Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap
Mother Nature Doesn’t Give a Crap - She really doesn’t. She could care less about our timelines or our targets. She’ll happily continue throwing hurricanes, burning forests and melting her ice caps. Unless we do something. Join us as we tackle the climate crisis though interviews with leaders in the environmental movement and experts in the field. Each episode will explore the policies, technology and human factors that will help you understand this global crisis and what you can do to help solve it. Mother Nature Doesn’t Give a Crap, so we have to.
Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap
Climate Crisis: Engineering Innovation
In this episode, hosts Peter Reynolds and Geoff Sheffrin discuss the role engineers have played in contributing to the climate crisis. Engineers have historically focused on cost-effectiveness rather than environmental impact but can now become architects of change.
Peter & Geoff are joined by Sandro Perruzza, CEO of the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers (OSPE), to discuss the importance of organizations like OSPE empowering engineers in the fight against climate change and to highlight the proactive initiatives they're taking to ensure engineers' voices are heard at all levels of government.
Subscribe on your favourite podcast app and don’t miss an episode!
Also available on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkTMDHlF8N8lVIWzyPl4yhw?sub_confirmation=1
Follow on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100087081536326
Follow on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mothernature_podcast/
[Start of recorded material 00:00:00]
Peter: [00:00:18] Hi, I'm Peter Reynolds and welcome to Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap, with Jeff Sheffrin [00:00:21]
Globally, engineers have created all of society’s infrastructure. If it didn't come from Mother Nature, then an engineer was involved. And though engineers didn't set out to cause the climate crisis, they have inadvertently contributed to it. Historically engineers focused on cost effectiveness and didn't prioritize the environment when designing buildings, vehicles, and industrial processes which often consumed more energy than necessary, producing excessive carbon emissions.
Luckily, those same engineers are now becoming the architects for a sustainable future, designing everything from renewable energy solutions to climate resilient infrastructure, ensuring the planet’s health for future generations.
In this episode we're going to explore how engineers are making a difference through their [00:01:18] expertise, dedication and leadership, and we're also going to learn about the proactive initiatives led by organizations like the Ontario Society for Professional Engineers, to empower engineers in the fight against climate change.
And joining me, as always, is the Muhammad Ali of the fight against climate change, and that’s professional engineer, and climate activist, Jeff Sheffrin. Jeff, how you doing?
Jeff: [00:01:44] Peter. Thank you so much. I'm delighted with the introduction. I'm not sure that I would – [unintelligible 00:01:48] no disrespect to Muhammad Ali, a great, great fighter and sportsman et cetera, but I'm not sure I'm quite in that same category. But never mind, let’s just move on. I'm well, how are you?
Peter: [00:02:00] I'm doing well, Jeff, I'm doing well. I know when you started this podcast it was all about getting engineers to wake up about the climate crisis and the things they could do to help solve it. Have engineers woken up? Are they awake and having their coffee? Did they hit the snooze button? What's going on there?
Jeff: [00:02:24] My view is, because we've been this podcast for almost a year. My view is we have moved a long way forward. Not just with engineers, but engineers critically so. But also the wider population, the denialism and so on has not gone away, but it is receding. And there’s still not-in-my-back-yard going on with people denying how it might impact them, so we have those sort of issues.
But engineers, I think, are way past hitting the snooze button. Are they all onboard? No, some of them work in fossil fuel industries and are a little bit challenged in this area. But the bottom line is, I think we have more and more engineers that are engaged, understand and finding ways of thinking their piece of the contribution through, for a better future.
Peter: [00:03:08] How important are organization, engineering organizations, in empowering them to make that change?
Jeff: [00:03:19] I personally think it’s critical, and Sandra will comment on it as well, I think. But I think it’s critical. [Unintelligible 00:03:24] I think the first of the advocacy engineering branches in Canada, and other provinces are talking about it. But I think what’s critically useful is that we do have an advocacy branch. Because our profession, the PDOs is regulated by the PEO and the regulative protocols that have been put in place through the government and so on.
But we now look at OSPE – OSPE is very much the flag-waving piece that goes beyond the regulatory side of it, and actually talks about advocacy and what we can do and what we need to do, et cetera. So one of the reasons there were several task forces in OSPE, and we come to this in a minute, and we come to exactly this reason.
Peter: [00:04:06] Well you mentioned OSPE, you mentioned Sandra, so perfect opportunity to bring in our guest, who is in fact Sandro Perruzza, the CEO of The Ontario Society of Professional Engineers, OSPE. Sandro, welcome to the podcast.
Joel: [00:04:21] Thank you very much. It’s great to be here.
Peter: [00:04:24] Sandro, I'm wondering for those listeners who don't know what OSPE is, if you could tell us a little bit about what OSPE is.
Joel: [00:04:31] Sure. So we are the advocacy body for the engineering community in Ontario. So what we do is basically we provide a platform for engineers to get together and talk about some of the big issues facing our society, like the climate crisis. Look at some of the things that are causing it, what solutions we can develop, and then we pitch them, the OSPE staff to government, to the media, to the public. So we really provide engineers with that voice.
Peter: [00:05:04] Yes, in fact the voice of engineers is something – is a real focus for your organization.
Joel: [00:05:09] Yes, it’s our tagline. So we are the voice of engineers. And really the role of the staff is to amplify that voice through our social media channels, through our lobbying efforts, all that.
Peter: [00:05:20] So maybe you could tell us about the role engineers have to play in fighting the climate crisis and ho crucial it is for them to be actively involved?
Joel: [00:05:32] Well I think Jeff was talking a little bit about that at the beginning, but I think engineers have probably the most crucial role in actually finding solutions to deal with the problems that we're facing with the climate crisis. You know, engineering is all about developing solutions to problems. And it’s not about the technology, it’s about the design of the technology. So there are a lot of specialists out there who are helping to identify the climate crisis, you know, is it happening? Where’s the evidence? We have people doing that. We have people talk about, OK, how do we get out of it? What do we need to do? Well we need to decarbonize our economy, decarbonize our systems. Fantastic. It’s the engineers who are going to figure out how to do it. Not the what, not the why, but the how.
And that is the hardest part, is the how. How do we do this in a way that we do it effectively, efficiently, and more importantly, without causing other harms?
Jeff: [00:06:35] Absolutely. Right.
Peter: [00:06:37] Jeff, your thoughts?
Jeff: [00:06:38] Yes, no, I totally agree with that. I think it’s critical. And as another little step in that process, one of the reasons I held my hand up and volunteered to chair the climate crisis task force within OSPE was for exactly the reasons that Sandro has just been articulating. It’s critical that we get engineers engaged. And I'm so happy that, you know, coming back to the earlier comment, they're not hitting the snooze button. They are drinking their coffee because they need to be adrenalized because we've got an awful lot of work to do. So I'm very much on the same page as Sandro about the critical value that we’re contributing and trying to find of motivating and pushing forward.
Peter: [00:07:16] Tell me a little bit more about the task force, how it came to be.
Jeff: [00:07:22] Well I think if I'm right, Sandro, this is the second evolution of the climate crisis task force. Previously it was a subsidy and energy piece. They still exist as task forces within OSPE. But the climate crisis has now got to the stage where it is more significant. And it isn’t just a global problem, as we know full well it is. But it’s an Ontario problem, and we try and focus within the OSPE Climate Crisis Task Force on various initiatives which are pertinent to Ontario. Ontario’s lucky. We're a pretty green province in many aspects, with over 90 per cent of our stuff coming from hydroelectric, and from nuclear, and a proportion from wind and solar. So we're about 93, 94 per cent green. Which is critically valuable. But nonetheless, there are many other things that we can do better, and are trying to do better.
For example, an SMR going into Darlington. The provincial government has stepped up and said, “Do three more.” Excellent. We may have anti-nukes in our listeners, but we need every single green source of power generation that we can get because we’ve got to get off fossils. You’ve got to get rid of coal. Next we've got to get rid of oil. We can’t get rid of all of it. We need it for lubrication and chemicals. And we’ve got to get rid of natural gas because [unintelligible 00:08:38] we can't – this is what’s killing us, it’s what’s killing our planet. So electrification in the short term is our biggest solution. It may not be our only one, but ultimately an awful lot of what we have to do has to be electrically powered. We’ve got to get there. That’s what the –
Peter: [00:08:55] And Sandro, so –
Jeff: [00:08:57] Sorry.
Peter: [00:08:58] No, I was just going to say, Sandro, so I guess the idea of the task force is to sort of look at the big pictures and, you know, I'm just trying to imagine wherein, for example, when the government is trying to decide on an energy policy, would OSPE go in there to help advise them? how does it work?
Sandro: [00:09:19] So our task force has, I guess, many tasks ahead of them. So part of the things that we do with the task force and with the chair and the committee you say, “OK, identify what you believe are the top three issues?” Again, we provide the platform for our members to get together. We don't want to direct them. So tell us, you know, assemble a task force, tell us what you think are the top three issues around the climate crisis –” and I’ll use the Climate Crisis Task Force as the example of how we do it.
And so they’ll come up with their three issues. Or top three topics that they want to challenge, or attack at the time. But in addition to that, we also talk to government quite a bit. And our focus is the provincial government, the Ontario Provincial Government. However, there is no other organization like OSPE in the country. So for that purpose and for that reason we also get involved in federal consultations. So we talk to [00:10:19] our contact at the provincial government and at the federal government, and they’ll tell us about consultations that they have coming forwarded. And so we've been in those consultations to the various task force, if it’s around energy and nuclear that’ll go to our energy task force. If it’s around decarbonizing, if it’s around a new energy – environmental policy they want to put it forward, we’ll bring it to the climate crisis group. If it’s about transportation it’ll go to our sustainable cities task force.
So we've been consultation to them. And we ask them to formulate a reply, which my staff will edit, and then we go and we provide that to government and we’ll speak at depositions around it. And other times, if we have a really good relationship with government, they’ll actually come to us with ideas, before it gets to the consultation stage. Say, “Hey, we're thinking of doing this. What do the engineers think?” and again, we’ll do a quiet consultation with the task force and say, “Our contact at the minister asked [00:11:19] us these three questions. What do we think?” And then we’ll go back and let them know, and then that will either formulate their position moving forward, or it’ll stop their thinking and say, “OK, let us go back and rethink this idea.”
Ideally we’d love to be at that last stage where they come to us first before they make the big announcements, because it’s very hard for them to backtrack after they make a big announcement. And if they're going down the wrong path, we like to get there before that.
So this is why we say engineers deserve a seat at the table so that those conversations could happen before the big, costly missteps happen.
Peter: [00:12:01] Jeff would you say that –
Jeff: [00:12:01] [Cross talk 00:12:01] comment.
Peter: [00:12:03] Yes, go ahead, Jeff.
Jeff: [00:12:05] No, I was just going to say the other thing, just to comment on what Sandro just said is that within the task forces for OSPE we do cross collaborate, the energy, the sustainability task force, because there are things that each of us do which add value to the other, and we've merged a few of these things into recommendations, thoughts, platforms, directives, suggestions to the provincial government and to the other bodies that are appropriate.
Peter: [00:12:30] I know in 2021 you highlighted six actions engineers can take to address the climate crisis. Can you just elaborate a little bit on those, either Jeff or Sandro, and where we are two years later?
Sandro: [00:12:46] Sure, I’ll straight with the first couple, Jeff, and then if you want to jump in. So the first one is calling for radical change to Ontario’s long-term energy plan, the framework. Where we really needed the government to step up its efforts to decarbonize our energy system. So we were out there, we were promoting nuclear when people weren't sure if nuclear was green energy source or not. We were looking at the much smaller nuclear reactors and seeing if that was a viable technology. We were involved in consultations with other groups as well who wanted the opinion of engineers.
So that is something that we're still talking to government, both the professional government and the federal as well as other groups that are tasked with coming up with this long-term energy plan. And that is very fruitful. Very good conversations. Where are we on that? I don't think we have that path to net zero yet [00:13:46]. But I don't think we can wait to figure out the perfect pathway. I think we just have to start getting on that path, and then as new technologies come forward, as new solutions come forward, that will allow us now to take a different path to continue to that net zero journey.
Jeff: [00:14:04] And I totally agree with that. And if I limit in the context of the Climate Crisis Task Force there are several slightly smaller things which also have critical value. For example, we need to figure out how we handle critical [unintelligible 00:14:15]. And within Ontario [if the ring of fire? 00:14:17] geographical area has a fair amount of resource opportunity, then we’ve got to find ways of encouraging the government, including the feds, to put up the $2 billion necessary to get infrastructure up there, so we can, in a responsible environmentally friendly way, mine these minerals. Because we need it. Because at the moment we're being held to ransom. Australia is one of the biggest suppliers. China has all of us to ransom. Russia has others. You know, [unintelligible 00:14:45] geopolitical issues to play with. So for us to help OSPE to push the Ontario initiatives forward, that’s one of several that we’re doing.
We're also working on green hydrogen. We're working on a number of other initiatives, as Sandro has mentioned. Another one for example is Pickering nuclear. We've [00:15:04] been pushing that, and I'm happy to say in their recent announcements on the various nuclear options that the provincial government has espoused. They're actually having OPG readdress the 2005 report which said Pickering, old CANDU, not so good. So we're looking at that. We're now 18 years later and we have better technology. And Pickering, you know, September 26, is due to retire. Quite frankly, we can't afford to lose the capacity. We've got to figure out how to make these things work.
Another one, so Jeff mentioned the critical minerals, which is another one of those six. The third one I’ll mention is pushing for electrification of our transportation [unintelligible 00:15:48]. Right? GO Rail is moving to election of trains. Which is fantastic. We want more electric vehicles on the road. We're talking to government about the importance of encouraging that transition to electric vehicles. I know they stopped giving [00:16:04] incentives to do so. We think incentives are the way to go. It’ll help those on a lower income stream to be able to afford these vehicles because they are more costly than your typical combustion engine vehicles. But we need to get there. And we need to accelerate our movement to them. And as more and more electric vehicles come to market, consumers will have more choice. So we're very supportive of that.
And again, the governments, both federally and provincially, have now pumped billions and billions of our tax dollars into battery plants. So let’s build the market for those batteries here in Ontario.
Jeff: [00:16:44] And the other piece of it I think it’s worth, just to [unintelligible 00:16:47] on what Sandro has just said, is one of the other initiatives we have in the Climate Crisis Task Force is sustainability and expansion of our national grid. Because at the moment the grid across the country will support what we've got. It’s not integrated inter-provincially, it needs to be. And it needs to be expanded because it’s usually got to deliver more than twice the current capacity. And we need charging infrastructure to go along with that. So that’s another one of the OSPE Climate Crisis Task Force initiatives that we have under our guidance.
The other one I’ll mention here as well, it kind of fits all together, is making sure that all our infrastructure projects are sustainable. You know, so it’s not what do we build, but how do we build? How do we build so that there’s a low carbon aspect to how we do construction, but also where we build? So we've come out against the Highway 413, [00:17:44] we had some concerns around the Bradford bypass. We certainly have raised our concerns about building on the Green Belt that the provincial government seems to have this focus on wanting to do. Because we don't think, you know, sprawl and expanding our cities is the way to go. We prefer – you know, looking at intensified building within cities. Densification. Where we already have transportation lines. Let’s build around there instead of expanding the sprawl.
Peter: [00:18:22] Yes, you’re jumping ahead in my questions. [Laughter]. This is great because I was going to talk about sustainable infrastructure. Because a lot of this comes down to this idea of sort of tech stewardship. And engineers can design things, but sort of the ethics of design. And thinking more than just about creating the next amazing piece of technology. How does tech stewardship fall into the activities of OSPE?
Sandro: [00:18:57] You know, I love the fact that you're talking about tech stewardship. We believe that all engineers need to be tech stewards. And what do we mean by that. So I'm going to expand a little bit on that. We actually have a program within our engineering academy all focused on tech stewardship. And it’s not our program. It was a program that was started or devised when I first started at OSPE. So about nine years ago. I was asked to join a group, that was headed at the time by Engineers Without Border, that were looking at – and it was part of this Engineering Change lab, and it talked about, OK, how do we do engineering in the future?
And in the future with a focus on, again, building, designing for good. And we realized it wasn't just engineers that were doing design, or other people doing design, and it was really about the technology we were designing, and that engineers design. So [00:19:57] this Engineering Change lab eventually evolved to this new organization called Tech Stewardship Canada. And they developed a program that was focused primarily on engineers and technologists and others that do design to say, “When you design, have an outlook into designing obviously for the problem you have at hand, but making sure that as you create a solution, you’re not creating other problems down the line. So have a focus on, “OK, we're doing this. How can this technology be used for the good? But also how could it be used maybe for not so good, and how do we design that aspect out of it?”
And a great example of something that maybe we didn't the foresight of doing is the combustion engine. Right? We needed a combustion engine because we needed to get from point A to point B in a more effective way than horse and buggy. Fantastic. And then we realized the combustion engine maybe has created some problems. Well if we had recognized that way back earlier, I don't know if you remember but in the ‘70s there was a company that started [00:20:57] to produce electric vehicles. And it wasn't supported, there were other plays [unintelligible 00:21:04] that kind of put that company out of business. But if in the ‘70s we recognized the dangers of climate crisis and where we're going to be today, maybe there would have been more support for more electric car companies and we could [all have dealt? 00:21:18] with that.
So that’s kind of the aspect of tech stewardship. Another really great example, you know, we’ve all moved now from plastic straws to these paper straws. Well the paper straws still have a thin, thin coat of plastic inside that biodegrades. Well when it biodegrades it causes micro plastics to get into our environment. Which isn’t so great as well. So this is what I mean about tech stewardship. Making sure that you’re looking long-term and all the things that can go wrong with your design and with your technology and try to design that out.
Sandro: [00:21:54] Jeff or Sandro, I want to know if you get any pushback on tech stewardship, whether trying to think about all the things that could go wrong with it or could – you know, that somehow that impacts or stifles innovation. Is there any pushback on that?
Jeff: [00:22:11] I would say from my point of view, I don't really see a lot of pushback on it because I think we're getting to the stage now where more and more of the technical stewards that are possibly involved in this process, recognize what we're trying to accomplish and why it’s important.
So I don't think we're getting a whole lot of that sort of pushback. That might have been the case a few years ago. I think we're a long way down that road and I think we're getting far more acceptance of what needs to be done and having us move forward.
Sandro: [00:22:40] Yes, I agree with Jeff and think – I believe, and I'm starting to see it as well with some evidence, that engineers are really starting to embrace engineering leadership. And what do I mean by that? In the past, when I've talked to some senior engineers and [unintelligible 00:22:58] “Why’d you build that?” And their [answer? 00:23:01] back was, “Well, it’s what the client wanted. The client wanted this, they wanted a low-efficient building because they couldn't afford to put in this or put in that.” And it’s, like, well you’re an engineer. Part of your role is to explain the client why.” And they didn't see that. They said, “No, my role as an engineer is to do what the client tells me to do.”
Now, if it’s a concept of engineering leadership that OSPE’s been promoting as well, you have engineers going back to the client, back to the owner of whatever, that infrastructure and saying, “Actually, no we're not going to build it that way, we're going to build it this way. And here’s why.” And [00:23:40] they're going to explain it. And they're going to talk about the long-term cost effects and efficiencies and all that. And the risk to the client in the long-term. And it allows – I think it allows the engineer more creativity to bring in more innovation solutions. So it doesn't stifle innovation. I think it actually creates more innovation.
The other aspect to this tech stewardship is there is a concept in there to actually, let’s start to do it. Build a prototype and start to go and do it and build it and implement it, but monitor it along the way. And it’s OK – and if you’re going to make a mistake, catch it early. Don't hide the mistake, celebrate – oh, you know, “I messed up. And here’s something we didn't think about, and we're going to go and fix it right now.” So it allows iterations and interactions to move forward instead of waiting till you had a solution that’s 100 per cent perfect. Because there is no 100 per cent perfection. Let’s get something going and straight to monitor it and innovate along the way.
Peter: [00:24:48] Thoughts, Jeff, on that?
Jeff: [00:24:50] No, I would agree totally. I think there’s many examples of that. I mean right at the moment, for a client, I'm working on a solar project. The client is actually a tenant in the building and has persuaded the landlord that they would make a contribution to the landlord’s solar project. So we’ve now launched a solar initiative to this building in order to bring solar energy to the building, and have the landlord and the tenant be independent off the grid and sell surplus power back to the grid. And so there are things like that going on.
If I look at the other point that Sandro was making. About the learning process. If I look at nuclear and I look at Darlington, the refurbishing of Darlington, the recent one, was finished on budget and on time. Well in nuclear industry that’s almost unique. No disrespect to the nuclear industry. But what’s happened, and we talked to the project manager for the SMR project about three or four podcasts back, Peter, if you remember. And he was saying, “We have learned. We are noting what we've done wrong, we [00:25:50] learn from it and we make it happen the right way as we go through the next cycle.” And that’s showing.
Peter: [00:25:58] It’s interesting, you've been talking about some of the sort of the success stories when it comes to the task force and the work that OSPE’s doing. I'm wondering if you can talk about any other sort of initiatives, you know, examples of how either that organization or engineers themselves are really sort of leading the fight against climate change. Because one thing I know we often don't highlight our successes. It can seem like this overwhelming program, climate change, and we're never going to reach our targets, and it can seem very overwhelming for people. So any sort of success stories you can tell us, Sandro.
Sandro: [00:26:41] I can actually talk about the success of OSPE and the efforts that we're having outside the boundaries of Ontario. And maybe Jeff can actually talk about some project [and? 00:26:52] engineers, and maybe his company’s doing with respect to what actual engineers are doing. But I was recently at an Engineers Canada meeting in May, and all the provincial regulators were there and guests from across Canada were there for about three days of various meetings. A number of people came up to me from outside Ontario and just saying, “We're noticing what OSPE’s doing in Ontario, and we're very impressed, and we're very grateful. We wish we had a voice like that in our province.” And they were asking how can they get involved. “How can we help OSPE?” “How can we help you and carry the message?’
So I said, “Use your networks. Leverage your networks to share a message, to share what we're doing. You don't need an organization like [00:27:41] OSPE for engineers to come together and provide solutions. It certainly helps with the credibility aspect. But, you know, nothing’s to prevent a group of engineers from BC or from Newfoundland to come together and provide recommendations to the government.
So that’s the first part. The second part is actually about a month after that meeting I got a call from the engineering regulator in BC and said, you know, “Our members have been asking us to look at an OSPE here and we're going to set one up.” So there’s actually a movement. And they asked me to be part of their advisory group.so there’s an advisory committee that is going to be the first inaugural board of directors to set up a BC society of engineers and geoscientists, and it’ll be an OSPE clone out there. And talking to some of the other organizations, they're going to watch what happens there [00:28:41] and do the same because I think engineers now want that voice. They see governments muddling around, not figuring things out, moving too slowly and they've had enough and I think they weren't to get organized, they want to elevate their status and elevate their position, and have that – I don't know, have that platform to provide solutions to government and to society.
Jeff: [00:29:08] I would agree with that totally, Peter, if I can just interject. We're in a situation where these sort of opportunities across Canada and through the provinces are critically valuable because one of the issues we always had anywhere in the world, and Canada’s no different, is the geopolitical process that constrains our governments into four-year cycles, re-election, renewal, et cetera, there’s always something that impeded the ability to do something which is long term. You know, you don't build a nuclear plant in a four-year election cycle. You don't put these sort of initiatives together on four-year election cycles. These are more long-term, more enduring requiring bigger footprints and longer duration of support.
And you know, we've got to persuade the governments that when you change the government, don't just can that program, find a way of continuing it and building on it. So those are the sort of things I think are critically important for us here in Canada generally, and I'm excited to hear OSPE is moving up on this regard in terms of helping other provinces. Just delightful.
Sandro: [00:30:13] And again, going around and listening to other engineers talk about this and hearing about what’s going on in the industry, there’s a hospital being built right now in Toronto, and what they're using to regulate the temperature in that hospital is actually waste water. So instead of using gas or oil or other heat sources to maintain the temperature in that hospital, they're actually using waste water because they have measured the temperature of waste water in the City of Toronto, and it’s 72 degrees Fahrenheit. And that is the perfect temperature that hospitals need to be at. It can't be too cold. It can't be too hot. Seventy-two degrees is perfect.
So they're actually using – so imagine all the waste water in the City of Toronto is flowing through this hospital to regulate the temperature in that hospital. Just brilliant right? And there’s a really low-cost way to actually use crap to help us – because Mother Nature doesn't give a crap, but she can certainly use it.
Peter: [00:31:24] I love it.
Sandro: [00:31:24] Sorry, it’s been a long day.
Jeff: [00:31:26] [Unintelligible 00:31:26] I love the analogy.
Peter: [00:31:29] I love it, I love it. No, it’s that kind of thinking that we need. And you know, you need – and I'm sure there’s a lot of engineers that in the past have had these ideas, but simply haven't had the – you know, had somebody who could amplify those ideas. You know, who could amplify that voice. And it seems that really is what OSPE is all about.
So for those engineers listening, it’s come to the end of the podcast, and I’ll ask Sandro and Jeff, I’ll ask both of you. What’s the sort of one thing you’d like them to take away when it comes to what they can do to help fight climate change?
Sandro: [00:32:11] Jeff, do you want to start?
Jeff: [00:32:12] Well, let me kick it off from my point of view. I think the answer is as a professional engineer myself, and out in the industry doing work with clients, I mean ultimately we've – as engineers we've got to step up and we've got to think about what the solutions are that we're putting in place for clients. This hospital waste heat recovery is a perfect example. But other things we need to think about. There’s a lot of Lake Ontario water being pulled up from around 700 feet deep in order to get cooling for the downtown core for many of the systems.
Now that is a worthy goal, but I've regularly been sort of trying to seek the answer to the question is, if I change the temperature at that level, what am I doing to the subspecies at that level. I'm driving them further down because they're looking for more cold, because I'm going to be returning hot water, and my interface from 700 feet for cold is likely to drop. So I'm always a little concerned because I've never seen anything that addresses that. I'm not saying [00:33:12] it’s wrong, but we need to be aware of it. And that, to me, is where engineers need to be thinking about the complete life cycle of a particular project to see that it delivers not only the current requirements cost effectively, environmentally efficiently, but also in a way that is sustainable without further upsetting the biodiversity and the species infrastructure.
I see it as a critical point which, I'm sorry to say, I don't think we're quite on that page yet. So I would be – here’s my opportunity to wave to a little flag in that area right now.
Sandro: [00:33:44] And for – I'm going to bring it home with my organization. That’s, I need you. You know, again, OSPE supplies a platform for engineers to come together and discuss these issues. The more we have on a platform, the louder we have, the more influence we have to actually create that change. So as an engineer the easiest thing you can do is join OSPE. That’s step one.
What I would love for you to do is get engaged in OSPE. Join our task forces. But if you can't join a task force because you just don't have the time commitment, sign up as a subject matter expert, so when we're looking for someone with a unique skill set that we need to bring them in for a conversation for some ideas, to answer some of – one of the three questions that the government may ask us, we can call on you and ask you that and it’s a small time commitment, but you’re going to have a humungous impact.
But also, attend our events. [Unintelligible 00:34:40] right? So we have our conference on November 2nd [00:34:44]. You know, the climate crisis is a key component of that conference, and it’s going to be a key focus where there’s a whole stream around it, but our first plenary session is around how do we decarbonize our energy system? So, you know, learn, share, engage, that’s really how you can really make an impact. Because you know, individually you can make a good impact. But together we can make a significant impact.
Peter: [00:35:17] Final thoughts Jeff?
Jeff: [00:35:18] I would totally agree with what Sandro is saying. I mean one of the reasons I've stepped up with OSPE on the Climate Crisis Task Force is exactly that. I mean I'm doing the podcast because I see it critical. And as you know well, Peter, and the podcast viewers will note, I'm always looking at the global picture because what’s happening in terms of cause and effect, we’re still not tackling the cause. We're still screwing around tackling the effects. OK, that’s part of human progress. But ultimately we've got to tackle the causes. We've got to get rid of coal. We've got to substantially reduce oil, and we've got to get off gas to the larges degree possible. Because at the moment we're still at 420 parts per million CO2 nd it ain't going down. Net zero is, dare I say this, Peter? A pile of crap because it is not where we need to get to, we need to get zero zero, but we've got to start with something. We've got to go forward.
So these initiatives, I think, are critical. And OSPE and the conference, you know, I’ll [00:36:18] have an opportunity to wave my little flag and bounce up and down in my anger about what needs to be done. But we need this. We need engineering support. And I think a session like this with Sandro giving us these insights is just critically valuable. And I hope from this we can motivate many, many more engineers to get involved, get engaged, because we're past denials guy. We're the lemmings running to the edge of the cliff. And nobody’s put a stop sign up, and the cliff is getting closer. So you know, we need to get there and we need to get on with it.
Peter: [00:36:53] And you can see, Sandro, why I call him the Muhammad Ali in the fight against climate change.
Sandro: [00:36:58] Yes. But I mean who better to lead our Climate Crisis Task Force than him. [Cross talk 00:37:05] I want to help out, I just don't have the time to lead this and to chair. But I’ll help you set it up, I’ll help you get organized, so I took advantage of that. And then after it was organized, I said, “Great Jeff, we need a chair.” He says, “Oh yes, I'm looking, I'm looking.” I said, “No, I found one.” He said, “Who?” and I said, “I'm looking at him.” And again the pitch was, this is how we're going to have the biggest impact.
Jeff: [00:37:30] Yes, and I have to say from my point of view, and I've been trying to manage my time and the Climate Crisis Task Force will tell you that I delegate a lot to them because I don't have the time to get into the detail. And one of my other challenges, as you know well, Peter, I'm always looking at the big global picture. If I can't get the bloody politicians onboard, which is one of our big problems, and I can't find my $86 trillion that we need to fix the climate crisis. You know my pet peeves, Peter. My three initiatives. Let’s get this bloody thing done. So I'm for every platform I can to push the initiatives.
Peter: [00:38:03] Well Sandro, Jeff. Thank you so much for joining us today. It's been really, really insightful, and I really appreciate you coming on the podcast.
Sandro: [00:38:13] Well thank you it was great.
Jeff: [00:38:15] Thanks Peter, perfect.
Peter: [00:38:16] And thank you, of course, to our audience. Without you we would not be here, and we always appreciate your comments so please keep them coming.
So until next time, for myself, Sandro Perruzza and Jeff Shiffrin, you’ve been listening to Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap, and we’ll see you next time.
[End of recorded material 00:38:54]