CrashCourse - 2016-01-27
So, if economics is about choices and how we use our resources, econ probably has a lot to say about the environment, right? Right! In simple terms, pollution is just a market failure. The market is producing more pollution than society wants. This week, Adriene and Jacob focus on the environment, and how economics can be used to control and reduce pollution and emissions. You'll learn about supply and demand, incentives, and how government intervention influences the environment. Crash Course is on Patreon! You can support us directly by signing up at http://www.patreon.com/crashcourse Thanks to the following Patrons for their generous monthly contributions that help keep Crash Course free for everyone forever: Mark, Eric Kitchen, Jessica Wode, Jeffrey Thompson, Steve Marshall, Moritz Schmidt, Robert Kunz, Tim Curwick, Jason A Saslow, SR Foxley, Elliot Beter, Jacob Ash, Christian, Jan Schmid, Jirat, Christy Huddleston, Daniel Baulig, Chris Peters, Anna-Ester Volozh, Ian Dundore, Caleb Weeks -- Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet? Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/YouTubeCrashCourse Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/TheCrashCourse Tumblr - http://thecrashcourse.tumblr.com Support Crash Course on Patreon: http://patreon.com/crashcourse CC Kids: http://www.youtube.com/crashcoursekids
I would look into alternative ways of producing meat, since agriculture is one of the biggest culprits in regards to climate change. The fossil fuel industry needs to go to.
William Shanks yes it is
Christian Neihart what you like or enjoy does not justify suffering that’s called being selfish
Animal agriculture is responsible for 13–18% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and less in developed countries (e.g. 3% in the USA). Fossil fuel combustion for energy and transportation is responsible for approximately 64% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and more in developed countries (e.g. 80% in the USA).
@ECA my dude rice and beans are cheap! I mean if you live off beyond burgers sure its gonna get pricey but eating whole plants is pretty much the cheapest way to eat!
@TheMFTⓋ you would really like meatonomics!
This is why I wasn't 100% sold on the 5p charge for supermarket plastic bags. They ARE a way to reduce our impact on the environment, but this policy is being used merely as a political strategy: one year after the legislation was effective, politicians can point at graphs showing a huge decline in the use of plastic bags, which is a good thing. What they might not show you is the tiny dent this has made on the country's environmental impact. Reducing the use of supermarket plastic bags is a good thing, but when you are a government, with the power to make policies that will have a very large positive impact, shifting the brunt of the burden to consumers seems like the safest and least effective course of action.
Though there are examples of industries and government using "green washing" policies and marketing (ex: clean coal), let's not discredit moves to lower environmental impact we can. The City of San Jose California did an Environmental Impact Report (as required under CEQA) and did a formal study of the results of the policy change and have found significant improvements in the local bodies of water and water ways (One of the main objectives the city initially sought to accomplish). Though it may not have created a significant impact on CO2 emissions, it's has improve the quality locally scarce resource: water.
+E “Anonymous Nerdfighter” Hernandez Don't forget that it a makes people feel that they are entitled to use the bag as they paid for it and they perceive that the 5cents pay for dealing with the environmental impacts (despite it not)..
What's wrong with nuclear energy??? I think the best case scenario is to switch to nuclear short term, and have a long term plan to switch to renewable energy(solar, wind, hydro, wave, etc.)
@Feynstein 100 if cultured meat technology becomes possible, companies will be incentivized to switch to cultured meat because its cheaper, more expandable.
@Parasitic Angel I guess that is true. Lol this comment thread is so old I have no idea what your comment is a reply to. I mean, I have read my comment but I don't see its point.
Nuclear industry in combination with electric cars is a wonderful solution. The nuclear industry has a lot better safety record than the wind/solar industries. The new generation of reactors don't have a problem with meltdowns any more if they use encapsulated fuel. Additionally the industry is clean because the spent fuel can be buried in the ground back a the sites where it was dug up from in the first place. Wind and Solar have lots of problems. Wind isn't steady and the creation of solar cells produce lots of heavy metals which pollute the environment. Additionally solar cells have an average lifetime of 15 to 25 years and they barely generate enough energy in their lifetime to pay for the cost to manufacture them. Additionally, they require lots of water to keep them clean of dust and producing well but water isn't easily available in the best locations for solar since solar works best in deserts where the sun is most reliable and there are few clouds.
What would you do with the nuclear waste? That’s the problem
Faults that occur handling nuclear energy are less common but the human and environmental cost of a mishap is far greater
you forgot deforestation by burning.. palm oil industry alone emits way more co2 than cars.
@KCircuit8 indeed it is, but h20 doesn't like to linger like other gasses do. Other than that it is quite potent.
+Gamerad360 There have been more than chernoble and fuukushima. three mile island, czech had problems too. After the 3 mile island disaster, reactors became better contained so unless they explode the radiation leaks arent too bad
they censored it... typical corporate channels
We try to keep the palm oil industry sustainable in Malaysia. We do this by capping expansion and using sustainable practises such as NOT burning forests. You also have to realise that agriculture as a whole contributes to this problem, do not single out the palm oil industry.
Luō ēn dasnewtron you forgot burning for ANIMAL AGRICULTURE
"I'll just ignore this entire video."
-Both Trump and AOC
Renewables not cheap enough is a half truth. In countries such as Chile and India, solar out competes coal/natgas. Areas such as Texas see wind power far cheaper than fossil fuels. Even the German government just said a few days ago that renewables are now cheaper than fossil fuels. It's just a matter of internalizing the externalities to such a point where the real cost of fossil fuels is fully realized in the price.
As the price of renewables continues to drop and the price of fossil fuel regulations increase, more and more places around the world will see renewables become cheaper than fossil fuels. 2014/15 was the time when renewables started being cost effective in select markets. Soon, it will be all markets.
Capacity factor in detail - http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=14611
+SangoProductions213 Actually the solar constant is 1.367 kW at noon, so while 1 might be a convenient approximation it's not the precise value like you imply.
which, as I said, was why I doubted just how valid it was. Thanks for finding the exact value.
If you want to compare renewables to "dirty" energy, you need to consider: 1: Renewables are highly subsidised, to promote high adoption rates 2: Dirty energy is highly regulated and taxed, to offset pollution costs, and price swings. But green energy is definitely the future for energy and transport, but the one culprit that green energy will not fix is the livestock off gasses and the deforestation to house livestock. Renewable human body energy is also needed, plant foods anyone???????
USE NUCLEAR POWER ITS CHEAP AND CLEAN
you have no idea how happy i got when he said trinidad and tobago :'(
Make your move, world! Here in Brazil we are already 85% on renewable energy :P
Apareçam BR's!!!
You're also burning down the Amazon where the world gets 20% of our oxygen
"treaty that could be adopted in 2015", we're in 2016 hhahaha
Nuclear power + electric vehicles = saving our planet <3
"Kick over a barrel of oil and light it on fire"
6:45 Errrr, December 2015 has passed already....
+Lumamaster I guess this shows that the episodes of each CrashCourse series were recorded in advance; that's probably more efficient than, say, asking Hill and Clifford to travel all the way to the Emigholz studio every week.
+James Lewis and in turn, it's also environmentally friendlier!
There's finally a crash course video on me, Captain Planet! Remember, the Power is Yours!!
So many of the individuals that are outspoken deniers of climate change are working backwards from their conclusion. They are looking for reasons as to why all the scientists are wrong because they've already decided they don't like governments telling businesses and people what to do.
So as long as things are continually this slow on the policy side of things, its currently most up to the market to find ways to incentivize getting off of oil and gas.
+Nickelicious except that that's like saying that it's up to a river to find a faster way downhill. "the market" is far too vast and nebulous to do anything but follow the path of least resistance. policy may be slow to change, but it's virtually instantaneous when compared to the virtually geologic timescales at which the market moves, without some drastic technological development (i.e. Industrial Revolution, or Digital Revolution - and at those rates, we've got at least another century or so before the next one).
Climate Change is a hoax, a political boogyman used by Democrats. It is a scare tactic to garner more power.
5:41 Where's Phil?!?! And Adrienne and Mr. Clifford?!
Tennessee Valley Authority making me proud of my state in a little way.
Yay! Glad they partially covered environmental economics. Next step, Ecological Economics! Hopefully..
if Hank and John would sell their homes, I guess there would be less green' houses (gases)
You should feel bad.
+Twan de Graaf ba-dum-tssh
i laughed
thanks.
oh god
bro really
This lines up perfectly as i'm starting my globalisation and sustainability class, cheering.
Thankyou.
YES! I've been waiting for environmental topics since I requested it on video 1.
@Nolan Thiessen What about systemic inefficiencies and contradictions?
@Nolan Thiessen Maybe I shall clarify my point. Are you up for a further discussion on the subject?
@William Freeman Yeah, sure. Just know that I have a Bachelor of Environmental Science and Bachelor of Science in Geography, so I come at the discussion from a very environment/human health point of view rather than a pure value=money POV.
@Nolan Thiessen I think an economy can be considered successful only when it efficiently serves the needs of majority of a population.
I've sent you an invite to hangouts.
+Nolan Thiessen Fuck Environment topics, shit's boring as hell and used to easily as propaganda. Space is where it's at, no smelly homeless hippies in space.
you should watch "the venus project " get some new and fresh ideas!
Thank you, and looking forward for more economics classes...
We started exactly with this topic in school today, very helpful video!
For anyone actually interested in this topic I recommend reading an article in ecological economics (2015) “In Markets We Trust? Setting the Boundaries of Market-Based Instruments in Ecosystem Services Governance” by Erik Gómez-Baggethum and Roldan Muradian
Great contribution to Crash Course you guys! But on the subject of environmental economics and externalities, I was sort of hoping to hear a little about value engineering and planned obsolescence.
Also, I imagine it may be a little controversial to mention much about human rights violations as a tactic used by some large companies to exploit resources in developing nations and to discourage protesting by indigenous people. But those instances are very real and a major part of globalization and the growing economic inequalities you mention in some of the earlier episodes, which sadly do not often get enough media attention for most people to ever hear or even believe they are happening.
Crash Course isn't exactly the news though, and even though it is part of the modern world's economic challenge, it would be pretty hard for you guys to cover something like that without getting sucked into some pretty heavy ideological debate.
Either way, you're both doing a great job, and btw I dig the AC/DC belt buckles.
Hm, it seems no matter how you try to hold the beast down, it finds a way to squirm away. Economical nihilism seems more attractive everyday.
Thank for the economics series ❤️
@5:42 That harmful emission though. :D
ThoughtBubble! I saw what you did there.
Hello Adriene and Jacob! I’ve been watching the entire course. Everything totally awesome! I own a permaculture farming business. I would love to hear your thoughts on this concept and the multiplier effect it could have:
In climate change there are two sides: pollution, and the degeneration of the biological systems that act as buffers, filters, and fertility regenerators.
Focus could be drawn to:
1. The potential of carbon sequestration through permaculture style grazing and no till farming as a means to lower CO2. (Adds valuable externalities like nutritious food and fertile soil and less disease)
2. Small local waste treatment for biological residues and add value through compost and/or insect farm (adds value through organic fertilizers and insects for animal feeds) mainly to prevent water pollution
3. If polluting company serves a social goal (i.e: fossil fuels for energy), maybe taxing only the company for all the externalities isnt the best choice. We could debate cases in which the expense is passed to the consumer in the form of taxes so the company doesnt need to raise prices for their goods, yet the externalities were accounted for.
4. Government organized transition plan with support and subsidies for farmers transitioning away from chemical conventional farming.
I really enjoy your course and am aching of doing thought bubbles too 🙂
omg Hank at 6:10 had me dead ! Amazing work 😂😂
1:14 those are nuclear power plants which dont produce any carbon emissions
Environmental Econ : Finding the right incentive that can make market do something good or at least not doing something bad for the environment.
They forgot to mention cows
WE can wait for new technology to become cheaper and... Die
The best part of this videos was Hank dancing! LOL
That belt :)
Top notch animations for this one. I particularly enjoy all the hula dancing and cartoony cameos from other CC personalities. Hula on, Hank Green.
5:40 fart incoming
Great lecture! Check out my Environmental and Natural Resource Economics video series for similar work
I really want to see an updated version of this episode.
wow amazing material!
<>
Haven't you Economists done enough to the environment? xD
@crashcourse How did this video manage to spend over one minute talking about "The Rebound Effect" but not once mention the concept of a Carbon Tax?
Things are really heating up here.
I am subscribing this video. It is really good! I am learning really much.
was that Hank Green in the hula skirt? :)
Yes it was.
Good video ! However please consider using something else than pictures of nuclear power plant when mentionning CO2 emissions (@1'10) since what's coming out of the huge tower is water vapor. Those facilities pollutes via solid radioactiv waste, but there's no CO2 emissions there.
Doing this helps spreading wrong idea about the type of pollution involved :/
Incoming arguments about how global warming is fake from a bunch of idiots
@黒い楓 so basically God is useless :(
@Ideally Jekyl Not really. It's more like he's fuel and you're a spark. Fuel doesn't just explode for the hell of it. It needs an external source of ignition. There's more to it than that, but I'm not equipt to explain, ask a theologian about the specifics.
@黒い楓 that made no sense whatsoever 😃but I like analogies haha
+黒い楓（Spice） Not going to argue about religion because I find it to be 95% asinine. Most religions are logically incompatible with reality. You can easily preform a number of different experiments to get a truth value regarding anything. edit: I mean to say, most religions are interchangeable with grandiose delusions. Simply apply Occam's Razor, the scientific method, and keep open a list of various real and logical inconsistencies and fallacies.
Are you sure? I've been studying up on Judaism and Christianity (and some Islam for finding similarities) for s number of years now, and cross referencing between the original Hebrew (and Greek for the New Testament) and the Young's Literal Translation, and some of The Message translation (which is really just an annotated NKJV), the entirey of the bible is consistent with itself. Most of the time people who complain about inconsistencies are using the New International Version, which is only about 60% true to the original text.
FirstRisingSouI - 2017-01-09
The big question: what can we do when we have science-deniers in the government making the decisions?
Kyle D - 2018-12-30
Get rid of the science-denying government, end all foreign wars, and we the people can use our money to invest in science and technology to save our environment and resources.
Ryan Shah - 2019-11-17
trump aside, I think most of the people in government are worried about what environmental regulations are going to do the economy in addition to transforming it into a green economy. trump just straight up denies it.
Ansariz Bros Production - 2019-12-27
@Kyle D Man what an amazing world could that be! We could become a space faring civilization within this century. But this won't happen as long as there are greedy capitalists in the world.
Viktor Jöhnemark - 2020-03-09
Educate the electorate
Tars Tars - 2020-04-01
Simple, Remove them