Welcome to zero. I'm Akshatarati. This week choices, controversies and carbon footprints. There are plenty of controversial things about climate change, that it is not happening is not one of them. The science is clear humans burning fossil fuels is the primary reason behind heating the planet, and cutting those emissions to zero will stop the rise in global average temperature. Where the legitimate controversies lie is on how we get
to zero. That's because there isn't one solution, or even one set of solutions that will help achieve that goal in every country on the planet. There's plenty of good debate to be had about why one solution is better than the other and what are the best ways to deploy those solutions. There are also legitimate concerns around who should be responsible for those solutions, corporations, governments, or individuals. Today, we're going to delve into understanding the agency that individuals
have to affect change. While it's clear there's no way to get to zero without systemic changes, it's also true that there's a growing role that individuals can play as consumers or as agents of systemic changes. However, often the conversation around individual action on climate starts off on a controversial metric, carbon footprints.
The very idea of any individual feeling accountable to this is something that the oil companies, who are far more accountable, would like you to believe. It's a proxy for talking about blame. Like, let's break down numerically the degree to which you are to blame for this problem, and no one is like, yeah, sign me up.
I'd love to hear about that.
This is Kira Bindram. She helped launch the Greener Living vertical for Bloomberg Green last year, and she's recounting the typical butttle to caring about a carbon footprint. And even if you're listening and nodding along with Kira, I bet you still do quite a few things in the name
of the environment. Today. I want to talk to you about that very tension that even if we understand carbon footprints are a distraction as a conscious citizen, we are still thinking about the measure and what we can do about it. To make this conversation a little fun, I asked Kira if you would let me calculate her carbon footprint, and she was game. We discuss what the numbers mean and what the limits are on doing something about reducing them.
We also discuss why people love reading about electric cars, why d growth is an idea that fails to take off, and how to find joy in your carbon footprint. Kira, Welcome to the show.
Thanks so much for having me.
Now, this is a show about greenert living and we're going to talk about lots of things to do with carbon footprint. And I should just note that you're sitting in New York in a studio. I'm sitting in London in a studio and thanks to magical technology, we're able to talk without having to put out a carbon footprint to be in the same physical place to do.
This, it would have been weird to fly here to just have this conversation.
Correct, Now, you have been editing Greener Living for a year. What were your trepidations coming into launching a vertical and what have you learned.
I think there's when you're just a person existing in the world and you're not sort of close to climate coverage, there's sort of two dueling narratives in your head around
climate change. One of them is that there's nothing you can do that this is all companies, this is all governments, this is all systemic problems, and you as a person are just sort of a bystander, hoping and praying that your values aligned with what the companies and the governments are going to do, and good luck, you know, but going like God. And then the other is that it's all you. You know, it's your carbon footprint. If you are flying, if you are buying stuff, if you are
eating hamburgers, you are part of the problem. And if you're not changing those things right now, you're even more part of the problem. And I think there is a way to an important way to sort of thread the needle between those two narratives, which is, yes, it is primarily companies and governments, and these are systemic problems, and your footprint and your accountability to them is small relative
to those other larger forces. But that doesn't mean that there's nothing you can do, and it doesn't mean that there's not power in feeling and taking agency when you're dealing with a problem this vast. And so I think that was both what excited me about doing greener living and what made me nervous about it is I think there's truth to both of the other narratives, but there's value in the one that sort of threads the needle between them.
So now let's just talk through some of the stories that, if you were to look back in the past year, stick out in your head as stories you're really prouder for, stories you didn't think you would end up doing, but really were fun stories a day. Did that reaction that you didn't expect.
Yeah, I feel like there are kind of types of stories that really resonate with me when I'm working with reporters or looking at pitches, and that seem to do well as greener living stories. The first kind would be a story that kind of reframes the way I think
about something or changes my assumption about it. So we had a story around a P and G, which is a big consumer company, wanted to sell more dishwasher fluid, and so they were trying to trot out the statistic, which is true that twenty percent of people in the US at least don't use their dishwashers because they think that they are more intense on the environment, and they're wrong. They're actually like much it's much better to using your
dishwasher than washing your dishes by hand. And I love this idea that people were doing something that they thought was sustainable and it actually wasn't, just because it reminds you that you know, your assumptions about things are always worth interrogating a little bit. I love stories that put validity to or commiserate with people around a shared experience. So we recently did a story. I think the headline was literally, why so many EV chargers in America don't work?
And that just resonated.
Immediately with so many people whose experience of evs so far is Okay, I got the car, and I trust the car. We'll go three hundred miles, but I am not confident that I will find a charger that will work. And it doesn't mean we shouldn't transition to EV's, Like I think you have to highlight these growing pains to normalize them.
These transitions are going to be tricky.
But it was something that like immediately resonated with a lot of people.
That's my first time experience too. I recently got a driving license and took a trip in the American Southwest in an EV and literally anything that wasn't a Tesla charger. Luckily we rented a Tesla did not work. It is a big problem.
Yeah, and it's one of those things that no one is dropping the ball necessarily, like this is a new technology, it has to sit out in the open and extreme weather. A lot of it is software updates, Like there's all of these totally valid reasons that it is not easy to make tons and tons of EV charger. Public ev chargers across the United States work perfectly, so it's nice to sort of unpack that for people.
And among the many things that add up to a person's impact on the emissions problem, electric cars tend to get a ton more people reading those stories. Even though road transportation is a buick portion of a person's emissions, especially if they're in America, where car and driving culture is a big part of living. It's not that big. You know, food matters, whether you fly or not matters.
All the things that you purchase matter. But why is it that there is just so much interest in electric car stories?
It jibes with another story type that I think resonates with people, which is I call it green future fomo fear of missing out.
I think there's this.
Idea that again that we have two choices that either we keep doing what we're doing and the planet burns, or we sacrifice. Sacrifice sacrifice and that is the way we get to zero emissions. And for me, nothing epitomizes this more than the paper straws that everyone saw the paper straws and was like, this is awful? Is this what it's going to be like? And evis are the
oppos they're the anti paper shows. It's an example of where like the culturally relevant thing happens to be clean energy versus that everyone is so hyped on clean energy. So you don't need to be someone who pays attention to clean energy or cares about climate change or even believes in climate change to maybe be at a point where you are interested in electric car coverage because you have a car. Car content is a big, big sector, and I really do think and hope that a lot
more sustainable technology, sustainable ideas enter that space. Cultural relevance and the cool factor is a big part of this and needs to be versus just banking on the climate claim.
And so a lot of the stories that you end up doing, which is not just greener living but broadly Bloomberg Green, are solutions oriented, and the more climate as a problem is getting attention, the more people want to come to you with solutions. So What is it that you do to try and avoid green washing or falling for solutions that sound good but may not work. What is it that you're asking reports to look out for when they write these stories.
Yeah, I think there are some questions that any reporter can and should ask when you're interrogating some of these ideas, and they're kind of the same as the questions that any consumers should ask if they're sort of thinking about
what changes they could make in their lives. If a company is out there talking about solving a problem at which many of these companies are, and the problem is climate change, the things that you can do or interrogate the scope of the problem that they're trying to solve. If it's textile waste, how big is textile waste, how much is that factoring? And how scalable their solution is.
If it's something that they made five shirts out of mushrooms like that is great, but it's not necessarily something that will translate to combating fast fashion or something like that. What kind of money is involved are these sustainable business ideas? And then lastly, how is it being marketed? And this gets into greenwashing, which I think we'll see a lot more of incoming years, not just companies doing it, but
also regulatory action against it. And I do think and hope that consumers will develop a more sophisticated understanding of what they should be watching out for. And that's something that we're trying to help them with to show these examples or show the words that you need to look
out for in add campaigns and things like that. These are words like carbon neutral or biodegradable, or when you see a claim that they're going to be net zero by blank date but not compared to some other date, things like that.
One big solution to all these problems is obviously the things that we buy need to be greener. But a big solution could also be just consuming less. So what is it that you do to try and figure out writing stories that help people think consuming less is a solution one that they may want to embrace.
So I am perennially of two minds about this, and one of them is sort of my lizard brain mind, which is de growth or less consumption is such a hard sell with people, Like climate change is a big problem, but getting people to buy less that's a really big problem. And then the others that of course, that's the simplest solution, and it's one of the things that you can tell people to do. So I think the way to navigate between those two ideas is to not be so on
the note about it. If I wrote a story with the headline, you know what you could do to help climate change?
Buy less stuff? No people, six people and click on.
That story because it's obvious and it's not something people want to hear, like they know that objectively on some level. And it's a tough thing to have every day, especially when you feel and see the impacts of climate change happening now and they're happening unequally around the world and socioeconomically, but it's not going to change the facts on the ground, which is that people are people, and it goes back to you sort of need to find a way to
meet them where they are. And then the last thing I'll say, I think there are two things that do not show up in your carbon footprint in the way that I fly or I have a house where I drive a car, which is voting. The number one thing you can do to affect change on climate is to vote for people in office that are focused on it, and that have policies that align with solutions, so please be doing that. And then the other is where you
store your money. I think a lot of people forget that banks are heavily invested in fossil fuel companies, and so where you have your bank account, where you have your retirement These are also things that are relevant that are not day to day changes, but are things that you can look into.
One aspect of Bloomberg Green that I love is that Bloomberg News has a global footprint and we have colleagues covering all the major economies in the world, covering every time zone greener living. On the other hand, though most reporters are either in the US or in Europe. Was that a conscious choice?
Yes and no.
I think when you're talking about tactics or methods that exist to reduce energy consumption or change production methods or consume less, I think you can find those stories pretty much anywhere in the world, Like there are countries where that way of life is extremely normal and actually we could learn a lot, And there are places where, you know, we'll do a story on an Italian startup that is recycling wool in a way that has lessons for modern
textile production, like those stories are everywhere.
But when you're.
Talking about people and who should who is in a position to change things in their lives socioeconomically that would help the planet, And who is in a position where the things that they change would disproportionately help the plant it because they are already over emitting. It makes a great deal of sense to be talking to Americans and Europeans,
and especially wealthy or upper income Americans and Europeans. If you live in Connecticut in a big house with three cars and fly six times a year and eat a ton of Hamburgers, like I'm going to come to you. I'm going to knock on your door with some ideas and some suggestions before I'm going to go to someone
in Pakistan or in Indonesia. And that's just logical, And so yes, there is an intended or intentional conceit in greener living that we should be talking to people who are in a position to make changes while finding inspiration and stories from all over the world.
And then going back to the start of this conversation, there is a polarization when it comes to an individual's contribution to climate change, and one reason why some people say, oh, it's all the system, and you know individuals don't have power to change that system, versus others who say, well, unless individuals do anything, nothing's going to happen. Is down to being able to measure our carbon footprint. It's a
thing that you can do now increasingly. As part of this conversation, Kira, you shared a bunch of numbers with me and how very soon I will reveal what I believe is your carbon footprint.
I'm so scared.
But before we get through that, what is it about carbon footprints that get so many people riled up?
I think it depends on how close you are to the topic. For a climate journalist, they will be very quick to tell you that the idea of carbon footprint was originated by BP, the oil company. Then it was this big campaign and it was extremely successful, and so they'll sort of argue, not unfairly, that the very idea of any individual feeling accountable to this is something that the oil companies, who are far more accountable for emissions and for warming, would like you to believe. It's a
proxy for talking about blame. And I think that's hard for people fairly, which it's sort of like, let's break down numerically the degree to which you are to blame for this problem, and no one is like, yeah, sign me up.
I'd love to hear about that.
So I think it's all of those things, Like it just activates the feelings that people have, which is this shouldn't be on me, and if it is on me, on us collectively, Like I don't want you to point the finger literally at me and the things that I'm doing. And we all have these little narratives that we tell ourselves of how we don't do the thing that we probably know we could be doing to improve emissions.
But you volunteered to be shamed for this podcast, so thank you, and you sent me a response to many of the questions I had about your consumption. And so after the break, I'll go through your carbon footprint. So there are two ways in which I think we can measure carbon footprints pretty easily. One is an average figure which is very easy to find. So if you just google per capita emissions of somebody living in the UK, then number is roughly five point two tons of carbon dioxide.
Barrier do that for the US and the number is fourteen point two tons of carbon dioxide. So from the get go, Kira, You're sitting in New York. I'm sitting in London.
I'm starting at a disadvantage.
You do start at a disadvantage. So the shame game has begun. But obviously what an average number gives you obscures a lot, and so to try and get down to a more refined figure, I asked you to give me a number of data points. So you very kindly shared with me how many flights you take every year, which is not a lot. How much meat you eat every week. I should have really asked you about cheese too,
because it counts. But anyway, how much meat do you eat every week, which amazingly you had the exact numbers because you track your meals. How much electricity do you consume? That's easy enough. Our bills come with a kilo what our figure on them, and so we should be able to find that. How much do you drive, which is not at all, which is very interesting for an American, but I suppose a New Yorker it's probably not that unusual.
And then how much do you buy? So of all those things, the hardest I found to figure out carbon footprint for is emissions tied to purchasing. There are some dodgy figures available, but I feel not very confident about it, and so I'm not including that in the calculation. Maybe we can give it a rough number, but I can walk through the rest of it.
Okay, I feel like I'm going to like come out easy because we're discounting my Amazon habit and my cheese habit.
So this is really already working out for me.
I think we'll just add a round number at the end, right.
For cheese and Amazon combined.
Yes, so we started with a comparison of just per capita US versus UK, and that is fourteen point two tons versus five point two tons. Now I'm going to do it by sections. So you said you don't fly that often, but if you were to average it out, roughly one New York London flight might be the most you would do in a year. So that comes out to be the easiest number to find, which is about one point seven tons of carbon dioxide. Because you were so precise on the meat options again.
Also the variety of meats, which I know well I admired in myself.
I don't know if you admired reading my list.
Yes, well I should list them out chicken, pork, seafood, turkey, ham, bison, and beef. And the fact you should remember is keyra at least last week eight more bison than beef. Turns out bison is about half the carbon footprint of beef, so you're also doing better on that front. But you add all of that up, and I've just taken your last week's meals as the sort of fifty two week meal plan, and that comes out to two point three tons. So one point seven tons plus two point three tons
is four tons. Electricity is very interesting. The New York State grid is about twice as carbon intensive as the UK grid. I knew the UK grid is going to be cleaner. We have a lot more wind over here, but I didn't realize that difference would be that much. And so taking that into consideration, your electricity consumption comes out to be about one point five tons of c or two emissions, so that's five point five tons. You live like a European in America.
That's so exciting. Can I get it on a T shirt or something.
If we are generous and we add the cheese and the purchases and give you another ton, you're still much closer to a European than an American.
But largely because I mean, which would you say is the factor that most differentiates me?
Driving?
Yeah, in the case of other American average Americans, driving makes the biggest difference because people drive a lot in America. You know, many people drive two hours a day and that's a lot of driving. So yeah, I think the biggest difference would be driving and flying. My biggest problem is flying.
Well, it's going to ask did you do your own calculation so we can compare notes and then shame each other.
So yes, I mean the problem with me was, you know, on a vegetarian diet, like the carbon footprint is so low that it doesn't matter, Like it literally is zo point to one to two tons, you know, when you're eating lentils and grassy food. I suppose rice would probably be the thing that contributes more. Rice has a carbon footprint because in the production of rice you do generate methane.
So I didn't actually do my own because I don't do meal tracking, so there was no easy way for me to calculate my food habits.
Sure, these are the excuses that people come up with.
Okshod well, I think, But to me, it's for me. It's a very simple answer.
Flyless.
Yeah, my flight emissions because I have to travel for work. I have family in India, so I'm doing at least one trip to India every year. That in itself just counteracts all the other things that I And that doesn't mean I shouldn't keep doing those things. You know, when I went for a driving trip, I took an electric car. When I fly, I don't fly business because businesses twice the emissions of a normal economy flight. So there are
ways in which I can be conscious. But just a sheer fact of flying means my emissions are high.
How do you think about that?
As I mean, like this is the question, right, I think flying is a really good example of something where like the obvious answers right there, just take less flights. But practically that's not practical or you know, you have to do it for work, you have to see your family, so you know going forward, this is going to be the thing that knocks you out disproportionately in terms of your individual footprint.
How do you like reconcile that in your mind?
So flying is one thing that to me from the very first flight I took, which was not until I was fifteen years old. Was a joyous experience. I still am mad if I don't get a window seat. I am always amazed, even now after having taken I don't know one hundred flights by now, by the sheer fact that we are flying in a tin can thirty thousand feet above the earth. To me, it's amazing that I can sit in a plane and in a few hours I'm in a different country with a different culture, with
different cuisine. And I would like humanity to be able to fly without having to worry about the carbon footprint. What can I do personally about it? Not very much. We had venkat Visvanathan, a professor of batteries, on this podcast earlier to talk about how electric planes could be coming soon and that will help at least short haul flights become greener. There is a big movement around making
sustainable aviation fuels happen. So if you can figure out ways in which the fuels that we do burn in planes can be low carbon, then we've got a way to cut carbon emissions. But fundamental physics of flying means that we are going to have to rely on some form of liquid fuels that are carbon based, so technology has to come and help us deal with the flying problem. But we should also recognize flying as a whole is
still about two to three percent of global emissions. So yes, on a personal level, flying probably is eighty percent of my emissions, but on a global level, flying is still a small portion of emissions.
That was the most journalist answer then you've given me, But I think you accidentally gave me the regular person answer, which is, you have a behavior that you know is disproportionately contributing to your individual carbon footprint. You also know that, like on a grand scale, it's not the thing that's going to move the needle, and you can't stop doing it.
What do you do, and what I'm hearing you say is pay attention to the way in which it's evolving a lot of these things are changing over time, and it's just not there yet the sort of cleaner version.
And so watch it.
Try where you can. I'm sure you're not. I hope you're not fling from London to Paris on the regular. Maybe take trains when you can, or you know, like do things that mitigate a little bit in the meantime.
And then the last one, I've never heard you say, which I love, which is joy.
I don't know if you're familiar with Marie Condo to sort of like find the joy and throw out the
things that aren't giving you joy. I love the idea of like sort of a Marie Condo for your carbon vices, that if you are going to do something that is emitting, it better be something that brings you a lot of joy, and it should not be Oh, I didn't care, So I got the plastic forks that the takeout like it should be that you really love that thing and that you feel present and engaged with it in that moment. And I think that is actually kind of a high
bar that I haven't been applying. That is interesting to think about applying as someone's trying to move forward in this moment.
You have just done what anybody listening should realize a good editor does of a reporter. They take the mass of information in their head and allow them to see what the real story is.
Yeah, what I heard you say is it's a classic. A classic editor moved for sure.
And so if I turn the tables to you and and say, if there was one thing you could do to cut your carbon emissions, what would.
That be I'm in kind of a similar position as you in that the things that I could change most effectively are not the things that would necessarily move the needle on a grand scale. So, as we were talking about consumption, the things you buy, it's sort of nebulous what that's doing. But I don't need to dig into the numbers to know that ordering things on Amazon is
just like not always the necessary thing. I buy clothing much more often than I need to, and I fully get sucked into this sort of mentality that, like, you should be constantly getting new stuff. So for me, I think there's a mindset shift that if I stepped away from newness as an idea, as something that I valued as much, that I would find myself quite naturally buying
a lot less stuff. And that goes back to the sort of cultural shifts that it's not always about a specific productor or it's not always about telling people like, just buyline stuff, but helping them see that, oh, you're placing value on something that is actually not the most important thing, and so cutting back on those types of purchases would probably be up there for me.
I won't give my meat is the issue I.
Think in the largest scheme of things. People who do have children who I've talked to, have thought about this. In a world that's going to be warming, whether bringing children to experience that world is a good thing. That's an ethical question. If we were to just count our lives in carbon, having children does make the children have a carbon footprint. So you have created a consumer that is going to be burning carbon and those emissions kind
of come back to you. So how do you think about children as an equation in the nebulous concept of a carbon footprint?
Yeah, for me personally, it's not the climate is not a factor. It's about keeping my Amazon and cheese habit going, really, But I hear from my friends who are parents who are thinking about becoming parents that is absolutely something they think about in terms of the emissions footprint. Like I just to go back to our conversation about the growth or consumption, Like in the realm of things that you can tell people or can't tell people to just stop doing.
It feels very impractical to me to tell people to stop perpetuating the species. So I just feel like people are going to have kids is a foregone conclusion and we should start from that place. And it is a really personal decision with a lot of other factors. I would go back to the thing that we were talking about when we were talking about your flying habit or
my consumption habits. Learn try joy right, like learn about the best ways to be you know, I'm doing air quotes, you're sustainable parent, all of these products, all of these things that you need to do or buy. There are options there that are better than other options. Try the best you can with what you have available to you,
and find joy in the things that you're doing. And I really hope that everyone who has kids, I'm sure they're not thinking about them in the terms of their emissions put from all the time, but when they do, like, inarguably, this is something that brings you so much joy and is so important to you and critical to your life that it is worth it to have those trade offs.
The other side of that equation in terms of how you reconcile the world we're in and what's going to happen in the next twenty thirty years with raising a kid that I don't know, I mean, I am not a parent. I do not envy them that challenge. I also think kids will lead this conversation they're going to be really close to it in a way that their parents weren't. I know we say that about every generation,
but it's increasingly true. And I think they're going to force change in a way that then maybe we didn't.
So it is a quintessential example of these things are nuanced and there aren't easy answers, and they're emotional, and it is unrealistic to talk about them in black and white terms, or to talk about them as pure value judgments on people if they're not making decisions purely from an emission standpoint, because to do so would not only be impractical for all of us, but it's not something any of us are really doing except for maybe a very very very tiny percentage of people.
Yeah, and a metapoint here, which is that there is a tendency to feel like when we talk about these topics there needs to be a neat answer that Okay, you talked about it at length, now tell us yes or no. And there just doesn't need to be that pressure on a question of this kind because it's a very personal question. And b because even if you did all the math, there is actually no right answer. That's because children that do come into being at this time,
are just going to be much more informed. You know, I learned about climate change as a student in high school, but didn't really think that much about it until I was in college. And so when one of our colleagues came up and asked me the question whether you know she should have children or not, my answer was, well, I know that your kids will know what climate change is and how to work on solutions, and we need
more of those kids. So never think about climate as a problem for whether you should have children or not.
I agree with that.
I also think they will live in a world where the lens of climate change is applied to everything in a way that like we just don't we're starting to feel that now, but I just think it'll be different. And some of that be the normalization of things like you know, extreme heat days in addition to snow days, or just little things that kids will experience, And some of it will be the normalization of new behaviors, Like I think anyone who's a kid today will think it's insane that we drove gas cars.
Will be like, what do you mean you put.
Liquid gas into your car with your hands, Like they'll just think it's stupid. And I think that there will be a lot of examples of that too, where behaviors that are changing or technologies that are changing will feel quite normal. And some of these culture wars or the tendency we have to hold on or cling to the old thing, it will be irrelevant because to kids it
won't make a difference. So I think they will be surrounded by this conversation for better or worse, and can engage with it in a really productive way.
So one thing for me as a journalist covering climate change for the past seven years has been that every year has been different. The topics that I focused on, that the world focuses on changes, how we talk about them, to what depths we talk about them has changed. Whether we think one thing is good and another bad changes, and so it's been a fascinating subject to cover. Having done greener living for the past year, what is it that you've learned and what have you changed your mind about?
I don't know that I've changed my mind about things. I think in a way because you are often closer to the technology and the science, like the things are changing rapidly, and some of green are living is that, but some of it is sort of dealing in the universal truths, which is people are more likely to make changes that are convenient for them or cheaper for them or cooler for them, and applying that framework to all
kinds of different products. I think the thing that I've actually changed the most is the way that I talk about climate change when I'm with my friends or I'm outside of a bloomberg green setting, which is I used to and I think a lot of people do this.
You bring the topic up almost apologetically in advance. You sort of know you're being a Debbie downer, and you're like, I gotta raise this thing, and everyone goes want well, sort of looks at you like that, and I think that is actually a more insidious default behavior for a
lot of us then we realize. When the wildfire smoke was happening in New York, we wrote a story where we talked to the head of the Climate Emergency Fund, which funds a lot of these big activism groups, and she talked about the spiral of silence, the idea that you sort of see everyone around you normalizing something like the sky is orange and we can't breathe, and they're not talking about climate change, so you're like, Okay, well, I guess we're just rolling with the punches here, and
you all do it, and you keep doing it, and you sort of keep going, and I think we have to live in a world where simultaneously, of course, you're keeping going, like we're not going to stop every time something's happening, but you're still having the conversation, and you're taking these moments and using them as inflection points to raise the conversation and not apologizing for raising the conversation because it's important and it's okay to be emotional and
angry and frustrated about it. So I think that's one of the things that I've learned from myself is that I'm sure my friends expect me as a climate editor to come in and bring up climate change, and I'm doing it and I'm not apologizing for it, and I think more of us should be doing that.
That speaks very well to a shortcut that I've had whenever people have asked me what should I do to try and tackle climate change, and my list of things to them is usually number one, talk about climate change. Number two, vote for the right politician, number three, fly less, number four eat less meat if you can do those four things, almost everything else that you could be doing will get greener because of the first four things that you've done.
If it wouldn't be bad for the environment, I would suggest we put that on tote bag or something, but we'll just keep it.
In our minds.
Well. Thank you, Kira, Thank you so much.
This was great.
One thing that listeners should know is Kira is our podcast editor in a way, because she's the one who we all go to when we are in crisis or we need to check whether something should be published or not, and she just makes our lives and this podcast so much better.
Thanks action.
I feel very fortunate to have Kira as my editor and that she's also someone I can talk to about climate change pretty casually. It makes a huge difference, and I hope that you have someone like that too. If you want to check out all the great articles that Kira mentioned, they are linked in the show notes. Thanks
so much for listening to Zero. If you liked this episode, please take a moment to rate and review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify, send it to a friend, or send it to someone who you want to talk to about climate change. Get in touch at zero pod at Bloomberg. Dot net Zero's producer is Oscar Boyd and senior producer is Christine Driskell. Our theme music is composed by wonderly special thanks this week to Jilda Decarli and as always, Kira bindram I am Akshatrati back next week