(00:01):
Well, I'm in over my head. No one told me trying to keep my footprint small was harder than I thought it could be. I'm in over my head. What do I really need? Trying to save the planet over someone, please save me trying to save the planet over someone. Please say me.

(00:25):
Welcome you over my head. I'm Michael Bartz. My guest today is Seth Klein. Seth has been a social activist for over 35 years and is currently the team lead and director of strategy of the climate emergency unit. Prior to that, he served for 22 years as the founding British Columbia director of the Canadian center for policy alternatives, a public policy research institute, committed to social economic and environmental justice. His research deals primarily with climate policy and climate justice, a frequent media commentator on public policy issues. Seth regularly gives talks across the province and nationally he is the author of a good war, mobilizing Canada for the climate emergency and writes a regular column for the national observer. Welcome to you know of my head, Seth.

(01:07):
Nice to be here.

(01:08):
So in talking with my previous guests about the decarbonization of the electricity grid, something that was mentioned was the idea of a just transition. And I wanna dig into this a bit more when I was chatting with Katherine Harrison about the politics of decarbonization, I brought up your book, a good war, which has an entire chapter dedicated to the just transition. So I'm excited that you could join me to talk more about your book to start. Can you just briefly explain the thesis of a good war?

(01:30):
Sure. Yeah. So a good war mobilizing Canada for the climate emergency is as the title suggests it's, it tries to lay out a whole plan for mobilizing Canada, but the original twist, if you will, is that it is structured entirely around lessons from the second world war. The last time we mobilized across society in the face of an existential threat. And so each chapter is sort of a one-third history, two-thirds present and jumps back and forth in time trying to pull those lessons, like how is public opinion rallied? How did we navigate the quagmire of Canadian Confederation? What was the role of inequality, the role of indigenous leadership, the role of youth, how did we retool the whole economy? How did we pay for it as well as some cautionary tales? So that's the structure and idea behind the book.

(02:23):
Yeah. And, and I found that comparison from the second world war to our current climate crisis, just incredibly fascinating. And I have to say, I learned a lot from reading your book.

(02:31):
Well, good. I'm glad to hear. You may be interested to know that I, the original book outline was only ever gonna have a single chapter on the second world war. Oh, really? Because I, I had been long intrigued by the example of the war as a, a reminder of how quickly we can retool the economy. But as I delved into that work, I started to see more and more parallels and ended up rewriting the whole plan and, and structuring the whole thing that way. And like you, from the sounds of it, finding some inspiration in, in that historic reminder,

(03:00):
Mm-Hmm, absolutely in chapter seven is about a just transition. And you talk about the three levels of a just transition. And so the first level being at the worker level, and then at the community level, and then the third being the macro level. So I thought maybe kind of fun to do kind of a then and now comparison with some of that. When we are looking at individual soldiers coming back from the war, how were they supported?

(03:24):
Yeah, well, I should say first off that it was my former colleague Shannon do at the Canadian center for policy alternatives, who first introduced me to thinking about it in those three levels. So at the individual level, when we think about just transition, it would be like, what sort of income support and training, and maybe bridge financing to retirement or relocation support or that kind of thing at the community level. It becomes an issue in particular, when you have communities that, where say the fossil fuel industry, coal or oil is really the dominant employer and where the, the loss of that means that the community as a whole needs help thinking about reinventing itself and finding a new source of employment and at the macro level, it's these larger questions around the relationship between inequality and how do we do this in a way that leaves no one behind.

(04:13):
So you were asking about in the war at the individual level, and here is one of those cases where I find some inspiration from the war story. There's about 300,000 Canadians who are employed in the fossil fuel industry today. A lot of people and they need a compelling, hopeful offer don't they, but in the war from a population of about 11 million Canadians at the time, think about this over a million of them enlist over a million of them were directly involved in military production. They all had to be recruited and trained up. And six years later, they all had to be reintegrated into a peacetime economy. And we did that with these audacious programs of income support and housing support and postsecondary programs that doubled the size of the postsecondary sector in Canada and transformed the lives of thousands of people. And I feel like if we could have done that, then we surely could do that again today. In fact, the task today, isn't as great as what we did then

(05:15):
With that example, how are we going to support workers who maybe are transitioning to different jobs out of the fossil fuel industry?

(05:22):
Yeah. So again, I think you can think about it in those three levels. We are gonna need an adequate pool of funding to help workers with income support and training and retraining if they need it often they don't, right? Often these skills are extremely transferable from fossil fuel industries to renewable energy industries, maybe some relocation support. There are communities that are gonna need support. Maybe we're gonna need to bring new renewable industries there or existing or new crown corporations that become new anchor employers. In those places. There are indigenous communities that have been on the front lines of fossil fuel extraction that also are gonna need specific community support, but a concrete proposal that I make in the book. And I actually cooked it up with Gil McGowan. Who's the president of the Alberta Federation of labour where you are, and we cooked it up thinking about not only what do we do for transition, but also recognizing that again at that macro level, while Canada as a whole is not super dependent on fossil fuels, economically pockets of the country are including your pocket.

(06:27):
So Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland, Northeast BC. And so the idea is we should have a new federal transfer program. Let's call it a climate emergency, just transition program transfer. And it should be big and audacious something like I'm imagining $20 billion a year, but unlike other federal transfers to the provinces and territories, which tend to divvy the money up by population like health transfers, this would be divvied up based on greenhouse gas emissions. So let's take your province. Alberta is the source of 38% of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions far greater than your share of the population. We freeze that in time and we say for the next 10 years, Alberta, you will get 38% of this money recognizing that your province has more heavy lifting to do, but with a catch two catches, really the first catch is the formula for giving up the money. The other one is that we wouldn't send the money to Jason, Kenny and your provincial government.

(07:30):
No offense. I don't think they're to be trusted on just transition. Okay. in instead we would create new just transition agencies in each province and territory jointly governed by the feds and municipalities indigenous nations put workers and businesses on the board. But that way we could know that the money is being held for its purpose, but also we would then recognize that the greenhouse gas profile of every province and territories a little different, right, in one province, it might be more oil and gas and another, it might be more vehicles. Another could be more steel, could be more a agriculture. So this would recognize the unique features of each province and have a large amount of money to be spent both on climate infrastructure. So people are seeing big projects that employ lots of people on the ground, as well as whatever money is needed for retraining and income support for individual workers making that transition. That would be my vision for it.

(08:34):
And that vision you're describing is that coming from some of the lessons you learned from world war II, like you talk about crown corporations and, and things like that.

(08:41):
Yes. Now we didn't have a transfer quite like that. It is true though, that, you know, when we think about how this all overlays with the challenges of Confederation, right? This is a challenge in Canada that we are a very decentralized Federation, probably the most so in the Western world. And in some ways, climate action would be easier if we were a unitary state say like great Britain, but we aren't, we have this complicated Confederation. People often say, you know, oh, poor Justin Trudeau. He has to contend with Jason Kenny and Scott Moe and all these difficult characters, but, you know, Mackenzie King had a pretty bad too. You asked about the war. I mean, Mackenzie King had to deal with Bible Bill Abrahart and your province and Duff Pattullo and mine and British Columbian and Mitch Hepburn and Ontario. I mean, these guys hated his guts, frankly.

(09:29):
And yet something remarkable happened when they all recognized the existential threat, the emergency, and for the duration of the war, they all forfeited authority over individual and corporate taxation to the federal government so that they could be United in tackling the emergency at hand. When we think about lessons from the war, I have these six markers of emergency and the first two of which are you spend what it takes to win, and you create new institutions to get the job done, including like new crown corporations. To me, the just transition transfer idea, in some ways captures both of those. It would be a new institution, an ambitious new program that would see us spend what we actually need to spend on the transition, both the infrastructure and the training. And it also captures the fifth marker of emergency, which is that you leave no one behind and that's an important one. And it's where I feel the federal government has been most lacking. When you are asking people to engage in a grand undertaking, as we did in the war. And as we must, again, you have to make a pledge and a promise to people that they will not be left behind. And that the society that awaits them at the other end of this transition is more, just a more fair than the one they are leaving behind. And we have yet to do that in this emergency,

(10:53):
On that you talk in the book about in the war, there was more, more effort in, in social solidarity and trying to come together. One interesting thing that I had learned in your book was that even in the war, people weren't like we think now that oh, people had just signed up and they went off and it was a, a good time, but there was actually a lot of resistance because they'd just come out of the first war and the great depression. So that was a factor as well.

(11:15):
This is a key lesson that when you are in fact trying to mobilize all of society, and when you are asking people to enlist in something risky, you need social solidarity and inequality is toxic to that social solidarity in the war. In the early years of the war, you know, the propaganda around recruitment was very, you know, you know, go get Hitler, right? That worked to a point, but only to a point, and they weren't nearly hitting the numbers that they needed to hit. What they realized as of about 1941, is that if they were actually gonna attain that level of buy-in, that they needed, as I said earlier, they had to make that pledge and that promise about what kind of society we would come back to. And so even as expensive as the war was to prosecute, we saw the introduction of Canada's first major income support programs in the war.

(12:07):
Unemployment insurance comes in in the war. The family allowance comes in during the war, the marsh report that this famous report that lays the architecture for the whole post-war welfare system is written in the war and offered up to Canadians as this promised about and a vision of what they would come back to. And on the flip side, you also saw taxes go up for the wealthy and for corporations, there was an excess profits tax brought in early on. So that like just a segue for a moment, you know, how, at the beginning of the pandemic, two years ago, there was all this language about how we're all in this together, right? Except we weren't really, and in fact, we saw, we've seen obscene profiteering by some, in the pandemic that kind of profiteering was illegal in the second world war. And that helped to secure that social solidarity. And I feel like we need that again today. So the just transition, isn't just about an employment promise to those who need support with the transition. It's why we need a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas companies and the banks. We have to make clear that those who are doing particularly well are paying their fair share to fund the transition that we need to undertake.

(13:25):
Mm-Hmm . And actually, another thing with that was you talked about, I think it was in the states when they made selling of cars, new cars, I think illegal for a certain time, once the war started. That's correct. Isn't it?

(13:36):
Well, yeah. So this is really an example of marker three in a way of my emergency. I told you, marker. One was spent when it takes to create new institutions. The third is perhaps the most thorny and fraught, particularly in the wake of these convoys that we've seen in some of the reaction to COVID mandates. My third marker of emergency is you shift from voluntary and incentive based policies to mandatory measures. And as you are just alluding to, and it gives you a sense of the speed and scale that's possible when we get serious about this Pearl Harbor happened in December of 1941 in February of 19 42, 2 months later, the last civilian automobile rolled off the assembly line in Detroit. And for the next four years, their production and purchase was basically illegal in the United States. You know, the heart of car culture. Now, all of those factories were busy producing other things, and all those workers were busy that did not happen through the voluntary Goodwill or patriotism of the big three automakers that happened because they were ordered.

(14:40):
And, you know, we're gonna need to do the same thing when it comes to buildings and vehicles and, and things like that today, we are stuck right now, and this would be my overarching critique of the federal government's current approach. We're stuck in this mode of trying to incentivize our way to victory. You know, we send price signals with carbon pricing and we give rebates and tax credits and this, that, and the other thing, and those will fail. You know, they, they, they will be successful on the margin, but they will not drive the level of GEG reductions. We urgently now need to see.

(15:19):
And that was kind of my thinking in thinking about the just transition and, and some of the other guests I've talked to in the past about that personal responsibility and how that's maybe not necessarily the most effective way to go about this. Cuz like for example, I live in a tiny house and it's 175 square feet and I'm lowering my environmental footprint, but my neighbour might not be, and someone may not want to buy an electric car. So yeah, we have to push people a little more perhaps

(15:44):
Yes, now, which is not to not to let individuals off the hook, but your example is perfect. So you and I are both a, a little weird aren't we, Michael, you've done your ti tiny house thing. I have voluntarily gotten all of the fossil fuels outta my home. Right. I switched to electric heat pump. I ripped out the gas fireplace. I replaced the stove and I have shut off and canceled my account with, for, to BC, to my great satisfaction. Most people aren't doing that. And if we are hoping that people will voluntarily do that, we're fried, but here's the great thing about marker three mandatory measures. And I think in some ways we've got a bit of it this in, in COVID as well. And it was true in the war as well. And it's this not withstanding the, the kind of an, some of the anti-social backlash we saw in COVID and which we also saw in the war, by the way, most of us in the main wanna do the right thing and do right by our fellow citizens.

(16:44):
We wanna do the right thing, but it irks us because nobody wants to be Achu that we will do the right thing and our neighbour won't and our neighbour will undo all of our good work. Right. That's just annoying. That's the great thing about mandatory measures. You can do the right thing and you don't need to worry about your neighbour your neighbour's gonna have to come along. And actually, the majority of us find that satisfying just to go back to the war, cuz you know, sort of be your weird uncle here, but this is what I do at the beginning of the war, the Canadian government, the American government, the UK government, we're all very nervous about the idea of bringing and rationing. They were convinced that it would produce a kind of popular revolt and it didn't happen. In fact, rationing became one of the most popular things.

(17:34):
Of course there was the anti-social non-cooperators. There always are. It was very popular with most people because first of all, everyone got to play their part. Secondly, they knew it was fair. The rich, as well as the poor, everybody was having to abide by the same rules. I think there is a lesson in that. So we all need to do our part as individuals. We all need to figure out how we're gonna change, how we get around. We all have to figure out how we're gonna heat our homes differently, but we all face limitations and how much we can do that without sufficient support from the state in particular, we need the cost to be within reach and that's in state power. We need public transit to replace a lot of the, that transportation options. And you know, you and I can't build a train ourselves, you know, that's something we have to do. It's an inherently collective enterprise. And so while we all have to do our part individually, the most important thing we have to do as individuals is to organize politically and do that advocacy and to force our governments into emergency mode.

(18:38):
And so you talk, when you talk about the rationing that people were very much on board with that was that partly marketing campaign or what got people. So on board with that,

(18:47):
I think it's a combination of factors. I mean, some of it is what I said. I mean, it was once we were mobilizing across society, it was this very all in participatory thing, but it was partially marketing and there's lessons there too. In the war, the messaging was ubiquitous around how the role we all had to play and the things that we could all do, we are not seeing that on climate. Are we, I mean, I, I would put it to you and your listeners notwithstanding, you know, the slow ramping up of these federal plans and so on. Is there anything about the current government's approach to climate that looks and sounds and feels like an emergency response? I don't think so. No, we're not there yet.

(19:36):
And what do you think it's gonna take to get there?

(19:39):
Well, you know, it's funny. I structured the whole book around the lessons from the second world war, cuz I thought we needed, I wanted to excavate this historic reminder and, and I wrote the whole book before the pandemic and then it came out in the pandemic and I spent a lot of time thinking about these parallels between these different emergencies, the war, pandemic, climate, and noodling over what is that alchemy, that secret sauce, the combination of events and leadership that shifts the zeitgeist and moves us into emergency mode, both our governments and the population as a whole. And it always is some combination of events in leadership, you know, in the pandemic. I mean, I don't know what you remember. I remember when they cancelled the NBA season, I don't even watch basketball, Michael. And I remember when they did that and I remember thinking that, oh my goodness, that's different the whole NBA season.

(20:35):
But I also know it took seeing our prime minister in front of his house every morning, giving those briefings on climate, the events are already happening. That's what these extreme weather events are now in my province in British Columbia last June, we lost 600 people in a week in the heat dome event. It was the most deadly weather event in Canadian history and it was fires. And then we had this incredible floods in November. Other parts of the country have had theirs, including in your province. One of the challenges is that unlike an war or the pandemic, these events don't happen everywhere at the same time. And so they fail to galvanize us all into action at the same time. And it is also the curse of climate that everything moves in slower motion. And that allows our politics to kick the can down the road to a certain extent.

(21:27):
And so the leadership hasn't been there yet, our leaders are not yet in emergency mode. I'm convinced that it's coming. We are seeing the events and they are sadly only gonna get worse. And that moment will come when our leaders are actually in emergency mode. In some cases we'll have to replace the ones we have with emergency leaders who are there. And in other cases like Mackenzie king, the people we have will surprise us and become the people we need them to be. The only question is, will it happen in time? And we don't know that yet. That is the ambiguous time in which we live. But to go back to the war again, I said earlier from 11 million Canadians over a million of them enlisted and you know what, they didn't know. They didn't know either if they would win and they did it anyway, that's the spirit we need today.

(22:21):
And also we learn from history, right? So why was it in world war II that we saw these robust programs for returning soldiers and their just transition? Well, part of it is because world war, I was still a fairly recent memory and the social upheaval after world war I, because there weren't programs like that in place. You know, we got the Winnipeg general strike and things like that in the wake of world war I, the world war II leaders were very cognizant of that. And so even in the early years of the war, they were already preparing for this just transition informed by their not so very distant experience with world war. I,

(23:05):
And do you think perhaps the pandemic might kind of help that transition cuz Hey, we just came out of this. So it's a little more recent.

(23:12):
Exactly. Yeah. So here I was digging up this 80-year-old story, but now we all have this much more recent experience of the pandemic and I would add the response to the invasion of Ukraine. Right? Let's look at that one. All of a sudden we're working with allies, we spending money. We didn't think we had we're banning imports from Russia. We' seizing assets of the Ali. GARS all of these things where we used to wring our hands just a few weeks ago and say, oh no, those things aren't possible. Turns out they are. And so we do have these more recent examples of speed and scale in the whole first year of the pandemic, we saw the government spend money. Like we hadn't seen since the war, the bank of Canada was buying up federal government securities to fund the COVID response, measures, the serve and the wage subsidy to the tune of $5 billion a week. For most of that first year, we only need the bank of Canada to do that for four weeks a year. And you'd have all the funding I mentioned earlier for that just transition transfer.

(24:22):
Cause you talked about in the war, some of these social programs that came in because of that. And do you see any of any of that happening if let's say with the, just transition with the climate crisis that we have our overall quality of life improves because of that?

(24:35):
Oh yes I do. And in fact, I see an historic echo of all of this in the appeal that you see in public opinion for the ideas behind the green new deal. So the green new deal is this whole approach that says we actually need to tackle the climate crisis and inequality hand in hand and have a good job guarantee for everyone in the transition. Right? What the polling I've done shows is that when you link bold climate action with these kinds of bold measures to tackle inequality and economic insecurity, the support for the bold climate action, doesn't go down. It goes through the roof, it registers levels of support higher than any political party. So I, I actually think we should link these things. That's how we win, but it also becomes an articulation of what I said earlier, which is that while we are asking people to take a bit of a leap here, to undertake a whole transformation of how we live and get around and what our communities look like, the society that comes out, the other end is a good life and more just, and fair than the one we're leaving behind

(25:45):
In the war. You talked about how labour unions were a big part of the change. And let's talk a bit about that.

(25:52):
Yes, well events like wars, transform society and social relations and relationships between bosses and workers and the, and the world war II transformed and greatly strengthened the labour movement in Canada and as anxiety-producing as the uncertainty of climate transition is for many, I think it can be so again, but I do think that the labour movement needs to lead on this. Ideally, I think this would go better if instead of transition being imposed on workers, that it was actually unions that were leading the charge and trying to hammer out zero-carbon transition plans for all of their workplaces, take it to the bargaining table. And if you don't get it, maybe that's the next generation sit-down strike. And maybe these student climate strikers will hold the door in the event of something like that. It, it is, I think this is an opening for the labour movement and students to make common cause again, and expedite the transition that has to happen.

(26:55):
And yeah, you talk about young people being involved. So do you see more of that happening now with the climate movement?

(27:01):
No question. I mean, first of all, just a few months before the pandemic we saw in September, 2019, this student-led climate strike day, which was as near as I can tell the largest single day of protesting Canadian history, a million or so Canadians were on the street that day. And it was just before the 2019 election. I think that they influenced the narrative of that election and helped to make climate. One of, if not the dominant issue in that election. So I take a lot of hold from the student-led stuff. That's happening just to give you an example from my hometown. I mean, I, I live in Vancouver and I'm a little biased in the story that I'm about to tell you, cuz my wife is a Vancouver city counsellor who introduced the climate emergency motion here, but Vancouver has a genuine climate emergency plan just to give you.

(27:51):
But one example of that as of last January, no new buildings in Vancouver are allowed to use fossil fuels for space and water heater years ahead of the other building code stuff. That's unfolding now, how is it that Vancouver passed these climate emergency motions? And they did it, you know, Vancouver doesn't have like a big left-wing majority Vancouver, city councils all over the political map. No one has a majority. It covers the full political spectrum and yet these motions have tended to pass unanimously. And how did that happen? In addition to the fact that my wife is really good at her job, Michael, but what she would say is that it happened because on those key vote days, dozens of high school students skipped class and rallied outside and spoke before council and filled the galleries. And basically they made it politically impossible for even the conservative city councillors to vote. No, they did that.

(28:45):
That's really cool. Did that happen during the war as well? Where young people got on board?

(28:51):
yeah. So let me go back to the stats I gave you over a million Canadians enlisted. 64% of them were under the age of 21. In fact, they couldn't vote yet. The federal voting age was 21 until 1970. It was young people who mobilized an, our connect collective defense then just as they are today. And if I can build on that, cuz I have another proposal in the book along these lines, it relates to just transition too. A remarkable thing to me. When I think about all of these hundreds of thousands of young people who enlisted, they left their farms, they delayed their careers. They deferred their university studies because the emergency was immediate, right? And today, you know, there's so many young people who wanna meet this moment. And yet we foolishly say just wait, we're on it, go get your degree, whatever.

(29:47):
Why would we do that? I would dearly love to see a youth climate core. Again, something audacious in size that wasn't something a young person out of high school had to competitively apply for, but actually said to every graduating high school student, if you want to enlist in this, you won't be turned away. There is a place for you. And if you wanna spend the next two years meeting the moment now, because the emergency is now we are ready to receive you. They did that in the war. They weren't ready. When the war began, the early recruits were training with broom handles, but nobody was turned away cuz that was an emergency start, what you do in an emergency.

(30:33):
Yeah. And that, and that comes back to that kind of solidarity as well that people are banding together. And back to the war example, you talked about how, when they came back from the war, they had support to go back to school, to finish their studies and things like that. So I think having that would be helpful as well.

(30:48):
Yeah. Well, or even, I, I mean, I think we could get creative. Imagine a youth climate core that mixes the two partnerships with universities and colleges across the country where you spend four months in the field and four months in the classroom and back and forth over the next few years with your post-secondary education costs covered, doing completely relevant work that sets you up to spend the next few decades doing what we all collectively need to be done. We were talking earlier about my markers of emergencies. So let me round them out, right. Spend what it takes to win, create new institutions like adjust, transition, transfer, like a youth climate core like new crown enterprises to mass-produce what's needed instead of just in, you know, offering a tax incentive in hoping that it gets built. Third move from voluntary to mandatory measures, set clear dates where buildings won't be allowed to use fossil fuels when you won't be allowed to buy a fossil fuel vehicle.

(31:44):
There's a bit of that happening, but the dates are far too out, right well into someone else's political life. Marker four is tell the truth and telling the truth in particular means being forthright about the severity of the crisis, but also what's necessary to confront it and ceasing this falsehood, which gets pedalled big time in your province, but also in mine, which is that we can be serious about climate while still doubling down on the expansion and export of fossil fuels. That's not true. We need to tell the truth. The fifth markers leave no one behind. And that's where the just transition comes in. And the sixth marker is that indigenous rights and title are central to winning. Now that wasn't true in the war, but it is clearly true in the present about a fifth of the renewable projects in our country are indigenous lead at the moment. And in the face of that falsehood that I just mentioned that disconnect that we're contending with, of politicians who say they get climate while still doubling down on fossil fuel extraction in the face of that over and over and over again, it has been indigenous-led assertions of rights and title that are blocking these projects and buying us time until such time as our politics comes into alignment with the science and we should be grateful for it.

(33:15):
Great Seth. So this show is about empowering citizens to take action when it comes to the climate crisis. And I think over our conversation, we've touched on the various things that people can do, but I'm gonna ask it anyways. What can people do today to ensure that we make the transition adjust one?

(33:32):
So first of all, people should do those individual things that we talked about and in particular on homes, which I know is a focus of, of your life and show that means turning off the gas from our homes, but the rest of it is this political project. So we need to forcefully say to all of our levels of government that we expect them to be in true emergency mode. And that marker five, no one should be left behind. We thankfully now federally there, you know, we're talking about having an emissions cap on oil and gas, the just transition transfer and real just transition programs are the flip side. You can't place a cap and lower that cap and not make a hopeful compelling offer to people that they won't be left behind and will be supported through the transition we need that.

(34:21):
Great. All right. Well, I think you've answered my questions. It's been a very interesting conversation. So thanks so much for coming on the show, Seth.

(34:28):
Thanks, Michael.

(34:30):
Well, that was my conversation with Seth. As I said earlier, I really liked the second world war comparison. But one thing that stuck with me was that emergency mode, like this is how we act in an emergency and that's what happened in the second world war and that's what has to happen now. And so I think the more that we can say, yes, this is an emergency and this is what we do when there's an emergency that's gonna make for bigger change and that social solidarity of everyone coming together. Let's do this thing together. So on that note, if you are enjoying the show and getting something from it, tell a friend about it because the more people that we can have helping with the climate crisis, the better off we'll be. Well, that's all for me. I'm Michael Bartz. Here's the feeling a little less you over our head when it comes to saving the planet. We'll see again, soon. In my head was produced and hosted by Michael Bartz original theme song by Gabriel thing. If you would like to get in touch with us email info@inovermyheadpodcast.com. Special thanks to Telus STORYHIVE for making this show possible.

(35:29):
I'm try trying to save the planet or will someone please save me.