Transcriber: tasnim amouri Reviewer: Alexey S.
The key to solving climate change might just be found
in a lesson from a rubber ducky.
I’m a scientist by training and a long time public servant by profession.
I have spent three decades standing up for science within government.
I am not afraid of asking hard questions or taking on corporate interests
in the service of the planet.
But I have noticed that scientists
and government officials seem to suffer from something in common --
an unwillingness to make decision in the face of uncertainty.
But in this world of imperfect or even conflicting information,
we must radically change our approach,
if we’re going to tackle the climate crisis,
And I have found that the answer lies in asking the right question.
In my work, trying to get rid of toxic chemicals and consumer products,
I saw firsthand the power of asking the right question
and the paralysis that can happen when we try to answer the wrong one.
A great example of changing the question
in order to enable action can be found in the rubber ducky.
But by the way, rubber duckies are not made of rubber.
In fact, they're made of rigid PVC plastic,
and they use a chemical called phthalates,
which is infused inside the toy to make them feel squishy.
Now, back in 2006, scientists knew full well that phthalates were toxic.
They also knew that the phthalates were leaching out of the toys
and into the bodies of young children and infants.
Well, I was quite alarmed to learn this information,
and I wanted to do something about it.
So I took the problem to my colleagues at the Department of the Environment,
and we started to ask questions. Our first question was, “Is it legal?”
Is it legal to make a toy with a toxic chemical inside?
Well, the answer to that question is “Yes”.
It is perfectly legal in San Francisco and in fact, in the entire United States.
So asking the question “Is it legal?”
was not going to enable us to take action that prevented harm?
So we switched to a different question -- “Is it safe?”
Is it safe to sell products that contain toxic chemicals?
Well, the problem with that question “Is it’s safe?” is it depends who you ask.
You see, the plastics industry was assuring us through their science
that it was perfectly safe to have toxic chemicals show up
in the bodies of infants and children.
But at the same time, the science from the public health world
was warning us that it was harmful to have these chemicals inside of products.
So, the problem with the question of “Is it safe?”
is the only answer -- is more study, more study, no action.
And meanwhile, the harm continues, so we needed to find a different question.
As it turns out, the right question is -- “Is it necessary?”
Is it necessary to make a toy containing a toxic chemical?
Can we instead make toys that don't have
the potential to cause harm to young children?
Well, the answer to that question is “Yes, we can.”
So, changing the question to “Is it necessary?”
made everything different for the City of San Francisco.
And in fact, we were able to take decisive action that prevented harm.
We banned the sale of products containing phthalates,
and it didn't stop here within two years.
The state of California and the United States both took note
and banned phthalates in children's products because it wasn't necessary.
There were safer ways of making toys.
The wrong question can lead to inaction.
But a city asking the right question can move a nation.
But unfortunately, toxic chemicals are not the only environmental problem
that is going to require us to ask the right question.
Scientists have been warning for 50 years
about the dangers of the greenhouse effect.
The warming of the planet from elevated levels of carbon dioxide in the air
from the burning of fossil fuels,
and throughout that time, industry has been sponsoring think tanks
and publishing white papers,
all with the purpose of seeding doubt and uncertainty.
And this uncertainty about the harm of burning fossil fuels
has resulted in, of course, calls for more study,
more study, no need for urgent action.
And in the meantime, the harm continues and even accelerates.
Government must break out of this pattern of asking the wrong questions
and getting stuck.
And here are three examples of how San Francisco
has changed the way we ask questions and has made bold action to heal the planet.
First, we stopped arguing with the fossil fuel industry
about the safety of natural gas.
Instead, we asked “Is it necessary to build our buildings
using a dirty fossil fuel?”
The answer is “No, it’s not.”
And so now in San Francisco, all new buildings will be built all electric,
using a hundred percent renewable electricity.
Next, we stop debating about the relative contribution of diesel emissions
to the elevated asthma rates that we were seeing in our low income communities.
And instead, we asked “Is it necessary for our bus fleet to operate on dirty diesel
when there are safer alternatives like all electric and zero emissions?”
No, it wasn’t.
And therefore, now our fleet is one of the greenest municipal fleets
in all of the country.
And we stopped arguing with the waste industry
about their contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.
When we asked “Is it necessary
for our food scraps to end up in their landfills when we know once they’re there,
they release methane, which is 80 times more heat trapping than carbon dioxide?”
The answer was, “No, it’s not.”
And it's the law in San Francisco that all food and organics be collected
and turned into compost, and we use that compost to heal the soil,
to improve fertility and to pull carbon out of the atmosphere.
The stakes are just too high to get stuck in this quagmire of indecision.
The example of the rubber ducky has shown us that it’s within our power
to make decisions now that prevent harm.
San Francisco is showing the world what is possible when we ask and answer
the right question “Is it necessary?“, and then take action that prevents harm.
And we need everyone to follow.
Because when governments ask the right question “Is it necessary?”
and then use that answer to take decisive and bold action --
that is how we solve the climate crisis of today. Thank you.