states know what it is that we have had to. we have to cut carbon pollution. we have to make sure that we move forward with renewable energy, develop efficiency programs and that we have stakeholders, including the in common sense solutions. as scientists we know what we have to do. there is a lot more progress that needs to be made, but we ought not sit back and say we can t do anything, because china and india and other countries are going to contribute greatly to global pollution. is there any chance of any kind of the u.n. process right now, which is complicated and somewhat opaque to me, if you ll allow me to say that, and also seems a black box? a black box that is a black box that is also doomed to failure. we ll talk about that in a moment. is there any possibility of an actual global deal getting done or real absolutely. without the u.s. doing something? no, there s no possibility without the u.s. but the u.s. is already starting, right, so we already hav
fruits of that economic growth, the u.s. actually has to pay other countries if we want them to not develop their own fossil fuels in the same way? you know, the answer is that we have to move forward as a world, and we here in the united states know what it is that we have had to. we have to cut carbon pollution. we have to make sure that we move forward with renewable energy, develop efficiency programs and that we have stakeholders, including the states involved in developing common sense solutions. scientists know what we have to do. and so this is a global problem. it does require a global solution. but but doesn t the u.s. have to doesn t the u.s. have to do something first? i mean, there s even the strongest possible argument, which i would like to hear your response to, basically not only does the u.s. have to move first, but because we have used 100 years of fossil fuel and burned up so much of that carbon