This election day, Bill Nye has a message for young people: “Vote with climate in mind. »

Since September, America’s beloved scientist has been injecting on social media platforms catchy and quirky videos aimed at educating voters to choose candidates who defend climate and clean energy. Working in tandem with Climate Power’s Too Hot Not To Vote campaign, Nye urged voters to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris – who cast the deciding vote for passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and called for climate crisis an “existential threat,” against former President Donald Trump, who falsely claimed climate change is a “hoax”.

With his last and final video in the seriesNye speaks with rolling stone about the political power of the country’s youth, why he supports the Harris-Walz ticket, and how the next United States will shape the future of our planet.

I wanted to talk about the climate issues of this presidential election. In terms of environmental policies, what kinds of futures do Vice President Kamala Harris and Donald Trump offer America?

Donald Trump has explicitly stated that he will continue to drill for oil and gas in the continental United States and wherever he manages to repeal regulations against what might have been against drilling on public lands, parks or national monuments, etc. Basically, he and his team say they don’t accept climate change and don’t intend to do anything about it. While Harris and Walz plan to pursue moves similar to the Inflation Reduction Act, also known as the Clean Power Plan, I therefore prefer to pursue the Clean Power Plan rather than “drill, baby drill.»

What is the main driver behind Trump and his allies’ intent to end the Clean Power Plan and roll back environmental protections?

I think two things: They are very heavily influenced by the fossil fuel industry, particularly the oil and gas sectors of the fossil fuel industry. And through influence, I believe, they accepted significant donations from them, and they certainly promised to repeal the regulations in exchange for the amount that he said was a billion dollars. It is therefore not in anyone’s interest, and the contrarian point of view has taken hold among conservatives, because it is not progressive: the science of climate change is rejected, as well as a bunch of other things they want to reject.

Young people don’t have time for that. Young people, in my experience, are very concerned about the future, very concerned about the climate and the world in which they are going to live. And so these (climatic) videos are aimed at young people, young voters. And I like to remind people that when I entered high school in the Motown era, you had to be 21 to vote, but by the time I graduated high school, you had to be 18 , and it was because of the deep concern expressed by the public about the Vietnam War, where people like me could be drafted and killed in the war, but we didn’t have any vote. And so the world changed with that. So I really want to emphasize this to young people. I traveled the country, went to a few places, made videos to encourage young people to vote, because young people have the power to change history.

When you talk to young people, especially millennials and Gen Z, what is the biggest difference you see between the generations when it comes to their views on climate change?

They grew up with it. So I grew up with Earth Day, and when Earth Day was created, everyone’s concern was pollution. Humanity was making the environment dirty and polluting with toxic chemicals. You’ve probably heard the phrase “forever plastics”, which was a big concern. But since then, climate change has been discovered, and so Millennials and Gen Z have had climate change in the background their entire lives. This wasn’t something they discovered while they were alive, it was before they were born. So, I think, they understand it better than people, for example, those who are running for president or vice president, on the other side. And (young people) want to do something about it.

There is widespread misrepresentation of solutions to the climate crisis among Republicans, such as the cost of alternatives to wind and solar power. How did the party get to this point?

The other side has worked very hard to make doubting climate change an idea, and they have also worked very hard to push the idea that doing anything about climate change is “extremist.” That’s a big word there: “climate extremists.” But considering the scale of the problem, something like the Inflation Reduction Act is not extreme, but rather a first step in the right direction.

They worked very hard to completely reject science and introduce the notion that scientific uncertainty equals overwhelming doubt. And that’s not true. This is false.

When you talk to young people across the country, what is their number one concern when it comes to the environment?

That we have reached a critical point. The word people throw around is “doomism” – that we are doomed. But I will claim it: I will hit the editorial staff with my fist! – that the latest research highlights that there is no tipping point. You have not reached a point of no return. It’s just that things are getting worse and worse. So the sooner you act, the better.

These videos that I made on the Constitutionabout climate changeabout the distorted view of the world – these were made before Hurricane Helene, before Hurricane Milton, weeks before. You can call it a coincidence or you can call it “What did you expect?” »… There is a real cost here: the financial cost of reconstruction. And it’s not a crazy or remarkable thing to suggest that people are going to choose to live elsewhere after they can’t get insurance, they can’t rebuild their house, they can’t insure their car against corrosion, because the salt water flows over and under the limescale. They are going to move. And where will they go, and what will they do once there? And these are real costs that we will all bear. And so young people: understand this. Let’s go. Let’s do something.