A Faster Way to Get to a Clean Energy Future | Ramez Naam | TED 

Every parking lot should be shaded by solar panels. We should never have to park in the baking hot sun. Nobody would complain about that.

Finally somebody who talks about solutions not just pointing about gloomy doomy future

Agrovoltaics are one of the answers to land availability. Many of the vegetables that we eat would have been understory plants in nature. Study after study has proven that they attain larger crop yields when grown under solar panel arrays. Furthermore, the shade reduces evaporation and therefore reduces water usage.

Great speech! Thank you for your support of solar energy. My company installing wind and solar since 2005, and I remember the time when solar panels were 15 times more expensive:)

A lot of nimby campaigns are promoted and funded by the fossil fuel industry. I worked for Shell and the amount spent was unbelievable.

Brilliant presentation, Ramez, thank you!

Nationalize railroads. Electrify them. Co-locate transmission on those rights of way

In 2002 I went into nuclear engineering for a college major. It might sound ridiculous, but climate change really was a motivating factor in that decision... also some concerns about peak oil, which didn't age well. I perceived that renewables were not sufficient for the problem. When the evidence changed, I changed my position. I am very sad that new nuclear builds have not panned out economically, but I can't deny it. Solar is the only type of energy that gets built on budget because the panels are all identical, you'd have to be a major idiot to project that wrong. Yeah, managing solar availability is hard, but the costs are too cheap to avoid, and the problem is solvable. Organizations that refuse to entertain this will go the way of the dodo.

The biggest problem I see online are the number of people who think it is 1975.

No more oil wars? Good.

Tony Seba from RethinkX was not surprised

As someone from Taiwan, I have difficulty placing my trust in those who promote misinformation aligned with the Chinese Communist Party's narrative. I kindly request that you reconsider the inclusion of Taiwan in your map of China, as it is a misrepresentation that I find distasteful.

If there ever was Must See TV, this is it.

I went to college with Mez at UIUC ages ago. We used to play Dungeons & Dragons and get hammered on the weekends. It's a trip to see him again all these years hence.

What oxford study are you referring to in 9:37 min?

A key reason for silicon solar's success is that the silicon chip industry paved its way in both material science and manufacturing optimization.

Great teaching on a major and also very current range of topics. Many thanks if we don't support the grid ? The grid won't support us either. 10Kw Solar on my roof

You came from capitalism. That is why they are all wrong and you were wrong. You want money no matter what happens to the world or your own life. But the fact is that you think it is ok to go into debt in order to afford to have them installed. You can't even imagine the need to install them for free on every home with battery storage. There are several reason you are wrong on so many things such as any fuels that burn are not clean. Hydrogen requires huge amounts of energy to make and the coal and gas corporations are paying off as many people of power as they can to keep themselves in power. No pun required. It is cheaper to build solar and batteries than to even start up a coal fired power plant. And then there are plastics that need to be replaced with non fossil fuels based plastics. We don't have the choice anymore of "not in my back yard" That is childish banter from cul-de-sac kids. The real problem here is the people with money must pay up after decades of cheating and stealing from everyone and exploiting everyone. They will never do it. Also Governments are sovereign so they are the only ones that can move decimal points and make new funds available yet they refuse to do it for anyone but big oil, pharma and the international arms machine. We must take away their power to say no and yet everyone is so tired and working all the time and on the edge of failing, that they simply do not have the bandwidth to stand up en-mass and force the powers that be to behave and do what is needed.

Awesome talk. Thanks. I just installed solar and I'm saving a lot of money now 💰😊 Go solar (wind and battery)!

I and some of my neighbors have declared we own the Renewable Energy Rights and Air Rights on our properties here in West Virginia. The future is coming to where these rights will be similar to mineral rights.

I like what was said in this talk. Great information that’s got actual solutions attached. I’m concerned that, in the US, special interest groups who are vested in fossil energy spend much time, money, and other resources to influence the leaders who can enact these types of solutions. It’s to the point where ideas like these are tossed into political talking points and dismissed to garner votes. I’m not sure that Europe is very different.

The term "clean energy " is not correct. Windturbine blades are impossible to recycle. Solarpanels also are a huge problem in recycling. This is not a longterm solution

Another delusional “expert”.

in Nederland the 2023 challenge is season storage of this cheap clean energy.

Wow. A TED Talk that is actually anti-subsidy and pro-free market. Whodathunkit?

I am interested in building solar power plants, but my dad works in large scale export of coal. He still believes that coal is the cheapest energy there is for the next decade. I will show him this video!

I have for 11 years since 2012 50 Solar Rooftop Panels. 11.000 kWh production a year for 11 years now in Groningen Nederland. Inductioncooking Heatpump and EV. A kWh was one euro a kWh. In North Nederland I make a lot of money with my Solar Panels. No Gas No Oil No Coal. 🙂👍☀️☀️☀️

Why is now the time to build, the tech has been available for a while yet the energy companies have been rinsing us of money. They should be responsible for delivery of new clean free energy. 😊

Fastest way is tje WEF. Reduce population tio just a few people (them)

Every single politician on the world should listen to this speech!

That's because you're enjoying the benefits of economies of scale and have practically outsourced all the emissions associated with wind turbines and solar panels.

GREAT talk. Awesome info, and very well delivered! Thank you for what you do Ramez!

We need to grow a holistic grid. First focus on nano grids (home based), then network into micro grids (community based) and connecting nano grids and micro grids creates a state grid, keep growing and you have built a national grid, and if we can put petty details in our respective view points, which are based on our experiences, DNA and other influencing factors, we can grow into a world grid to share as equally as possible. Good bye stress due to energy insecurity. This model works for food insecurity, housing insecurity, all of our insecurities, and therefore all of the stress causing aspects that create our respective fears and negative outlooks. We could actually meet the 1947 Baisc Human Rights accord published by UNDP/UNESCO. Talk about growth.

It's not all free. The silicon, the turbines. These cannot survive on their own at the moment w/o govt subsidy. Not against them but not for papering the earth with them. Too costly. Be more selective & agree to a multi-sourced grid. The fact of the matter is the green movement is about greenbacks.

Great speech indeed, however the graph on time 0:52 may be questionable if the cost of solar will drop to 0.2 $/W. No one may drop the facts on time 1:30 where we see the solar cost 0.4 $/W, but on these world where everything goes up and up, only artificially the cost goes up only on presentations. Peoples pay more every day, this has been the past, this is the present, and these may be the future. Then today solar panels really are very good, but intermittent and then need storing and after this need distribution which are needed to provide dispatchable energy. The speaker really is right, but the real life is not what investors pay to build with low cost, the real life is what consumers pay on the bill, and so let speak for the "price", then the cost and then the profit. On addition to all the above why not speak and compare these solar energy or wind energy with secure and abundant geothermal energy, or nuclear energy and see the capital needed for kwhr and not for power, an investment which work with 93% or higher efficiency may be more attractive than an investment like solar which has efficiency lower than 15%, or wind with efficiency 25%.

And we are still seeing remarkable progress in solar energy technology development like perovskites and battery storage the transition to an all electric economy is coming

One has to change from expecting Green to be able to pay for itself, but has to enable changing the value of land by consuming an obscene amount of electricity to enable getting a byproduct of potable water!

5 times more electricity grid capacity. $1million per klm. 1million klm in Australia = $1TRILLION × 5 = Australian GDP × 5 Plus generation = $1/2 TRILLION × 5 decades and decades and decades Ezi pezi. 😊

Governments getting out of the way and getting on board with a framework for action: CARIBE: Curtail fossil extraction 2% per month down to zero by 2030; Avoid methane emissions as much as possible; Renewables come online, equal fossil gets taken offline; Increase drawdown of CO2e from the air equal to planting a trillion new trees by 2060; Boost conservation; Energy efficiency increase 8% per year up at least 50% by 2030.

Add this to the growing list of studies saying that renewables is better, cheaper, and inevitable. Rethinkx 100% SWB, Tesla master plan 3, and now this.

Classic misdirection of using LCOE (levelize cost of Energy) to argue cost impact of green energy. This is heavily influenced by economics and politics. Wake me up when the cradle-to-grave EROI (Energy return on energy invested) on these systems is greater than 15, then I’ll join the parade. Btw, solar and wind with backup have EROI’s of less than 5, and we need a minimum EROI of 10 just to maintain our current society. Otherwise we will just slide back to the standard of living and population of the Roman Empire. It has been noted by historians that one of the main reasons civilizations fail is because of decreasing EROI’s.

90% efficency... transmittion lines and thermal batteries are about the same. Seems as though it would probably be a balance between local and national connectivity.

Great! Can we stop the insanely large subsidies and other supports for wind/solar/battery production etc? Unfortunately, it seems that even with these alleged cost declines, these technologies are still not viable. P.S. Can we fairly drop the term "clean energy" when referring to wind/solar? Can we also stop casting NIMBY in a negative light. It is good to have some controls over these things, especially on wind/solar. The more this guy goes on, the more ridiculously non-viable wind/solar really are. I bet that Oxford study is complete B.S.. Practically all of these studies promoting wind/solar don't withstand any real scrutiny. If wind/solar were so fantastically more economic, then China and India would not be building so much coal power generating ability. I would bet that this speaker is also hiding the ball on the issue of renewables in Texas. There are always incentives associated with these projects. Wind/solar remain non-viable even with the tsunami of supports from governments.

In this context, Brazil serves as an excellent illustration. With a landmass comparable to that of the United States, Brazil boasts an interconnected transmission system that enables the country to fulfill a staggering 80% of its electricity demand through renewable sources. How normally it works: the North region produces more energy than it consumes, especially during the wet season, thus most of the excess of energy is exported to the Southeast and a minor part is exported to the Northeast. In the Northeast region has a higher energy production during the dry season, which is the period with highest wind potential, thus in this period it exports the excess of energy to the Southeast-Midwest region. In its turn, the Southeast region imports energy from the North during the wet period and from the Northeast during the dry period and exports energy to the South region. Brazil's most populous region and one with the highest demand for electricity is the Southeast-Midwest at the same time is the region with highest hydropower and hydro storage installed potential. The South region's need is partially met by local resources, with the remaining portion coming from imports from the Southeast, particularly during the wet season, which coincides with the South's dry season.

can you make EV panels with only EV panels? They are made of oil, coal...The pricing is like the prices of shares, stocks, paper contracts. Human manipulates the price. The real cost of EV! Do u know the real price? Animals and plants are offering.... My solar panels should be replaced after 30 years. Who will make these? I hope they do not burn coal. a grid based on solar and wind is not stable. Nice dream.... because u use the word "easy" and "simply" .

Ok but here's another barrier - private sector energy generators/retailers do not want to produce enough energy, because then the price will drop. We see this in New Zealand where the gentailers like Meridian et al sit on permits to build capacity but choose not to do it, because by building more generative capacity they will oversupply the market and energy prices will drop (and actually be affordable) - so why would they do that? They prefer to maximize profit and keep energy scarce. I guess at least cheaper solar etc will make generating your own energy more affordable, for those lucky enough to have their own home and the money to buy the gear.

There seems to be a lot of rose tinted glasses being used here. Certainly , in the U.K. that cost is increaseing not decreasing. Cost apart, what is more important is value and renewables are low value with regard to grid supplied electrcity. They are second and third rate generators and are not an equivalent to conventional generators. What ever power they supply to a grid is supported by conventional for intermittency and technical reasons. We have had decades of building these devices, indeed some are already past their life span and been shut down. No stand alone grid has come near to running on them without support.

My new innovation called perpetual hydro gravity is the solution of our energy crisis. But if this innovation nobody believes me it will be buried if I have no life in this world. Hydro gravity is the answer. I know never heard of this because this kind of idea is my new design. No one's believes me. How can I introduce I have no capacity to show this that this is what we need. Hope someone give me a chance to prove that this is what we need. Again this a perpetual source of energy.

I don't get how solar or wind are cheaper; 20 years of ongoing construction projects all across the state of Victoria and they don't match anywhere near the output of the old coal power plants in rated output; The intermittent operation of a good wind turbine site produces 30% of it's rated capacity over 12 months. The wind turbines are difficult to maintain and their operational life is not very long.Before the infrastructure is completed to match the power output, the earliest wind turbines would need replacing. Maintaining and operating thousands of wind generators; 50-100 metres high, sprawled across hundreds of acres all across the country, covering thousands of acres of land compared to maintaining 2 or 3 sites with 8 powerful generators each that are all contained in a building with easy access, with tools and support onsite; This is 100 times more work. The cabling is easy to bring across the state and connect into the fixed sites, these different sized and intermittent sites are going to need wiring all over the place. Another huge construction operation and the maintenance on this new grid is going to be far more complicated. Then we add electrical storage, more costs, more complications. The construction and maintenance is going to be ongoing to keep the sites operating, replacing failed sites and servicing a far more complicated grid. It would be more work then operating machinery and putting coal on a conveyor belt. The coal is under our feet; It's ours; The only cost should be digging it out the ground. Wind and solar are good for smaller sites and for boosting the grid, they are not at all practical for large scale, high power outputs to support our nation and it's industry.

But, but, what about the cost of destroying mountains to produce panels and batteries? I mean, I love the idea of solar and electric car to a certain point, but the amount of destruction just to produce a battery large enough for a car is just so catastrophically awful that I can't even say it.

good talk! Still, please use the correct map of China where Taiwan is not included, thank you so much! The fact "Taiwan doesn't belong to China" is not only politically correct, but also crucial in terms of scientific studies because the data sets from the main land and the island are independently collected by different authorities. So come on, use the correct resources please.

Naïve: I don't disagree that the cost of green power is falling. BUT, the modern world relies on firm power, not intermittent, so you need to add the cost of storage into the cost of green power which makes it expensive. Additionally, you are ignoring the cost of capital - the cost of fuel is discounted, whereas the high capital cost of green energy (per MW) is penalised in a higher interest rate environment. Disappointing.

Why would anyone believe the IEA's predictions? Why would anyone believe that the cost of solar and wind power will continue to go down. The fact is that the cost of raw materials and rare earth minerals needed for wind and solar will go up significantly as demand increases. And this but one of many cost issues.

So many "environmentalists" are primarily motivated by hating oil and gas and opposing anything that they want. Hate is a powerful motivator of ideology. Love doesn't really motivate. You'd think that with the possible demise of all 8 billion of us in horrible deaths would instill compassion and a desire to quickly solve problems, but people are more hate-motivated than ever.

Local energy is better - more resilient. Plenty of roof space in the US - 8B m^2 for 1 TW. Add batteries to make it firm, dispatchable.

If so cheap, why do the countries with the highest rate of installed capacity (Denmark & Germany) have the highest energy prices? The renewables will continue to make inroads into the energy markets but there are still pressing issues including: intermittency, wildlife impingement (wind turbines), additional costs due to transmission across large distances, etc. We'll be needing the existing infrastructure for awhile.

You don’t spend any time talking about geothermal which can be used anywhere and will provide year-round access to 55° temperatures just by digging a hole and great amount of heat if you go Deep

One gas fired generator is equal to 720 turbines over 60 years. The cost comparison is massive. The only reason gas is more expensive is because they add Ona 60% tax onto the fossil fuel A totally false comparison .

The problem facing such ideals are the enormous environmental impact of solar panels, windmills and transmission lines. Add in the full cost and 'renewable ' energy is not so cost effective. All these machines cause power prices to rise. We have nuclear and gas and some renewable energy, but let's not ignore the damage of large scale renewable projects. At the end of the day they'll make minimal impact on climate, but at a very high environmental and economic cost

Okay, but it is not all about the costs. It is about the resources our planet has left. For example copper is needed for wind wheels, but copper is available only for the next 30 years on the earth. Same with Indium for solar cells.

Why do I suspect this guy does not have an engineering background. Lots of half truths. Great talk but large scale battery storage is not cheap and you need 4x the solar since peak solar output is about 6 hours a day. Also the raw material supply chain for copper will take about 20 years to mature.

The most efficacious paths to a clean energy future would rely on metal powders as renewable fuels for heat, the hydrogen economy, along with the regenerative grid theory. Use the surplus energy in the grid, an incredible amount in the US, to make hydrogen, and evolve to the next stage.

Clean energy technologies are technology and they drop in cost like other technologies; as they are scaled they come down in price. Meanwhile, fossil fuels are commodities, whose prices fluctuate.

Renewables might be a technology, but they heavily rely on rare commodities such as neodymium and copper... Too many wind turbines can inflict a fatal blow to birds.

It's the vested interests that are the issue. It is true that renewables will decommodify energy and that is the problem. The highly profitable fossil fuel industry saw off nuclear energy, they will do the same for renewables.

I call BS on this...if it was cheaper every electrical company on earth will do it for free...now trillion $ in incentives and still losing money on it..and increased cost to customers..

Why does green energy, have to be deployed on grid scale? Why not have more localized and regional grids so that the cost of transmission is small. Nuclear is also a very clean and green energy. Thorium reactors are much better than uranium based reactors. We don't see any of those being built.

Use hydrogen and ammonia pipelines to move energy, not just via power lines. It is far more efficacious in energy density throughput, to do so

9:20 Grid is sufficient. Need battery powerplants along the grid, which is easy. Just build it into the turbine halls of old nuclear and coal/gas power plants.

China is held up as an example of the energy transition, yet Xi just announced China will not abide by the Paris accords.

Agree on all, but not on H2. This is a totally different beast and in the making for over 50 years, with very very little progress!

23M Subscribers and after 11days only 70k People watchec this 🤔🤔

Ramen, take a look at Proton technologies , converting oil into hydrogen deep underground , using existing oil wells ,does not get much faster than than that and at lower cost

hey, I know it's not the point of this video, but I wanted to point out a mistake in 9:58 . Taipei is not part of the People's Republic of China.

Every grocery store car parking lot in America could provide enough solar power to power the entire U.S. Just need to build car park canopy solar structures. Just give incentives for stores/landowners to use some of their otherwise wasted parking areas.

This analysis is not taking into consideration mining mineral sourcing of copper and silver which are in severe decline and are required to manufacture solar panels. We are living in a finite world with finite resources.

Very good points! One of the common complaints about wind turbines and solar panels is: "You can't make wind turbines and solar panels using wind turbines and solar panels". This is true----but only so far. There are new CHEMICAL processes (not smelting) being developed, as we speak, for producing both steel and solar panels. And with minimal, if any, energy usage. Presumably this could be used to make the tempered glass that is required as well. It's evident that most----and probably all----problems can be worked through, given enough time, effort, and resources. The environmental movement has NEVER had to resort to its' various scare tactics to advance this technology. Their "crying 'Wolf' " tactics have always been proven false---and will be again. Every time.

We need more residential solar, no more HOAs telling people they cant have solar panels because they are ugly to look at

How about we take care of the threat plastics a and pollution in general are doing to our eco system.

Texas suffered a major failure of energy because it snowed. People died and wind power failed resulting in total failure of the grid. FACT. NEW GRID NEEDS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN COSTSEITHER. TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

Downvoting and reporting the video for wrong boundaries of india

Gus Fring

whats the negative things will come if almost all people on earth using solar panel?

Nimby are nit a big dil HOA on the other hand are the spawn of satan sometimes

Do we have enough minerals & materials to support this transition to multiple continental renewables grids? Where are those minerals & materials located? What are the geopolitical, humanitarian and environmental costs of extraction and transportation? How renewable are renewables? Should our primary focus be on using significantly *less* energy (and materials)? At the very least it would make the problem smaller...

While true, it is also handicapped by the past. This is trying to use old style logic to fix the problem. We not only need to push to replace fossil fuels with green energy, but we need to escape our primitive fascination with the magic that electricity is and stop focusing all of our solutions on just generating more electricity. Green energy is just that, energy. Electricity is just one form of energy. I honestly think that a key to us moving forward is to not only clean up our electricity, but to open ourselves up to finding ways of creating our current quality of life through technologies that aren't driven by electricity. Wouldn't offsetting our electricity dependence and demand also help us reach our goals of clean electricity without having to require so many rare and harmful elements that go into solar panels and wind farms? Solar is actually terrible for generating electricity efficiency wise when compared to heat capture. Per square meter of sunlit captured, we get a lot more energy that way. So, why not use it. So much of our energy consumption comes from heat generation. In using solar to generate out heat, we could for better and more quickly displace fossil fuel consumption our of society. The map shown talks about special areas with especially high solar levels and transporting electricity over huge distances. This exposes the two strongest weaknesses of solar electrical generation. How the inefficiency of such generation makes only the sunniest area viable for generation and how transportation is so much easier and cheaper than storage. Rare and environmentally harmful, as well as extremely expensive materials are required for electrical storage. Heat storage is the opposite. Carbon in the form of graphite and sand are in abundance around the world, and they are great heat storage mediums. I'm fact, they are amongst the most abundant materials on Earth. As solar heat capture is so much more efficient than electrical generation, it doesn't require being captured in some fad off land. It can be captured close to its destination. The heat can be captured in the sunny season, stored until the less sunny times, infused when it is needed. Also, with the assistance of electrically efficient heat pumps, stored solar heat can be ramped up in temperature for industrial application, to offset the truly enormous energy demand of industry for heat. More, with a little ingenuity, we can find all sorts of ways of applying such energy. Think about food production in colder climates or dry climates. Store solar heat that can then be used for greenhouses. Add to that all the organic waste from cities. Massive amounts of methane are produced by rotting organic waste. What if warm air from solar heaters flowed through chambers of organic waste on their its way to greenhouses its heating? Warm air is more absorbent, and would absorb the water from the waste, drying it out. This would make the air not only warm, but humid. So, without using fossil fuels or even electricity, one could have greenhouses that are warm and humid enough to grow plants that normally can only grow in more equatorial areas with lush environments. Beyond that, drying out the organic waste would cut short the methane production of the rotting process. Beyond that, it would also produce nutrient rich inorganic material that could be used in the soils of the plants to help the greenhouse even more to grow healthy strong plants. All while while using green not electrically demanding energy. No doubt there are a million other ways non electrical green energy can be utilized by technology to drive our and others quality of life up while at the same time reducing our dependence and demand on the electrical grid. It's good to push for more electrical generation, but we absolutely need to stop restricting ourselves by making it the sole focus of our search for better solutions.

The US has needed to build east/west UHVDC transmission lines for decades. The benefits of increased energy efficiency alone would pay for it. With it, nothing can compete with solar and battery storage.

Seems like he ignored every other issue with these technologies other than land space, NIMBYs, and permits. Not that cost should even matter in any of these discussions, but does he not think prices will go up when a gird is built and production subsidies subside?

NIMBY is one of the worst campaigns ever.

We are at a 100 year technological transition. The “norm” for 100 years is about to be upended in 5-10 years. Humans are notorious for resistance to change, “status quo”. But none the less, that is EXACTLY what is happening, while you are reading this… BUY TSLA

Pur bs talk. He has no clue at all. Just hot air.🤦‍♂️

Cost per watt should be broken down into residential vs. industrial installations. Residential solar is still very expensive and installers will gladly rip you off just to slap something on your roof.

Too much "Pay to Watch" on the channel now.

If deep-bored geothermal comes to fruition, E.G. GA Drilling and Quaise etc, wouldn't solar, wind and the need for continent-wide grid infrastructure become less important? Maybe even irrelevant?

Thing about comments about clean energy is that goalposts always seem to be changing. I remember when electric cars of new generation (Tesla) first came out, people said ''expensive toys, maybe 1000 people will buy one''. Then Tesla said they want to build a million EVs and people said ''there is no market for million electric cars'', now people say price is still not right and range is still not right or that they do not work in all climates. Which may be/is true today, but who knows where we will be in 2030.... Same with clean energy, just 10-15 years ago the discussion was that wind and solar were laughable as resources period, some novelty expensive energy. Now we've moved to ''this will not work as batteries are expensive and we need to store the energy''. As with EVs, well let's see where we are in 2030...

I love the optimism but there’s many other issues you completely ignored. Not once did you talk about efficiency and energy conversion. You didn’t mention carbon. You didnt go into to all the inputs vs outputs. You made it seem like we could just flip a switch and make it easy to get permits and licenses everywhere. Dude the government doesn’t want to give away power or control ever… good luck trying to make all the governments just completely change up its legislation process lmao! Again, I love your optimism. Unfortunately it’s not rooted in reality, which is the issue behind this whole argument every time… no one wants to have the hard conversations…

I agree but why do I want to build the power for the coast

I can't say it enough: If you're a conservative, you should LOVE solar power. Most of it Is very high tech, it's the triumph of mass production, and it will feed economic growth like you've never seen.

i don't get why Germany, which is a pretty progressive country, so doing everything possible to encourage more use of coal and gas and less use of renewables and nuclear

This pattern is also seen in the question of scale. It is the exact same mathematical formula, and it is possible to replicate this improvement in human rights, green energy implementation, health, really everything. If we look with our eyes open, if we remember the the key of "EQUITY". By so many people, companies, and governments starting to work towards a common goal (common goal = search for equity). has given us a period in time of never seen before technological advancement. We need to analyze the influences that are creating this transition towards equity. We do also need to be more holistic, in that everything effects everything else in the universe. Such is its nature. Even going green can either get us closer to equity or divide view points which creates friction that becomes arguable points of view. We must be able to walk in the other side's view. Find commonality, realize you are both reaching for the same core value goal. The thing that is stopping us is ourselves. Our inability to feel what the other side feels. Once we do there arre no limits, because we will all work together. That combination of all those experiences and talent will explode in exponential progress.