Andrew Revkin

When you're thinking about subsidies, you're not just thinking about Big Bad Exxon.

You're thinking about this little company in Nairobi, Pago LPG, I think is the name.

In India, the same thing.

So you can list those properties of systems.

And the IPCC wasn't originally transparent when I started writing about it in 1988 and 1990.

And now it's way more transparent.

They have more public review.

So it's even better than it was.

It's like a really good example of a science process of assessing the science, providing periodic output to the world, and iteratively improving the model going forward because of critique, because of scrutiny, and finding better ways for that to interface with people so they have information they can use from that big thing.

And the media are not doing a good job because of this front-page thoughtism.

But we can all, you know, I work partially in academia at Columbia on an initiative partially in communication innovation.

Like how can we have an open landscape of access to information that matters?

What can you do to foster better conversations so that words like collapse aren't just thrown around like emblems?

And so system properties give you confidence, I think.

And then you don't have to be flailing around for Bjorn or Tom Friedman or Catherine Hayhoe.

You can always right now find your character to follow.

But I think what would be better is if you actually develop some skills to just have a basic ability to know how to cut to the chase.

But you just hit on something really important.

You know, having been on this beat for so long, and again, on the disaster beat as well, earthquakes,

I can't tell you how many disaster science experts keep telling me, like everyone says, preparedness, invest for preparedness.