As someone who studies climate policy debates I find it a bit concerning to see what appears to be growing polarization on a number of issues which quite frankly would benefit from nuance. Ex. Nuclear vs renewables; regen meat vs veganism; degrowth vs ecomodernism. Short

The world is a complicated place, and an uneven one in many respects. What “works” in one space or context may not be appropriate in another. It’s also not fixed in time! Things change.

Nothin’ wrong w advocating for 100% renewables or, on the flipside, making the case for massive nuclear scale-up, but there’s value in hearing the other side of the argument out. IMHO we benefit from an energy system w nuclear, but I’m glad renewables are often prioritized.

Meat is a very resource-intensive food, but also a great source of protein, and the vast majority of the world does not identify as vegan. Point is - we can eat way less meat & support plant-rich diets while ALSO recognizing nutritional, agricultural & cultural benefit of meat.

The growth-environment debate has become unnecessarily siloed and over-generalized. This doesn’t make sense: Growth can be very useful in some spaces and times, and in others may be extremely destructive. Worth listening to the fundamental concerns of ideological opponents more.

Ecologists know the value of diversity. Diversity in economic policy, in energy systems, in infrastructure and technological choices, and in culture and diet is all valuable too! Makes us more resilient.

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.