Greta Thunberg and George Monbiot on the climate crisis

In this video, climate activists Greta Thunberg and George Monbiot tell us how we should use nature to tackle the climate crisis.

Do the preparation task first. Then watch the video and do the exercises. You can also read the transcript.

Preparation

Matching_MjM2NDU=

Transcript

This is not a drill.

My name is Greta Thunberg. We are living in the beginning of a mass extinction. Our climate is breaking down. Children like me are giving up their education to protest. But we can still fix this. You can still fix this. To survive, we need to stop burning fossil fuels, but this alone will not be enough. Lots of solutions are talked about, but what about a solution that is right in front of us? I'll let my friend George explain.

There is a magic machine that sucks carbon out of the air, costs very little and builds itself. It's called ... a tree. A tree is an example of a natural climate solution. Mangroves, peat bogs, jungles, marshes, sea beds, kelp forests, swamps, coral reefs, they take carbon out of the air and lock it away. Nature is a tool we can use to repair our broken climate. These natural climate solutions could make a massive difference.

Pretty cool, right?

But only if we also leave fossil fuels in the ground.

Here's the crazy part ... right now we are ignoring them. We spend one thousand times more on global fossil fuel subsidies than on natural-based solutions.

Natural climate solutions get just two per cent of all the money used on tackling climate breakdown.

This is your money, it is your taxes and your savings.

Even more crazy, right now where we need nature the most, we're destroying it faster than ever.

Up to 200 species are going extinct every single day.

Much of the Arctic ice is gone. Most of our wild animals have gone. Much of our soil has gone. So what should we do?

What should you do?

It's simple ... we need to protect, restore and fund.

Protect. Tropical forests are being cut down at the rate of 30 football pitches a minute.

Where nature is doing something vital, we must protect it.

Restore. Much of our planet has been damaged.

But nature can regenerate and we can help ecosystems bounce back.

Fund.

We need to stop funding things that destroy nature and pay for things that help it.

It is that simple. Protect, restore, fund.

This can happen everywhere. Many people have already begun using natural climate solutions. We need to do it on a massive scale.

You can be part of this.

Vote for people who defend nature.

Share this video. Talk about this.

All around the world there are amazing movements fighting for nature. Join them!

Everything counts. What you do counts.

Task 1

Exercise

Task 2

Exercise

Discussion

Do you agree with Greta and George that natural climate solutions are needed? What can you do to make a difference?

Download

Worksheet58.87 KB

Language level

B2 Upper intermediate

C1 Advanced

C2 Proficiency

Topics

climate change

environment and nature

Do you agree with Greta and George that natural climate solutions are needed? What can you do to make a difference?

yes I agree with great and George about the climate solution we need to protect our environment and this is very simple we protect, restore and fund. we need to protect the trees and grow as many trees in our environment. we can reduce fossil fuels with our environment.

I agree with them we should help nature . We can feel the improvement of nature and weather with coronavirus problem because the number of cars and vehicles are not the same as before .the factories or any thing produce smokes . A lot of things that hurt nature stopped .May be this virus has a benefit. And I want to thank this girl because she is brave to talk about this topic and she reminds me with my self .

I agree with them. Also I think that we can help and we can save the nature by ourselves! (btw..idk if i wrote it right or wrong, srry xD)

Dear friends I've just read, entirely surprised, a comment by our friend''VB'' from Latvia on the issue of Climate on Earth.It reminds me of a specific world leader's words.(Perhaps you know who I'm referring to).No one else in the civilised world suppοrts such ideas anymore,especially after all global organisations warnings during the last years.I'd like to remind our friend''VB'' a very simple thing:We all agree that ''Climate on Earth itself works'''as it has been doing billion years now and it will continue to do for -at least- the next seven billion years, without caring if there are people on earth or just dinosaurs.So, will it be working with the presence of humans or without them?''That's the question'' like Hamlet said...and this our friend VB has to answer. Thanks a lot for the hospitality Nikoslado

Yes, I agree. I would recommend a massive scale natural climate solution.

Hopefully, I don't hurt any sensitivity; according to me, this child should go to school and play games with her friend instead of doing this. I'm not even sure she can understand everything she's saying. For sure fighting for earth is a good fight, but it should be done by adults.

There is no scientific evidence about climate change, it is all another money project of air sellers, Climate on Earth itself works, it does not have to just interfere...

Hello everybody, That's a brave girl! She’s right and so you who are adult we have to take our accountability for our children and progenies! We must change our way live, we must stop to burn the earth, there's no other! We have to use the fossils fuels just when there's no else solution and just the necessary, use cars, planes for fun... that's disrespectfull for our futur! We have to reduce our purchases, the last hight tech goods have burnt most carbon for theirs productions and deliveries than you when you'll use it along their life! Used our planet for only ours basic needs is respect our earth. Together we 'll save ours progenies.

Hi everyone, I'm sorry because I post this comment here, but I don't have that possibility at Grammar Lesson. Folow please this one: Home » Grammar » Intermediate to upper intermediate, and there is the lesson called "Enough". In Grammar Test 2 at the end of this lesson, there is a sentence (the one before the last one): "I've dropped a euro between those two cupboards but I don't have _____ to get it." The right answer for it is "small enough hands". Is there a mistake ? From my point of view instead of word "small" should be "long" so " ...I don't have long enough hands to get it". Am I wrong? If I am wrong please tell me why is that. Thank you so much for your answer P.P.

Hello Peter Piper

Thanks for your comment. We recently revised that grammar page (as well as many others) and neglected to turn the comments back on. I've just fixed this on the 'enough' page and will fix the other pages in the coming week. I'm sorry about the inconvenience!

The question you ask about is correct. The idea is that a small hand is thinner and so can fit into the space between the cupboards, and so we usually say 'small hands' in this kind of situation. Although it is intelligible and makes sense, we just don't speak about 'long hands' -- instead we say 'small hands', or possibly 'long fingers'.

Best wishes

Kirk

The LearnEnglish Team