Video

Love it!

Great stuff! Keep it up!

It is not going to be delicious. We are not going to love it.

I've been a bit of a coward for a long time in not going vegetarian, but after watching this I think I'll muster my courage and start. Way more effective video than all the PETA ones I've seen before for some reason.

This is so cool inefficiency of traditional food production is maddening

This dude is gonna make us eat Star Trek cube food isn't it?

Chernobyl was not an accident. It was purposely placed in a situation that all the safety precautions were defeated. So, it was an experimental reactor accident. So, really, there have been no casualties in the normal operation of commercial reactors worldwide for almost 70 years of operation and thousands of reactor-years of electricity. 10% of electricity in the world comes from nuclear power. Just sayin'.

Insightful conversation!

Really awesome video!!

If only people realised it isn't green goo like in The Simpsons

I am not against Nuclear. There are places for it. Who knows, better technologies are possible. I think small nuclear will be needed in high latitude locations. Traditionally, nuclear is very centralized. Modern renewables such as Solar, wind, and geo/thermal/hydro are decentralized and cost effective. The danger I see is that nuclear will consume too large a share of development money. The issue is that sunlight and wind are free. When everyone can produce their own power who needs nuclear?

There is great concern about water use in the western USA, particularly the Colorado River. Eighty present of the consumed Colorado River water goes to crop irrigation. Half of that water is for animal feed.

Excellent !

It would make far more sense to feed the livestock the featureless gunk and enjoy the meat and milk .they could engineer the gunk not to produce methane .

I love the analogy...drives the message home

I'm hopeful that precision fermentation may give help develop the initial building blocks of knowledge to eventually produce transplant organs. As we can see at 3:08 there's a big demand for hearts <3

This techno-ethical shift could have massive negative consequences that you are not addressing. The genetic modification technology used in precision fermentation could cause irreversible damage to human health and the environment. Where are the long term studies showing it to be safe?

Great message

Nice video.

Nuclear, nuclear, nuclear Boils my blood when I hear nucular FFS

@15:50 I think a very effective action would be to do just that: show the public what happens, how the meat industry works. Pig and chicken farms, feedlots, transporting the animals, and the processing in the slaughterhouse. Not the stories about soy growing and deforestation, but what happens right next door and how it ends up in the supermarket.

Yes we need both nuclear AND renewable energies to fight fossil fuels

Greenpeace are correct because new nuclear power is not cost effective vs renewables. Nothing else matters.

The reason greencepeace cannot allow nuclear is it would be admitting they were wrong all the way back in the 60's and that most mass fossil fuel use is their fault.

I really don’t understand why you oppose to Nuclear Power?

Innovation! There is no other choice. "Marrying" one option is like putting a chain around our necks. Right now nuclear is still a bad idea. Specially if the new developments in other countries rely on outdated and proven dangerous technologies.

What is needed to find balance.....we should equal all to the same level and combine it all........placing windturbines as the only solution will bring collapse, water electrocity mills? Yes if we want damage all river life which would cause damage too....... The universe is the fight for balance we have desserts on one side and rainforrests on the other.......we have sand here and ice over there......and it all makes balance.........we just need to find balance among all sources of energy.

the question with greenpeace is are they luddites, keynesians or both? solar panels are jobs programs at best

Nuclear fission is not renewable, sustainable, environmentally sound, and especially not safe. We have an extremely effective fusion reactor 8 light-minutes away, all we need to do is harness its output.

They dont want to save the world, they know that most green power is trash so they attack the only green power that isn't heavily limited

I wonder why Greenpeace is getting in the way of dismantling the fossil fuel industry by spreading misinformation that makes nuclear the bad guy. ... If it quacks like a duck.

Power to you Ia and the rest of RePlanet.

Just from the outside looking in, the totality of your global plan seems like a fairly farfetched scenario. Until we can understand what the downstream impact on human metabolism and the environment will be, scaling something like 'precision fermentation' and eliminating the livestock industry seems, as policy, dangerous. It's not that it can't work, It's just that we have an awful track record when it comes to this 'not looking before you leap' biotechnology being applied to our food system. When Norman Borlag modified wheat in the 60's to 'feed the world', we thought we knew what wheat was. We didn't. We've now identified 700 plus previously unknown proteins and their functions in wheat, two of which are or pals gliadin and gluteine, and the prevalence of dwarf wheat in the food supply freakishly correlates with the the increase of coeliac and IBS diagnoses. Do we know if it's causal? Of course not, but the risk of modifying things we fundamentally don't understand to begin with at a global scale is terrifying tbh. Edit: 36:23 just some advice, if you want to be taken seriously going forward, you need to uncouple 'animal rights' from the nutrtional and environmental discussion, however tempting it is to tie everything into one tight, moral package. We tried that on the states, we are still trying to recover from the cognitive dissonance it created (cardiovascular disease being caused by 'fat clogging' your arteries is STILL a thing here).

"Why we should be farming microbes instead of animals"? If the likes of Monsanto, Bayer, and governments attempting to advance UN and WEF's call for the massive depopulation of the planet, did not exist, then yeah, a very clean manufacturing process like this would make sense. However reality tells us there are likely thousands of Monsanto like companies and government officials all willing to manipulate this process and not for our benefit.

It's a new swindle, new hope is just baseless propaganda.

RePlanet is just another braindead scam, devoid of real science, working to swindle us all!

It's NOT carbon, it is CO2 and trying to sequester CO2 is the stupidest thing we could ever do! CO2 feeds the ecosystem that provides the food we eat. The problem is, that these fanatic propagandists have never seen a Physics textbook and they know nothing about the subjects they are attacking. These fanatics are trying to destroy the very source of the food we eat. They are trying to kill us!

Nuclear waste is lethal and there is no guaranty that it will remain in the containers and not get released into our environment by greedy people. The fact that they have removed millions of tons of CO2 is a crime against the environment and mankind. So we are supposed to keep piling up more and more toxic waste so these clowns can swindle us? Fossil fuels are the only green energy!

Greenhouse Gasses are a lie used by swindlers and crooks like you to bilk the public! Physics proves there is no Greenhouse Effect, so there are no Greenhouse Gasses, so CO2 has absolutely nothing to do with climate and everything to do with nourishing and feeding the ecosystem and promoting a healthy and robust environment. Nothing is better for the ecosystem than burning Fossil Fuels and everyone of hundreds of thousands of commercial greenhouses around the world, are an undeniable and irrefutable proof of the fact, because they all burn Fossil Fuels to produce extra CO2, to feed their cash crops, without which the business would be untenable. Nuclear waste on the other hand is always a threat and a danger to everything, which is why they are required by law to put that "radioactive emblem" we all recognize and know instantly what it means, if we are over the age of 12 years. Nuclear waste has absolutely NO redeeming characteristics. All that said, it would be foolish to close down operational nuclear plants that are the lifeline for millions of people, businesses and industry. That is self-abusive, impractical and not necessary. They should be allowed to carryon their very necessary task until they are ready to be decommissioned at the end of the service life. After which they could have had time to plan a fast efficient and economical conversion back to Fossil Fuels and reduce the cost of energy for the consumers, as an incentive to change back and feed the ecosystem once more as the gravy.

Thanks for the excellent work you all do.

2:52 interview

15 years to build a nuclear power plant...then you need even more mining for a 76 year solution. Mining and construction creates greenhouse gases. I refer you to Simon Mischaux.

Sorry, but I don't believe your numbers are correct. If consumers are willing to pay more for food and pay farmers for environmental goods and services, farmers will change practices. Farming is a business model where money talks but most care about the health of their land and strive to be good stewards of their landscape. We grow more than enough food for the world now but approximately 40% is lost due to waste. Perhaps we should focus on fixing the distribution system first before throwing agriculture under the bus.

Great ideas, Stallin did something similar by pushing farmers off their land and starved 30 million people in the process. How do you rewild without large numbers of herbivores? What about the large landscapes of fuel load you will create for mega fires? Why don't you try your hypothesis on small scale and prove it works in practice before unleashing your simplistic ideas on the rest of the world? You are advocating wholesale changes to a complex system without understanding the unintended consequences !

We need to go nuclear now. Reopen all closed nuclear plants in the world and build new ones. Support the companies developing Small Modular Reactors and those developing advanced reactors like Molten Salt Reactors and High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactors. Support countries like Sweden, Poland and France in their ambitions to build new reactors - don't let Greenpeace or other countries get in their way. We don't have time to wait for fusion reactors, too many decades before we will have a commercial reactor - and even then it might be worse than advanced fission reactors on many parameters.

What are the long term health effects of eating GM food? How can you be sure it's safe?

Well done George! What about all the unemployed people in your new system? What about all the farmers and their land they payed for? Your socailist veiws will turn this world into a worse nightmare than we currenly have. You are nothing more than an anti agriculture activist! Try your hypothesis and prove it can be done. The green new deal was supposed to be a win fall for jobs, wrong. Stalin pushed farmers off their land too and starved over 30 million people.

🌷 Promo-SM

Its about trust. I don't trust you. I don't trust how elites will use the tech to make an inferior product that makes people sick. Therefor the tech must be accessible by all and the product independently checked and tested over the next 50 years before I take it.

He didn’t add the cost for the unrealistically guaranteed ‘longterm’ storage of the high level waste, wich is, fair enough, not much in comparison with fossil fuel, but as it’s decay time is unimaginable, it will become a huge problem for future generations. That in itself is not a difficult math assignment…