There are a host of solutions to help climate change action, but how do we tell what’s worth the hype, and what’s just greenwashing? From solar pv, to wind power, plus nuclear and even geoengineering. So are renewables worth it, and could the future of fusion save the day? I’m joined by @EngineeringwithRosie to break down the tools that could help save us from climate break down.

And don’t forget to watch the video over on Rosie’s channel all about solar radiation management (SRM) geoengineering

Support ClimateAdam on patreon:

#ClimateChange #TierList #engineering #technology



Rooftop wind from Toby Whiting
Global warming temperature map from Nasa GISS
Vertical axis wind turbine by SWIRL SeCS (Smart Wind Integrated Renewables Letzebuerg)
Geoengineering visuals from Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung
Power plant demolition by ALIEN ADDICT
Ocean photo by Hotel Kaesong
Solar panel by Jimmy_Joe
Wind turbine by Patrick Finnegan



  • @ClimateAdam

    don't miss our in depth look at solar geoengineering over on Rosie's channel!

  • @jaybo8204

    Hi There Peoples. May I suggest that whilst I get hydro, is it not actually a disaster for the environment. I mean damming rivers and flooding swathes of land and the impact on ecosystems. Seems counterintuitive. A way out there idea – mining (that dirty word again) Helium 3 from the moon. At least its basically limitless – the Helium 3 I mean. But a very immediate solution – change your behaviour such as at least switch off the data on your mobile when you go to sleep at night and don't leave things on standby and don't leave the clock on your microwave on 24/7 switch it off at the power point and so on. All the tiny things on their own multiplied by X billion people surely would make a difference. After all the most stunning beaches near you are made up of what – tiny grains of sand.

  • @alanphillips8544

    If we are taking on an average of 150 tons of space dust every day …. the earth is gaining mass…. increasing the gravitational pull towards the sun… getting warmer every day… rising sea levels because the oceans are filling with dust…. dust falling on the glaciers and turning them black absorbing more heat from the sun, causing receding glaciers….. think about it people… carbon emissions….. malarkey!

  • @VictorKB96

    Wind energy is not a topic that I master. However, if you read "The World Without End" by the French brilliant genius Jean-Marc Jancovici, you see that it takes a lot of energy, and material to manufacture a wind tower. Then it has to be transported by huge trucks and needs to take up a lot of space, with a lot of cement. And someone has to come to repar it when necessary. All of this for an energy source that is not very efficient. The same goes with solar

    One solution missed is a global recession, which I would put into the S tier

  • @BobTheWulf

    I live in Illinois, USA. We get over 50% of our power from Nuclear, and we’re increasing our renewable energy production. As of January our coal burning has dropped so much that our renewable energy production has almost surpassed it! Illinois is very dedicated to its promise to reach Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050.

    We’ve also been installing charging stations for EV’s, and hopefully soon will implement a carbon tax for fuel inefficient vehicles to incentivize switching to EV’s. As technology catches up with our needs, I know that everything will become more efficient

  • @giiiuseppe2802

    Nuclear fission is literally the only the should be placed in S

  • @LBeaudoin

    I agree with EV and Nuclear at level "C". I just find it interesting that EV are hyped up and Nuclear disregarded. I guess political bias in the real world …

  • @danrichards27

    wow i need to hear more of your thoughts on why hydrogen is so low – seems like it could be a good option for solar storage, and for applications that electrification wont work for – such as big cargo ships and airplanes.

  • @johngage5391

    There's one "S", but it's not a technology, it's a policy: Carbon Fee and Dividend with a CBAM. It will drive 50% of the emissions reductions required globally for a 1.5˚C future. It makes most people richer while it sends a price signal throughout the entire economy to drive the innovation, deployments, and choices necessary. The CBAM pushes the power around the world through trade. Check out Citizens' Climate Lobby to learn how you can get involved in helping make it happen in your country! If we do it in the US (as with the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act), it will spread like wildfire around the world. We need $135/tCO2e by 2030 and rising at least $8/tCO2e a year through 2100 and complementary policies for any chance at 1.5˚C (IPCC SR15). Carbon Fee and Dividend is a viable and durable way to do it.

  • @kratos-gj1ml

    I can not believe this, conventional nuclear energy in the same spot of electric cars and Below cycling. There are creating new nuclear reactor with boron in China, but not, not mention that.

    Also, you Don't mentions the zeppelin neither the most efficient way o transport people and merchandise on earth, the trains.

  • @vincewhite5087

    Still feel solar everywhere is great.

  • @vincewhite5087

    Lip mega batts are coming down fast.

  • @Mivoat

    Hilarious. Climate solution or energy solution? Or are they the same thing?

  • @user-np5bi9wn5x

    It seems to me that the reasons given for nuclear fission (and so forth) being C-tier are based more on politics than energy-like considerations. Just because it's expensive and it takes time doesn't mean we shouldn't build more nuclear plants, indeed, I would argue we should start building ASAP given the climate crisis we're living in. As of now, they're the most efficient and clean way to produce energy, it's kind of a shame to see it under (even) windpower, which quite frankly is such a scam

  • @rochellerochelle1488

    2:26 Small nuclear reactors?????

  • @TheEulerID

    No intermittent solution without a viable and cost effective energy storage solution deserves an A category. The only truly proven, cost effective storage system at the required scale around is pumped hydro, which is fine if you are Norway, but lousy for many countries. Batteries are OK for a bit of load levelling, but too expensive for true grid level, and also use a massive amount of resources, have limited life and things like flow batteries which might help, simply are not there at the right level. Of course if spare renewables could be used in a cost effective way to produce chemical energy, that would be wonderful, but still a long way off.
    At the moment, in many countries, solar and wind rely on backup from fossil fueled generation for when the wind doesn't blow and the sun does not shine. Also, renewables are a lousy match for nuclear generation.
    Hydro is the one that ticks all the boxes, if we ignore the environmental impact, and the fact that in many countries there are very limited sites. The same is true of tidal, but even more so along with geothermal.

  • @SheilaCrosby

    Solar water heating? I know someone with a very cheap installation. It has no control electronics, so no problems sourcing coltron, but it really only provides hot water late afternoon and early evening. They organise showers and laundry around that.
    Most people have posher ones that provide hot water about 20 hours a day, and warm water for the other 4

  • @DobrinWorld

    Thank you Adam for the good job ❤! Can you make something more just for our way of living, can you explain much more in details for our food and veganism? I'm vegan and i love when scientist talk about it because the science make me vegan, for the biodiversity! Your colleague dr. Peter Kalmus also talk about it and this make me much more an optimist for the future because in Bulgaria most of the scientist lie about it!

  • @nelsonchick7348

    Tidal power? Sun does not shine at night and sometimes the wind does not blow, but the tide always comes in and out.

  • @henkverhoeven1256

    Nuclear energy: takes too long and too expensive? That’s on us to decide upon. Hope one day XR Will demonstrate pro nuclear energy.

  • @clester4773

    We need to advance Nuclear as soon as possible if we want to electrify the world. Until then Natural gas and hydro are the answer

  • @paulblack5329

    Please do a video on Cloud Brightening Stephen Salter (designer) & Sir David King UK have a few decent videos explaining how it works. Basically spraying sea water over the artic! It’s a very fast short term solution that could give us 30 to 50 years !

  • @hgoebl

    Nobody speaks about just saving energy, avoiding flights and transportation, consume local goods, avoiding pets and many children, build with wood rather than cement, build smaller homes, work from home if possible, reuse, share and repair things/tools.

  • @breakablec

    Wow, so unbiased!

  • @edvindenbeste2587

    I'd have to say veganism is S-tier, it's the no 1 thing we can do for climate change, if we count the potential for carbon sequestration from rewilding. We could reduce agricultural land use by about 75% by going vegan, which would mean about 30% of all ice-free land in the world, if we rewilded that and grew back rainforests, forests, swamps, marshes etc. We could basically halt global warming for decades even with everything else being unchanged, buying us time to switch everything else in our society to being more sustainable

  • @jackosimbo

    I would have put wind at D and nuclear at A. Both have challenges but nuclear is more environmentally friendly in my opinion and gives a consistent base load

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sign In


Reset Password

Please enter your username or email address, you will receive a link to create a new password via email.