20140113_CF
Source: Bloomberg Television
Date: 13/01/2014
Event: Figueres: people find evidence of climate change "every day, in their own experience"
Credit: Bloomberg Television
People:
- Christiana Figueres: Executive Secretary, UNFCCC
- Stephanie Ruhle: Anchor, Bloomberg Television
- Erik Schatzker: Anchor, Bloomberg Television
Erik Schatzker: Progress has been slow. Are you at all optimistic that we're going to get the kind of deal that nations around the world - all of them - can sign on to?
Christiana Figueres: Yes, I am confident that we're going to get a global agreement in 2015. I'm confident because I have seen definite progress only in one direction, which is forward, over the past three years. And I'm confident because at the last Conference of the Parties - which is when all governments get together - which recently happened in Warsaw, governments decided not only to stay on track for the 2015 agreement but actually to accelerate the pace with which they would reach the milestones.
Stephanie Ruhle: Here -
Christiana Figueres: So we're on track.
Stephanie Ruhle: Here in the US, do you feel like we're moving at the right pace? Because Democrats - they seem to want to keep Obama's climate change plan on the table, and they can't get it there because there are other issues that, you know, people just think are more important.
Christiana Figueres: Well, the fact is that nobody is on track, right. Globally we're not on track, because the science says we should be moving much faster. Um, now, in the United States, it is a very difficult... uh, unfortunately, it has become a partisan issue, and this should not be a partisan issue. Because the fact is, global climate change affects everyone, no matter what your political affiliation is.
Stephanie Ruhle: How do you get people to start understanding that? Because, at the end of the day, people seem to care about how much money is in their pocket, do they have a job, do they have Medicare, and they're not thinking about the Planet Earth, which really they need to, because all those other things are secondary, if we're not living somewhere safe.
Erik Schatzker: 'Cos the bill comes due, so many years later, right? They don't see [inaudible] in the future.
Christiana Figueres: Well, that is true. But it's also true that everyone is having - every day, in their own experience - more and more evidence of climate change. So the polls show, here in the United States, but also in many other countries, that there is increasing public demand for climate action, because people are seeing the effects. And they're not seeing it just two generations down the line or way over in another continent - they're seeing it in their own front yard.
Stephanie Ruhle: But do they understand it? Because even last week, people weren't acknowledging, you know, the extreme cold weather's - this is part of the radical climate change. They were foolishly saying "Global warming? Not happening", because they don't understand the nuances of it.
Christiana Figueres: Well, it is a relatively complex issue. Um, and if you only call it "global warming", well, that's, you know, already the problem in calling it that - it's about global climate change. So you tell me when, in the past have we actually talked about a "polar vortex"? I mean, the fact is we're having changes that we have not seen before. Unprecedented changes. That's what global climate change is about. Exactly about that kind of effects, that are unprecedented.
Erik Schatzker: Christiana, do you have a dialogue with those people who disagree, with those people who say climate change isn't happening? And, if so, is it working?
Christiana Figueres: I do have a dialogue. Now, those who deny the science are increasingly so much in the minority, um, that that is -
Erik Schatzker: But they're often wealthy and they're spending lots of their own money publicising their position, and making it difficult for the President, for example, to get Congressional approval for any kind of deal like that.
Christiana Figueres: Well, well that's true but... There's a difference between those who deny climate science and those who use their money to stop policy - those are two different, two different universes. Um, so those who deny the science of climate are truly very, very much in the minority, and, you know, will - a definitely disappearing species. Um, but those who use their funds to stop climate policy are really, I think, having a - honestly, are shooting themselves in the foot, because the advance of climate policy is inevitable. It is advancing slowly, but it is going to advance. It is going to shift the value of investments. And if they continue to invest in - in the technologies of old - of yesterday - they're not going to be the companies of tomorrow. So they're shooting themselves in the foot.
Erik Schatzker: If that continues to be the position of many members of the Republican Party, again complicating any governmental efforts to try and sign on to a climate change deal, is there any way, in your mind, that the Federal government might try to work around Congress? Is that a possibility? Is that something that you're looking towards?
Christiana Figueres: I think the important thing here is to reach out to the US citizen who actually doesn't look at this as a very complex issue, but just says "What is my interest?" So my favourite example is: those out there who are espousedly Republicans who say "You know what? I don't really want any government interference. I don't even want any government delivering energy to me. I'm just going to put a solar panel on my roof, because I want to generate my own electricity." Fantastic! That's what it's all about. Okay? It's about getting energy independence which doesn't necessarily have to involve the government. It's about exploiting your own resources and actually moving forward in an intelligent way that has nothing to do with politics.
Stephanie Ruhle: Is there a country, a government, you could point to, who you could say "They're doing it right"?
Christiana Figueres: Well, I probably have very bad news for you. Yes. China.
Stephanie Ruhle: China?!!
Christiana Figueres: China.
Erik Schatzker: Tell us more.
Stephanie Ruhle: China - would you have ever guessed that?
Erik Schatzker: No.
Stephanie Ruhle: You could've given me 50 countries, and I wouldn't have guessed China.
Erik Schatzker: Germany, for example, is one that comes to mind.
Christiana Figueres: Well, there you go. Of course, China has a huge advantage, with respect to legislation, right. I mean, they decide on any policy and they just push it forward. But China is already the lead country in wind energy, and they're going to invest so much this year that they're going to bring wind power costs down substantially. They're the second in the world in solar energy and they're going to duplicate solar energy over the next two years. They have probably one of the most aggressive energy efficiency standards, for both buildings and vehicles, in the world. And so when China says "We're going to do this", they do it. And you know why they're doing it? They're not doing it because they want to save the planet. They're doing it because it's in their national interest.
Stephanie Ruhle: But aren't they one of the biggest polluters out there?
Christiana Figueres: Precisely! And because they're burning so much coal, they have enormous amounts of smog in their cities that is absolutely unacceptable to their citizens. And their citizens are saying "You've got to do something about this". They also understand, so they're doing it for national health reasons, they're also using it - doing it because of competitive reasons, because they want to continue to be competitive in tomorrow's low-carbon economy, and they know - if they shift their investments, they will be competitive. So the big question for the United States is: does the US want to be competitive, or do we want to export all of the renewable energy capacity over to China? It is the question that the United States has to answer.