of
three-foot-high saplings may have regrown in another.
In
that case the data would show no net loss in forest cover, despite a
significant deficit of carbon storage and habitat occurring.
The
analysis is done via satellite imagery and cannot pick up subtle
differences happening at ground level, according to WWF forestry expert
Martin Taylor.
"The LULUCF activity tables are very primitive," Dr Taylor said.
"If a pixel goes from 'forest' to 'non-forest' that's counted as deforestation. Could be a year old or 300."
The NGA data also fails to pick up forest thinning, according to Dr Taylor.
The
NGA method is based on satellite imagery where 20 per cent canopy cover
or greater is classified as forest. Only when an area drops below that
20 per cent threshold is it registered as forest loss.
According
to Dr Taylor that means a dense forest can be thinned from 95 per cent
canopy to 21 per cent canopy, for instance, without registering as
having been cleared under the NGA method.
There is
no official data on how widespread this may be, however Dr Taylor said
he had found numerous instances by trawling through satellite imagery —
several of which he showed to the ABC.
Tree thinning shown between the image in 2015 (left) and 2016 (right) wasn't picked up in the NGA data. (Supplied)
Discrepancies in data
Other questions have also been raised about the NGA land clearing data.
Unlike
other states and territories, Queensland also has its own statewide
annual land clearing monitoring program based on a method called
Statewide Landcover and Trees Study (SLATs).
When
comparing the data for land clearing in Queensland from the SLATs method
and the NGA method, there are vast discrepancies between the two —
discrepancies which cast further doubt on the idea that Australia's tree
budget is "in the black".
For instance, using the
SLATs method the Queensland state government reported 356,000 and
392,000 hectares were cleared in Queensland in the periods 2016-17
(winter-to-winter) and 2017-18 respectively.
But
the National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) figures for Queensland show only
304,000 and 254,400 hectares were cleared for the 2017 and 2018 periods —
almost 190,000 hectares less.
In a statement to
the ABC, a spokesperson for the Department of Industry, Science, Energy
and Resources said that is was "misleading to make simple comparisons"
between the different reporting methods, and that the Department was
confident its records are "complete and accurate".
"There is no underestimate of areas or emissions reported in the National Greenhouse Accounts," the spokesperson said.
"Only the Australian Government's reporting is undertaken in accordance with international standards established by the UNFCCC."
But Dr Taylor from the WWF disputes that.
"It's ridiculous to say there is more forest [now than 10 years ago]," he said.
Calls for a standardised national monitoring system
According
to Dr Taylor, the SLATs method gives a more accurate measure of tree
loss and the WWF are calling for a standardised national system for
monitoring forest cover in Australia.
Neither
Queensland's Department of Environment and Science (DES) nor the Federal
Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources responded
directly to questions from the ABC about the differences in their
methodologies, but both said they were confident in their systems.
A DES spokesperson told the ABC that "SLATs applies a highly rigorous methodology".
"Queensland's
SLATs data undergoes extensive manual editing and verification to
ensure a high level of confidence in the data for Queensland's
monitoring and reporting requirements."
Meanwhile,
Australia continues to be compared with some of the worst offending
countries in the world when it comes to land clearing.
The
data for the 2018-19 reporting periods, particularly from Queensland
and New South Wales, will determine whether that has changed.
Filmmaker Sir David Attenborough has been documenting the natural world
since the 1950s. In his latest book and film, “A Life on Our Planet,” he
offers a grave and alarming assessment about the climate crisis Earth
is facing. The 94-year-old Attenborough spoke with William Brangham
recently as part of our ongoing arts and culture series, Canvas.
Transcript
Judy Woodruff:
There is perhaps no one whose name is more synonymous with documenting the natural world than filmmaker Sir David Attenborough.
He has been at it since the 1950s. And in his latest book and film, both out this week, he offers a grave and alarming witness statement about the crisis facing our planet.
William Brangham talked with the 94-year-old recently.
It's part of our ongoing arts and culture series, Canvas.
David Attenborough:
The living world is a unique and spectacular marvel.
William Brangham:
No one has given us a more intimate or stunning look at our planet than Sir David Attenborough.
David Attenborough:
Dazzling in their variety and richness.
William Brangham:
But now, after a near 70-year career, he says we are running the planet headlong into disaster.
David Attenborough:
Yet, the way we humans live on Earth, you're sending it into a decline.
Human beings have overrun the world.
William Brangham:
In his new Netflix documentary and companion book, both titled "A Life on Our Planet," the famed filmmaker wants us to recognize what's happening, and to act before it's too late.
I spoke with him recently from his home in London.
Sir David Attenborough, it's a great honor to have you on the "NewsHour." Thank you very much for being here.
Anyone who knows your work knows that you have increasingly talked about man's impact on the natural world.
But this film really hits this point very directly. Was it your sense that things had just gotten so bad that that needed to be the focus of this project?
David Attenborough:
Yes, I think I have been speaking about this the last 20, 30 years, really.
It's just what anybody who knows the natural world and spends time looking at the natural world stares it in the face. And anybody with whom to that happens feels a huge responsibility to talk about it.
William Brangham:
As you say in the film and in the book, that when you were a young man, going to all these exotic places, you had the sense at the time that man's imprint was not being felt.
Was there a moment where you first recognized and said, I see it now, I see very directly the imprint that humanity is having on the planet?
David Attenborough:
Yes, the problem is making global assessments like that.
I mean, you can go to a glacier that you were there maybe five, 10 years ago, and it has retreated, but you think, oh, well, that's just this glacier. Maybe there's another one that's increasing.
But there are some things that are irrevocable and so dramatic and distressing that you can't brush them away.
The one, I suppose, was the tipping point was when I dive on the coral reef, which I have known perfectly well, on the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, and suddenly saw a cemetery, and, suddenly, it was dead. And these corals, this extraordinary, wonderful construction of corals was dead, white. And that was a shock.
William Brangham:
There is, if I may say, a genuine sense of sadness and melancholy that is throughout this project.
I mean, in the past, you would often talk about man's impact on the world, but would move on, in a sense. This film, you really clearly seem to say: We are not moving on. I cannot stress this point strong enough.
David Attenborough:
Well, you put it very well. That is exactly what I think.
And we — you know, you feel that, sitting in London or New York or wherever, you may feel the what the wilderness is, out there, and, of course, it's interesting, and, of course, we know theoretically we depend upon it.
But when — but now it's more serious than that. It affects every man and woman and child on this planet. I'm an elderly chap. And I look at my grandchildren and wonder what's going to happen.
And all I know is that, if you see these things and realize what they mean, you simply can't sit back and say, well, I'm not going to bother.
William Brangham:
I should say, I don't want to leave people with the sense that you don't address what we might do to remedy this. And a good portion of the book and of the film is looking at solutions.
David Attenborough:
This film is my witness statement and my vision for the future.
William Brangham:
Attenborough argues, for a rapid shift to renewable energy, to sustainable agriculture, for a slowing of population growth, and for what he calls a rewilding of the land and the oceans to give them time to rebound.
How confident are you that we will, in fact, move from these isolated examples to a true moment for change?
David Attenborough:
I'm not in the least confident that we will do so in time.
And I certainly feel, although the situation is worse, I believe that the world is becoming more aware of what needs to be done, to a much greater extent than only, say, five, 10 years ago.
It does seem to me a worldwide realization of the crisis which we are facing. And it's been spearheaded, of course, by young people, and quite rightly, too. It's their future.
The kids of today are — that's their life, you know? And we owe it to them to do everything we can to make sure that disaster's averted.
William Brangham:
Could you talk a little bit about the role that our own human complacency plays in all of this? We all love the benefits of our gas-powered cars and our air-conditioned homes.
And when we talk about sixth extinction or global climate change, it's still very easy for so many people to put this view out of their minds and just keep on.
David Attenborough:
But, actually, in your country, it's more unlikely for that to happen than in mine.
I mean, you have faced disaster after disaster. You have got rising sea levels. You had cyclones, hurricanes moving through with greater ferocity and frequency than ever before.
We see on our television usual coverage of appalling things that happen in your country because of climate change, seem to me overwhelming.
And it's nice to say, oh, it's nothing, it's just a passing threat. It isn't. And the statistics show it isn't. It is a major movement that's happening.
And your country and my country and the rest of the world have got to do something about it. And we can. And we know what to do.
William Brangham:
Do you have to dig deep down to come up with this optimism, or is the — is the long arc of your career what gives you this optimism? What is it?
David Attenborough:
I don't regard myself an optimist, to be truthful.
But, having said that, we have to recognize that, if we are going to solve it, we are going to, as humanity, act as one. And that means that people will have to give, as well as take.
And if that's to happen, it's got to be supported by the electorate, who says, we want it to happen. We want to solve it. And tell us what the price is, but we want to pay it.
William Brangham:
The book and the film is called "A Life on Our Planet: My Witness Statement and A Vision for the Future."
Sir David Attenborough, thank you so much for talking with us, and thank you for your remarkable career.
