February 27, 2025 • 41 mins
Imagine a world where health and environmental policies are seamlessly integrated, empowering nations to combat crises more effectively. In this episode of Sustainability Unveiled, we promise you’ll gain insight into this compelling vision through our conversation with Dr. Zara Ahmed, a distinguished public health and policy expert. Dr. Ahmed walks us through her journey of transforming scientific insights into actionable policies that bridge the gap between government and science. She highlights the urgent need for international collaboration to fortify global health and environmental security, drawing from past crises to inform future strategies.
As we explore the volatile dynamics of the voluntary carbon market, Dr. Ahmed shares lessons learned from global health financing that could stabilize these markets and ensure genuine climate impact. The discussion offers practical guidance for governments, businesses, and other stakeholders looking to engage meaningfully with carbon markets. We navigate the economic advantages of climate action, presenting it as an apolitical endeavor that can lead to cost savings and job creation.
Together, we explore how making climate information accessible can empower individuals and policymakers alike to make informed decisions. Concluding on a note of inspiration, Dr. Ahmed invites listeners to reflect on their roles in fostering sustainability, urging them to integrate sustainable practices into their leadership journeys. Join us for an episode filled with insights, practical advice, and a call to action for a more sustainable future.
Connect with Jessica Hunt and the rest of the team at Environment+Energy Leader - LinkedIn l Twitter l Facebook l Instagram l YouTube l BlueSky
Do you have an idea for an episode?
Call for Speakers - Environment+Energy Leader
Like what you hear? We'd love your support! Please share, like, and review our podcast! Use #EELeaderUnveiled
Additional Opportunities to Support
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Welcome to Sustainability Unveiled, the
podcast where we explore thepolicy, strategies and
innovations shaping a moresustainable future.
I'm your host, jessica Hunt,and today we're diving into a
critical conversation at theintersection of global health
security policy andsustainability.
As we navigate an ever-evolvingpolitical and environmental
landscape, businesses must adaptto new challenges while driving
(00:29):
meaningful impact.
Joining me today is Dr IzaraAhmed, a renowned expert in
public policy and global healthsecurity.
With an extensive careerspanning roles at the Guttmacher
Institute and the Center forDisease Control and Prevention,
dr Ahmed brings a wealth ofknowledge on how public health
policy shapes corporatesustainability efforts.
(00:51):
Today, we'll be discussing thegrowing role of businesses in
global health resilience, theregulatory landscape ahead and
how organizations can strengthentheir sustainability strategies
through proactive policyengagement.
Again, we are so pleased to haveDr Zahra Ahmed on with us today
.
Thank you for being here.
Thanks so much for having me.
(01:12):
I know we have a lot to getinto today, so let's jump right
in.
You've had an extensive careerin global health policy, working
with institutions such as theCDC and the Guttmacher Institute
.
What really drew you to thisfield and how has your
experience shaped your approachto advocacy and policy
(01:34):
development?
Speaker 2 (01:36):
Yeah, that's a great question.
So everything about my careerhas been a wonderful surprise.
Each new chapter is one I couldnever have anticipated or
guessed.
The short version is that mydad and his whole family are
doctors and my mom and her wholefamily are in business, and I
saw really clearly how differenttheir work was, the challenges
(01:56):
they face, and that they kind ofspoke different work languages,
and so even as a kid I kind ofended up translating between
them or thinking about thingsfrom different perspectives.
So after getting an undergraddegree in political science from
Brown, I decided to get acouple of master's degrees, one
in public health and one inpublic policy.
And I did that because publichealth people know how to design
(02:18):
and implement good programs,they understand evidence and
research, but they generallyhave no idea how the government
works and they don't know how toget their good ideas funded or
scaled up.
And, on the other hand, publicpolicy, they're the inverse.
They don't know the details ofany particular area really, but
they know the mechanics ofgovernment, they know how to
operate and get things throughthe system.
(02:39):
So I wanted to learn those twolanguages and be that bridge,
taking science-based ideas andturning them into effective
policy, and so later on, I got adoctorate that was focused on
public health, leadership andmanagement, as well as an MBA,
all of this with the goal ofbeing a more effective
collaborator and betterunderstanding how different
types of people and differenttypes of organizations operate.
(03:00):
So this bridging between groupsand interest is really what I
did for my 15-year career inpublic health, and it's also now
what I do in the climate space.
So I really love any job thathas essentially three
ingredients.
So first is smart, passionatescientists, the second is a
wicked policy problem, and thenthe third is the need to
translate science into action tosolve that policy problem, and
(03:24):
that's really, to me, what's atthe heart of both public health
and climate.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
Which is incredible.
Now, just following up on whatyou you know the answer you just
gave, what you talked about,what's been the biggest surprise
for you professionally overyour 15-year career, when you
have combined all of the degreesand expertise that you have?
Speaker 2 (03:47):
The biggest surprise for me is how similar things are
.
So, whether it's working in aforeign country, or working at a
school-based health center, orworking within the private
sector, on climate, so much ofthe dynamics and the challenges
are the same right, translatingevidence into action, getting
people to care about your issue,figuring out how to use limited
(04:08):
resources, because we all wantmore resources, no matter where
we are.
So all of those challenges arethe same and I see a lot of
similarities between them, evenmore than differences.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
Oh, that's really really really interesting,
really really really interesting.
Now, obviously, this episode isgoing to air in late February
early March 2025.
And there has already been alot of change within the United
States government and policysince President Trump was sworn
in on January 20th, and we knowhe's taken swift action on
(04:43):
climate policy, such aswithdrawing from the Paris
Agreement to freezing fundingfor environmental initiatives.
What parallels do you seebetween these moves and early
actions on global healthsecurity during this time?
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Yeah.
So a virus and a molecule ofcarbon dioxide have something
really important in common theydon't care about borders.
So we live in an interconnectedworld and what the US does to
contain disease or to addressclimate globally have real and
direct benefits to Americans aswell as the world more broadly.
So if we don't want to haveanother pandemic like COVID that
(05:20):
devastates the US economy andjobs, we need to have US
epidemiologists who help stopoutbreaks at their source.
Similarly, if we don't wantanother devastating round of
storms and extreme weather, weneed to help other countries
implement environmental programsto reduce carbon emissions.
So engagement, both bilaterallywith another country one-on-one
(05:41):
and multilaterally through theUN, un and other bodies, isn't
just something that we dobecause it's nice.
We do it because it protectsand benefits every single person
in America.
So, for example, why are eggprices so high?
The bird flu you want to makeeggs more affordable.
Then you need to fund publichealth specialists to contain
the epidemic.
So I really worry about us notlearning the lessons of public
(06:05):
health or climate action untilthere's another pandemic or a
major catastrophic event.
But the thing is, we don'tactually have to wait.
A lot can happen in four years.
So the time to act is actuallynow.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
So how do you get policymakers on board to help
mitigate, as you said, the priceof eggs and dealing with bird
flu and really getting them tolisten and understand the
science behind it and howactions they take at the
(06:37):
government level are impactingthe entire United States and
abroad?
Speaker 2 (06:43):
So I spent the almost the all of the Obama
administration from 2009 to 2016based overseas in Rwanda,
namibia and Haiti working forthe CDC, and it was a great
honor for me to represent the USgovernment, working alongside
both colleagues in the USembassy and the local ministries
of health, and in the summer of2016, I was asked to become the
head of policy and strategy forthe Global Pandemic Division at
(07:05):
CDC headquarters, which wasagain another incredible honor,
and so I moved from Atlanta tofrom Haiti to Atlanta a month
before the 2016 election.
I closed my first home threedays before the election, and I
did that because I was excitedabout potentially working with a
Clinton administration that hadexpressed a lot of support for
public health.
Chelsea Clinton and I actuallyboth wrote our doctoral
(07:25):
dissertations about globalhealth cooperation, funny enough
and so we had really detailedplans and priorities for a
Clinton administration that wasvery much focused on the lessons
learned from the Ebola crisis,and obviously the election in
2016 threw those plans out thewindow.
So instead, I was looking at aRepublican-controlled White
House, senate and House ofRepresentatives, and I was being
asked to get more money forglobal health because we were
(07:47):
facing a budget cliff as theemergency resources for Ebola
were coming to an end, and so wepivoted.
To your question about how youreach policymakers and get them
on board with these issues is.
We pivoted and we talked notjust about the work of
preventing, detecting andresponding to outbreaks, but we
changed how we describe thatwork.
So, for example, instead offraming this as about
(08:08):
humanitarian response, we choseto focus on how investments in
health systems abroad benefitedAmericans by preventing disease,
sustaining the economies thatare vital for US exports and
enabling the transit of people,so vital to the US tourism
industry.
And so, really, we talked aboutthe health.
Security is a national securityissue, and so when you want to
(08:29):
reach people, it's reallyimportant to break these
benefits down by state and evencongressional district, so you
can show each member of Congresshow and why our work benefited
their constituents in terms ofjobs, local industry, colleges
and universities, and even howwe were protecting the billions
of chickens in their state.
And it worked, with my divisiongetting a 400% increase in its
(08:52):
budget over three years, and itwas one of the only public
health programs to get a fundingincrease during the Trump
administration.
So the point is that you canreach people, even if on the
face of it, they might.
You might think that they'renot interested or not in support
, as long as you use languageand connect with them on a way
that they can understand thatspeaks to their particular set
(09:12):
of interests.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
Now.
I think that's absolutelyfantastic advice.
Now, with the 400% increasethat you received, what are some
of the biggest accomplishmentsyou achieved and your team
achieved with the additionalfunding?
Speaker 2 (09:27):
Yeah, we were able to train thousands more
epidemiologists.
We were able to build labs tofaster detect outbreaks and stop
them at their source.
Public health is one of thosefunny things where you only hear
about things when they don'twork, but you don't hear about
all of the outbreaks that werecontained at their source, all
(09:47):
of the people whose lives weresaved.
You don't hear about any ofthat.
I do think that it also theCOVID pandemic would have been
much, much worse in a lot ofcountries without these systems
that we had built prior to thepandemic happening.
And having that workforce,having those structures, having
the information systems andsupply chains all of that got
built and that's pretty unsexy,unglamorous work, but it is so
(10:11):
essential and so, again, it'sabout making that work that
unglamorous, unsexy workinteresting to the people who
have to fund it.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
It's a similar parallel to the structure of a
house.
It's not sexy.
The wood that's put up, thesupport beams are not sexy, but
they're essential in order tokeep building and to make the
house what you want to say asgood and as stable and as
(10:45):
possible.
So you know definitely someparallels there, and you
mentioned the COVID-19 pandemic.
So what role did you playduring the time of the global
pandemic that we were dealingwith?
Speaker 2 (10:59):
Yeah, absolutely.
I sometimes joke that I'm likethe Cassandra of public policy
because I spent 2016 to 2019saying a pandemic is coming.
A pandemic is coming and Idecided to leave CDC for a
little while and I went to theGuttmacher Institute to work on
reproductive health and rightsand while I was there I was
saying the end of Roe v Wade iscoming.
The end of Roe v Wade is coming, and unfortunately, I was right
(11:23):
on both those counts and CDCasked me to come back during the
pandemic as somebody who'dworked on policy on pandemics,
and so I spent a year as thehead of policy and government
affairs for the COVID-19response, working 365 days
talking to all members ofCongress and trying to address
their needs, make sure we weremeeting the needs of their
(11:45):
constituents, and really sawfirsthand how much of an all of
government it takes when there'sa really serious crisis, and
all of the skills and benefitsthat each agency brings to the
table that are so essential.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Oh, definitely.
Now, how did you know Now, howdid you know what, in your
professional career, yourresearch, everything that you,
the different agencies you'veworked with, what made you say
to yourself there's a pandemiccoming and it's going to be the
end of Roe v Wade?
Speaker 2 (12:18):
A very dark crystal ball, I guess, but we had
modeled out the impact of apotential pandemic and written
three papers modeling what wouldhappen, even in a small
outbreak overseas that wouldaffect US jobs, exports, the
health of chickens, all thesethings.
We wrote three papers aboutthem in 2017 and 2018 because we
(12:38):
knew we were due for a hundredonce in a hundred year pandemic
Right, and we were like it willhappen around this time and sure
enough it did.
So epidemiologists are smart.
They really know what they'retalking about and they predicted
it almost to the year.
So some of these things areevidence-based and are known.
And I think the other part of itis that I do have a political
(12:59):
science degree.
I have that orientation.
I've worked on the Hill and fora mayor and for a state
legislature and you can kind ofunderstand the political winds
and where things are going toland, and so it's really
important for people who work inpolicy to think about things
from their different angles andexperiences and say what do I
need to deal with right now, forsure, but also what can I
anticipate happening in thefuture and how can I work with
(13:20):
my organization to get ahead ofthat?
Speaker 1 (13:24):
Do you think there was anything that the United
States could have done to helpbetter prepare for the COVID-19
pandemic?
And it's?
You know the effects on,obviously, the economy here,
supply chains, global tourism, Icould go on and on.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
Yeah, another thing that public health and climate
have in common is a cycle ofpanic and neglect, and so when
something like the pandemichappens, we all panic, we throw
money at the problem, and that'san important thing to do,
certainly, but the better timeto be putting money into
(14:04):
something is before the pandemic.
Right, you can't magicallymaterialize a bunch of
healthcare workers out ofnowhere.
It takes time to train thosepeople, to get systems and labs
and supply chains in place.
All of that has to happenbefore an outbreak.
The same is true for climate.
Right, you can't justmaterialize out of nowhere
firefighters, in the case of theLA wildfires, for example.
(14:25):
You have to invest in thosesystems and those people ahead
of time, rather than fallinginto this cycle of panic and
neglect.
Speaker 1 (14:33):
Yeah, we definitely have a reactive approach and I
think you see that acrossindustries and hopefully that
will not always be the case whenit comes to dealing with
pandemics or climate emergencies.
Now, pivoting just a little bitobviously still on talking
about climate, but climatepolicy and market dynamics, I'm
really interested to get intothis part of our conversation.
(14:55):
The voluntary carbon market hasseen significant fluctuations
in credibility and participation, so what lessons from global
health financing can be appliedto stabilizing and strengthening
voluntary carbon markets?
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Great question.
So, importantly, the voluntarymarket is still voluntary and
because of that it's largelybuffeted from political forces,
which is a major difference fromglobal health where, as we're
seeing, politics can dictatefunding.
So, in general, wheregovernment and the voluntary
carbon market intersect, it'slargely just for investment to
(15:35):
encourage climate emissionsdisclosure and to support
nascent green technology andnational government leadership
on climate action is shiftingworldwide and there's new
leaders anticipated to makesignificant advances, to advance
climate policy and to catalyzethe growth in the VCM.
Now, while the Trumpadministration is expected to
slow down federal action, thatmeans that the role of states in
the US, other countries and theprivate sector, as well as
(15:58):
non-governmental authorities,are all the more crucial for
improving the integrity of theVCM.
I will say that we thinkcertain climate provisions, such
as the 45Q carbon sequestrationtax credit, should remain
durable, and they do have strongbipartisan support.
So, again, because it's avoluntary market, companies have
(16:18):
the freedom to opt in or out ofthe market to the degree that
they see fit, based on theirbusiness objectives objectives,
and so governments may providebest practices or guidance or
even limited regulation oncertain aspects of the VCM, but
directing the operation of theVCM is not a core function of
the government, and so, in termsof strengthening the VCM, we
(16:39):
encourage all participants,whether that be states or the
private sector, or NGOs, themedia, whomever it is to focus
on two key things.
So the first is to identify andbuy actual carbon removal
credits, rather than avoidanceor reduction credits, so that
you can have the biggest climateimpact.
And then the second is toprioritize quality.
(17:00):
So less than 10% of the removalcredits on the voluntary carbon
market actually meet thecriteria that we and Microsoft
set out about what is highquality carbon removal, and
there's only less than 4% of thecredits on the VCM that are
actually removal credits.
So we're talking about a verysmall subset of this voluntary
(17:21):
carbon market that is highquality, high integrity and high
impact, and so what we want todo is encourage people to invest
in that corner of the marketand really grow it in order for
it to, overall, have greaterintegrity.
Speaker 1 (17:36):
So because it really is only 4%.
What advice do you have forstate governments, local
governments, corporations oreven small businesses to be able
to hone in on the carbonremoval that 4%?
What advice do you have forthem and how can they find the
information that they need to besuccessful?
Speaker 2 (17:59):
So there are two documents I think everybody in
this space should be reading.
So the first is every year,carbon Direct puts out a report
called the State of theVoluntary Carbon Market and I
would highly encourage everybodyto read it.
It's super informative.
It's short and it's a greatread and you get to understand
(18:19):
the dynamics, includingnature-based solutions versus
high durability solutions.
What are the trade-offs inthese things?
It's a really complex thing tounderstand.
The second is to look at everyyear with Microsoft, we update
the criteria for high qualitycarbon removal credits and we
talk about them overall.
What are things that apply toall technologies?
And then we go technology bytechnology and explain across
(18:40):
multiple dimensions.
What are the things that aregood to have, what are the
things that are necessary tohave in your project?
So it's all transparent when wesay you know less than 10% meet
our quality criteria, you cansee the grading rubric here and
if you're a project developer,if you're a potential buyer,
look at those.
And then the other thing is askfor help.
(19:00):
This is a lot of what we do atCarbon Direct.
We help the biggest buyers onthe voluntary carbon market find
and source those high qualitycarbon removal credits.
It's a very difficult thing totry and do by yourself.
We have a whole fleet ofscientists who specialize in
this, and so ask for help getoutside opinion, because
otherwise you're risking wastingyour money on non-impactful
(19:24):
credits.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
Now.
I think that's very importantand just to say, it is okay to
ask for help.
We should all be in.
We should all be workingtogether to solve as many
problems in terms of dealingwith climate change and climate
impact as possible, and don'treinvent the wheel you might,
you're going to, you can spendso much money and so much time
trying to reinvent the wheel.
(19:46):
That doesn't need to bereinvented Absolutely.
So now it's.
I think it's going to be veryinteresting.
I live in the state of Maryland, which is a very democratic
state, and our governor is stillcontinuing to push forward with
climate initiatives, with EVfunding, infrastructure funding.
Do you anticipate they'reseeing a divide in the country
(20:12):
over the next four years when itcomes to climate policy based
on, you know, the red or bluestates?
Speaker 2 (20:21):
The thing about climate action and policy is
that it benefits everybody,right?
Wind energy comes to your houseif you're a Republican voter or
a Democratic voter, right,that's the great thing about it
it benefits everybody.
So, for example, I live inOklahoma and Oklahoma received
as much money from the InflationReduction Act as California
(20:43):
about $40 billion and we have a10th of population.
So the impact is actuallygreater here in this little red
state than in the giant bluestate of California, right?
People don't necessarilyrecognize that and the benefits
that brings.
So much of this is like how wetalk about the benefits of
climate action.
We don't need to talk about itin partisan terms.
(21:04):
We just need to talk about itin the terms of regular people,
in terms of making your powerbill cheaper, providing you a
new job that's well-paying.
We don't have to talk about itas a green job, just a great
paying job, and get peopleexcited about things.
That way, I think states thatare going to be proactive in
this space and understand theeconomic opportunities that
(21:24):
climate action can bring arereally going to be ahead of the
game.
I don't necessarily think it'sgoing to break down along
partisan lines as long as wekeep talking about this in terms
of the benefits that it comesto everybody.
This doesn't need to be apartisan issue.
It can actually be a completelynonpartisan one.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
And it just brings me back to the fact that we have
solar on our house and, honestly, we got it.
For the economic benefits, thatwas number one Great.
We're helping the environment,lowering our carbon footprint.
We have an EV.
We have an EV charger set up inour home, so we charge using
our solar panels.
But when I talk to people aboutit, I always start with the
(22:04):
financial impact, because wherewe live Baltimore Gas and
Electric is unbelievably.
The rates are unbelievably high.
A house of our size it's about3,500 square feet People are
paying over $1,000 a month fortheir electricity bills and we
pay $200, some pricetransparency here a month for
(22:28):
our solar loan and that's it.
And we're going to own oursolar outright and we sell
credits back.
And there are so many differentincentives financial incentives
that when I talk to peopleabout the benefits of having
solar, that's what I focus on,because that's right now what
makes sense to the normaleveryday people is the economy.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
The solar panel doesn't care who you voted for,
right.
It's providing you that benefit, that peace of mind, that
resilience in case of a stormcoming your way.
And that's the thing that wecan connect with people on.
Is, what is the personalbenefit to you of your state
doing something?
You individually doingsomething?
It does not have to do anythingat all with politics.
Speaker 1 (23:14):
Do you think because there are so many climate
actions at the federal levelhappening right now, do you
think that it's going makeprivate companies hesitant to
continue on the path of becomingclimate positive or really
sticking with the goals thatthey have their ESG
(23:36):
sustainability goals?
Or because they know thestakeholders their stakeholders
are on board.
They're just going to keepmoving forward.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
I think if you are in the private sector and you
choose to focus only on the USright now, sure, you might get
scared off of climate action.
But if you are going to bestrategic, you're going to think
both globally and long term.
And if you do that, then youare going to charge ahead with
climate action.
Right, because these thingstake a long time to build.
(24:07):
Right, if you want to increaseenergy, you're going to have to
start building a power plant now.
You're going to build a solarfarm or wind farm.
You better start that now ifyou want to be ready in a few
years.
Right, if you want to diversifyand strengthen your supply
chain, if you want to lower thecarbon intensity of your product
because you can see whereconsumer demand is going you
(24:28):
should be doing that now.
So the key is not to fixate onoh no, the immediate term,
what's happening right now, andallowing yourself to kind of be
like thrown around by thepolitical winds.
Rather, you're going to saywhat is best for the long-term
global development of my companyand obviously, if you do that,
climate action is going to be atthe top of your list.
And it's not again, it's notabout politics or anything.
(24:50):
It's actually about strategyand economics, right?
So wind is cheaper in manyplaces than fossil fuels.
We know that renewables aregoing to be even cheaper in the
future.
We know that regulation isgoing to come from other states
and from other countries.
All of those things are comingdown the pike at you, and so
best time is to get your housein order now.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
No, I think that is great advice.
Now, can you talk to us about atime where I don't want to use
the word convinced, but you wereup against policymakers that
maybe were not going to be onboard with your plans and what
you wanted to accomplish in yourroles at the CDC, and how did
you bridge that gap?
(25:38):
I know we talked a little bitabout the language you use and
focusing on what their strengthswere, but do you have a
specific example that you couldshare?
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Sure, so I teach negotiations at UNC, chapel Hill
, and I love it.
It scares everybody.
When I say the word negotiation, everybody kind of breaks into
a cold sweat.
But I think it's one of themost important skill sets that
anybody can learn over thecourse of their career.
And one of the most fundamentalthings to understand about
(26:06):
negotiations is the differencebetween positions and interests.
So positions are what peoplesay they want, and then the
interest is what's theirunderlying motivation or concern
or reason for saying that.
And oftentimes we get fixatedon the position.
So somebody might say I don'tlike climate, I don't like
(26:27):
global health, and we tend tojust try and convince them no,
you should like this, don't likeclimate, I don't like global
health.
And we tend to just try andconvince them no, you should
like this, you should like this.
And what we don't do is take ita step further and seek to
understand their underlyinginterest or motivation.
And maybe it's I don't want myconstituents tax dollars wasted,
and so we need to plug in there.
And that's really what we didwhen we were trying to secure
more money for global healthsecurity post Ebola.
(26:48):
So we said, okay, we're notgoing to just talk about the
humanitarian response or thebenefits of this we're again
we're going to talk specificallyabout for your state, for your
congressional district.
Hey, x number of jobs in yourdistrict are tied to exports to
other countries, right, and iftheir economies are shut down
(27:09):
and they don't have money to payor they close their border,
this is what's going to happento jobs from your voter base.
The other thing is that we didis we pivoted and we talked
about language that met theirinterests, around what committee
they were on, for example.
So when we were talking tosomebody who was maybe on the
defense committee, we would talkabout how global health
(27:30):
protects US military forcesoverseas from disease outbreaks.
Talk about in terms of forceprotection.
So it really comes down totalking about the interests of
the other person.
It's not about you, it's aboutthem.
And so the other thing I wouldsay is to use social math, right
, so oftentimes you'll be likethis costs $150 million.
Well, you could also just saythat that costs $1 for every
(27:53):
taxpayer Way more digestible,easier to remember, and you're
giving them a talking point thatthey can use to be your
advocate further on.
And so we did that again a lotwith global health, and you see
this right now in some of themessaging about trying to
explain USAID's budget is tobreak it down into simple terms.
(28:14):
Right, nobody really knows likehow much a military destroyer
costs or something like that.
But if you break it down intolike dollars per person or it's
the equivalent of something elsepeople can, it's much more
digestible.
So I'd say, make thingsdigestible and hyperlocal.
And then the last thing I'd sayis sometimes we're not the
right messenger and we getfixated on I want to convince
(28:38):
you of this but somebody who'syou already have a relationship
with or you have things incommon with more than you and I
do.
They may be the right messenger.
So broaden out your base andbring people into the fold who
you may be very different frombut can reach your target
(28:59):
audience.
Speaker 1 (29:00):
I think that might be one of my favorite quotes from
our conversation.
You might not be the bestmessenger, and I think that is
that can transcend whatever youdo professionally and personally
, so I think that's a really,really important message.
To drive home is again, alsowe're not one person.
You're not one person.
You have a team.
You have your own expertise,your own experience, but you
also should rely on theexpertise and experience of your
(29:24):
team members and theirrelationships to be able to work
towards a common goal.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
Absolutely.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
Now so well.
I feel like we could continuethis conversation for a very,
very long time.
It's been wonderful so far, butI want to look ahead now.
Looking ahead what are thebiggest risks and opportunities
for climate action in the comingyears, not just during the next
four years of Trump'spresidency, but beyond that?
Speaker 2 (29:53):
Yeah, I can think of three major risks, but they're
also the biggest opportunities,and when we have this complex
landscape, it's really easy justto focus on the risk side of
the equation and not thinkstrategically about the
opportunity side.
So a few big risks andopportunities that come to mind.
So first is obviously and we'reseeing this very intensely
(30:13):
right now political uncertaintyand policy reversal.
So flip-flopping and changingand we're part of the Paris
Agreement, now we're not, nowwe're in, now we're out.
That can be very unsettling anddisruptive and we realize that
the lack of federal governmentaction may slow or reverse some
of the climate progress we'vemade to date.
But, however, the flip side ofthat, the opportunity side, is
(30:36):
again, if you look nationally,like more globally, or if you
look more long-term, you'll seethat other businesses, your
competitors, your investors,local governments, other
countries are increasinglydriving climate action
independent of national politics, and so the opportunity there
is to get ahead of everybodyelse and to make those
(30:57):
investments.
Another big risk I think thatpeople are focused on is
insufficient climate funding andthis investment gap.
I said earlier we all want moreresources, excuse me, okay, and
so how do we scale private andpublic climate finance and the
flip side of that risk is theopportunity to think about green
(31:20):
bonds or getting more engagedin the carbon markets or using
other types of climateinvestment frameworks to close
that financing gap, to use theexisting resources from the
Inflation Reduction Act,particularly around the tax
credits, to scale uptechnologies.
And then the last one I thinkthat people are very focused on
is the slow adoption ofdecarbonization in key sectors.
(31:44):
So that might be in heavyindustry like cement, steel or
aviation, where cost is stillquite high and there's technical
barriers.
But on the flip side of thatthere's been a number of
advancements in green hydrogenand sustainable aviation fuel
and carbon capture andsequestration electrification,
which make that deepdecarbonization more feasible.
And so, again, if you get inearly with those technologies
(32:07):
and integrate them into yoursystem, you'll be well
positioned for the future.
One of my favorite things isthat I work with about 70
scientists at Carbon Direct whoare some of the smartest people
I've ever met and I really seethem think strategically about.
Here are the challenges, buthere are all the incredible
opportunities and they translatethat work with clients to get
(32:28):
ahead of the challenges thatthey're facing, and that
competitive advantage is what'sgoing to make climate action
possible.
Speaker 1 (32:36):
Oh, definitely Now, on a personal slash professional
level, what technologies areyou most excited about in the
future?
Speaker 2 (32:44):
I have recently been diving in a lot on
electrification.
I think it's a reallyfascinating area and we see this
growth of data centers and thehyperscalers.
There's huge electricity demand, so understanding things like
as wonky as different carbonemissions methodologies to
understand your carbon footprintwe just put out a great white
(33:05):
paper on this I learned so muchReally fascinating Understanding
about purchase power agreementsfor renewable energy it's
incredible.
The other thing is to thinkabout natural gas with carbon
capture and storage.
We have this huge demand forenergy and electricity.
How are we going to meet it,especially in a way that doesn't
(33:26):
affect regular people?
Like you and I don't want tosee our electricity bill go
through the roof we all have tocome together around that
technology.
Speaker 1 (33:34):
Now, I couldn't agree more with you there and I think
, when it comes back to some ofthe things that you've talked
about, the messages that youmentioned earlier, which is the
messaging, and make sure thatthe messaging that's being put
out is factual and accurate, anexample of offshore wind farms
off the coast of Virginia,virginia Beach, and people are
(33:57):
up in arms because their billsare going to go up, but if they
did a little bit of researchthey would realize they're going
to go up 47 cents a month onaverage.
So it is.
You know, I think in today'ssociety and I'm sure you can
reiterate the sentiment you haveto take it upon yourself to do
the research and and look atdata and evidence and make the
(34:22):
best decisions.
You know, on a personal level,but at professional level too,
if you're, if you are runningthose companies or working with
policymakers.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
Yeah, I would also say it's incumbent upon us who
have the energy, the education,the privilege to spend time
doing the research, to share itwith others and make it
understandable for them.
So, 47 cents I'm not going toforget that number.
Now, right, you just taught mesomething that makes my life
better and easier, and youshared that with me in a way
that I could understand, and so,for those of us who have these
(34:53):
insights, it's really importantfor us to share them as much as
possible and bring these bigideas about offshore wind farm,
bring it down to a very personallevel so that we can be better
informed consumers, betterinformed voters, better informed
investors going forward.
Speaker 1 (35:09):
No, I think that that's a great, great message to
take home for our viewers andlisteners.
So I keep going back in my headto the debate between clean
energy and fossil fuels.
And how can there be a balance,not just in the United States,
(35:30):
but globally?
And can there be a balance ifwe're not just looking at energy
production but we're looking atthe economy, job creation, all
of that?
Speaker 2 (35:49):
It's complicated.
I think that one of the bigthings to understand is that in
so many places, renewable energyis the cheapest form of energy,
right, and you want to run tothat not just because it's good
for the environment, but it'sgood for your bottom line, right
.
And so I think it's very easyto get caught up again in the
political conversations about weshould drill more, we should
export more natural gas, whenreally the conversation should
(36:10):
be like what is the most costeffective or the cheapest
solution for me personally, orfor me for my company?
Speaker 1 (36:18):
No, I think that's.
That's a great point.
And not many know too that thestate of Texas is just behind
California in the number ofclean energy initiatives and job
creation.
So when you think of Texas atleast when I think of Texas I
think big oil companies.
But there's actually a lot ofpush towards clean energy in
(36:39):
that state because the resourcesare there, the space is there
to generate additional sourcesof energy.
Speaker 2 (36:48):
Absolutely.
I mentioned I live in Oklahomaand driving around.
Sure, you see oil wells, butyou know what?
You see more of Wind farms, waymore wind farms.
Right, because we have thisbase, we have that abundant
natural resource here and itmakes sense, regardless of
political affiliation, to tapinto that resource.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Now, definitely Now.
I know we have to wrap up.
We so appreciate you being herewith us today and I hope this
is not the last time that we getto sit down and have a
conversation, because we wouldlove to have you back.
But what final advice do youhave for policymakers, business
leaders and advocates working toadvance sustainable and
equitable policies inunpredictable political
(37:30):
environments?
Speaker 2 (37:31):
Yeah, great question.
So I have three pieces of advice.
The first is to make your workpersonal and relevant to other
people.
So we talked about talking totheir interests, not just their
positions.
To talk about the things thatthey care most about, to use
language that resonates withthem.
So I live here in Oklahomasurrounded by farmers, ranchers,
(37:52):
hunters.
You know they actually care alot about the environment.
They are very knowledgeableabout changing weather patterns,
so I talk to them about that.
I don't try and talk aboutgreen jobs, we just talk about
jobs.
Maybe they don't want to talkabout climate change or climate
policy, but they care a lotabout like hey, the rain doesn't
come when I need it to anymore,and so we talk about that.
(38:13):
So, first is to make your workpersonal and resonate with other
people.
The second is be ready whenopportunity arises and don't let
a good crisis go to waste.
So, as I was joking aboutearlier, being like the
Cassandra of public policy andbeing like the next crisis is on
the horizon, whether that be alegal change or an outbreak,
whatever it is, but be readyissue, and then all of a sudden
(38:44):
it breaks into the spotlight.
So, when it does, be ready withthose messages.
Be ready with your asks, notjust, oh my gosh, now.
Now people want to talk to meabout my niche issue.
Be ready, have a game plan,because you never know right
when that Overton window shiftsand now you're in the spotlight.
And then the third is to takecare of yourself.
And then the third is to takecare of yourself.
This is a long game.
These are stressful times.
(39:05):
I got stress-induced shingleson my face when I was 25 and
working on the H1N1 outbreak inRwanda, and I think that it was
the best thing that everhappened to me, because it
taught me that nothing is moreimportant than my health and
taking care of myself so that Ican show up in the long term for
these fights, whether it beabout public health or about
(39:26):
climate.
So take care of yourself.
Step away if you need to Take abreak.
Speaker 1 (39:36):
But remember that we have to be here and we have to
continue showing up long termWow, fantastic advice and not
getting lost in the noise whileyou have to step back.
I know there's a lot ofindividuals in my network,
professionally and personally,that just have to turn, turn the
TV off or turn their socialmedia, social media channels off
for now, because it's just toomuch and they need to focus on
themselves and what they cancontrol and what they can do,
(39:58):
which is not always easy.
Speaker 2 (40:00):
It's not easy, but the only person who's ever going
to take care of you really isyou, and you know what you need
and when you need it and how.
But you have to show up foryourself, just as we show up for
these issues.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
No.
Well, on that note, I think weare going to conclude today's
conversation.
Thank you again so much forbeing here.
We will have some links in thepodcast episode to Zara's work
and other ways to connect withher, and thank you again for
being with us.
Thank you so much, jessica.
In the next 60 seconds, askyourself how can I contribute to
(40:35):
a brighter, more sustainablefuture, not just personally but
professionally?
Let's embark on this journeytogether and shape the landscape
of sustainable leadership fortomorrow.
Take the first step now andmake a commitment to lead with
sustainability in mind.
That's all for this episode ofSustainability Unveiled.
Join us next time as wecontinue exploring the forefront
(40:58):
of sustainable businesspractices.
Until then, stay informed, staysustainable.
Welcome to Sustainability Unveiled, the
podcast where we explore thepolicy, strategies and
innovations shaping a moresustainable future.
I'm your host, jessica Hunt,and today we're diving into a
critical conversation at theintersection of global health
security policy andsustainability.
As we navigate an ever-evolvingpolitical and environmental
landscape, businesses must adaptto new challenges while driving
(00:29):
meaningful impact.
Joining me today is Dr IzaraAhmed, a renowned expert in
public policy and global healthsecurity.
With an extensive careerspanning roles at the Guttmacher
Institute and the Center forDisease Control and Prevention,
dr Ahmed brings a wealth ofknowledge on how public health
policy shapes corporatesustainability efforts.
(00:51):
Today, we'll be discussing thegrowing role of businesses in
global health resilience, theregulatory landscape ahead and
how organizations can strengthentheir sustainability strategies
through proactive policyengagement.
Again, we are so pleased to haveDr Zahra Ahmed on with us today
.
Thank you for being here.
Thanks so much for having me.
(01:12):
I know we have a lot to getinto today, so let's jump right
in.
You've had an extensive careerin global health policy, working
with institutions such as theCDC and the Guttmacher Institute
.
What really drew you to thisfield and how has your
experience shaped your approachto advocacy and policy
(01:34):
development?
Speaker 2 (01:36):
Yeah, that's a great question.
So everything about my careerhas been a wonderful surprise.
Each new chapter is one I couldnever have anticipated or
guessed.
The short version is that mydad and his whole family are
doctors and my mom and her wholefamily are in business, and I
saw really clearly how differenttheir work was, the challenges
(01:56):
they face, and that they kind ofspoke different work languages,
and so even as a kid I kind ofended up translating between
them or thinking about thingsfrom different perspectives.
So after getting an undergraddegree in political science from
Brown, I decided to get acouple of master's degrees, one
in public health and one inpublic policy.
And I did that because publichealth people know how to design
(02:18):
and implement good programs,they understand evidence and
research, but they generallyhave no idea how the government
works and they don't know how toget their good ideas funded or
scaled up.
And, on the other hand, publicpolicy, they're the inverse.
They don't know the details ofany particular area really, but
they know the mechanics ofgovernment, they know how to
operate and get things throughthe system.
(02:39):
So I wanted to learn those twolanguages and be that bridge,
taking science-based ideas andturning them into effective
policy, and so later on, I got adoctorate that was focused on
public health, leadership andmanagement, as well as an MBA,
all of this with the goal ofbeing a more effective
collaborator and betterunderstanding how different
types of people and differenttypes of organizations operate.
(03:00):
So this bridging between groupsand interest is really what I
did for my 15-year career inpublic health, and it's also now
what I do in the climate space.
So I really love any job thathas essentially three
ingredients.
So first is smart, passionatescientists, the second is a
wicked policy problem, and thenthe third is the need to
translate science into action tosolve that policy problem, and
(03:24):
that's really, to me, what's atthe heart of both public health
and climate.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
Which is incredible.
Now, just following up on whatyou you know the answer you just
gave, what you talked about,what's been the biggest surprise
for you professionally overyour 15-year career, when you
have combined all of the degreesand expertise that you have?
Speaker 2 (03:47):
The biggest surprise for me is how similar things are
.
So, whether it's working in aforeign country, or working at a
school-based health center, orworking within the private
sector, on climate, so much ofthe dynamics and the challenges
are the same right, translatingevidence into action, getting
people to care about your issue,figuring out how to use limited
(04:08):
resources, because we all wantmore resources, no matter where
we are.
So all of those challenges arethe same and I see a lot of
similarities between them, evenmore than differences.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
Oh, that's really really really interesting,
really really really interesting.
Now, obviously, this episode isgoing to air in late February
early March 2025.
And there has already been alot of change within the United
States government and policysince President Trump was sworn
in on January 20th, and we knowhe's taken swift action on
(04:43):
climate policy, such aswithdrawing from the Paris
Agreement to freezing fundingfor environmental initiatives.
What parallels do you seebetween these moves and early
actions on global healthsecurity during this time?
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Yeah.
So a virus and a molecule ofcarbon dioxide have something
really important in common theydon't care about borders.
So we live in an interconnectedworld and what the US does to
contain disease or to addressclimate globally have real and
direct benefits to Americans aswell as the world more broadly.
So if we don't want to haveanother pandemic like COVID that
(05:20):
devastates the US economy andjobs, we need to have US
epidemiologists who help stopoutbreaks at their source.
Similarly, if we don't wantanother devastating round of
storms and extreme weather, weneed to help other countries
implement environmental programsto reduce carbon emissions.
So engagement, both bilaterallywith another country one-on-one
(05:41):
and multilaterally through theUN, un and other bodies, isn't
just something that we dobecause it's nice.
We do it because it protectsand benefits every single person
in America.
So, for example, why are eggprices so high?
The bird flu you want to makeeggs more affordable.
Then you need to fund publichealth specialists to contain
the epidemic.
So I really worry about us notlearning the lessons of public
(06:05):
health or climate action untilthere's another pandemic or a
major catastrophic event.
But the thing is, we don'tactually have to wait.
A lot can happen in four years.
So the time to act is actuallynow.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
So how do you get policymakers on board to help
mitigate, as you said, the priceof eggs and dealing with bird
flu and really getting them tolisten and understand the
science behind it and howactions they take at the
(06:37):
government level are impactingthe entire United States and
abroad?
Speaker 2 (06:43):
So I spent the almost the all of the Obama
administration from 2009 to 2016based overseas in Rwanda,
namibia and Haiti working forthe CDC, and it was a great
honor for me to represent the USgovernment, working alongside
both colleagues in the USembassy and the local ministries
of health, and in the summer of2016, I was asked to become the
head of policy and strategy forthe Global Pandemic Division at
(07:05):
CDC headquarters, which wasagain another incredible honor,
and so I moved from Atlanta tofrom Haiti to Atlanta a month
before the 2016 election.
I closed my first home threedays before the election, and I
did that because I was excitedabout potentially working with a
Clinton administration that hadexpressed a lot of support for
public health.
Chelsea Clinton and I actuallyboth wrote our doctoral
(07:25):
dissertations about globalhealth cooperation, funny enough
and so we had really detailedplans and priorities for a
Clinton administration that wasvery much focused on the lessons
learned from the Ebola crisis,and obviously the election in
2016 threw those plans out thewindow.
So instead, I was looking at aRepublican-controlled White
House, senate and House ofRepresentatives, and I was being
asked to get more money forglobal health because we were
(07:47):
facing a budget cliff as theemergency resources for Ebola
were coming to an end, and so wepivoted.
To your question about how youreach policymakers and get them
on board with these issues is.
We pivoted and we talked notjust about the work of
preventing, detecting andresponding to outbreaks, but we
changed how we describe thatwork.
So, for example, instead offraming this as about
(08:08):
humanitarian response, we choseto focus on how investments in
health systems abroad benefitedAmericans by preventing disease,
sustaining the economies thatare vital for US exports and
enabling the transit of people,so vital to the US tourism
industry.
And so, really, we talked aboutthe health.
Security is a national securityissue, and so when you want to
(08:29):
reach people, it's reallyimportant to break these
benefits down by state and evencongressional district, so you
can show each member of Congresshow and why our work benefited
their constituents in terms ofjobs, local industry, colleges
and universities, and even howwe were protecting the billions
of chickens in their state.
And it worked, with my divisiongetting a 400% increase in its
(08:52):
budget over three years, and itwas one of the only public
health programs to get a fundingincrease during the Trump
administration.
So the point is that you canreach people, even if on the
face of it, they might.
You might think that they'renot interested or not in support
, as long as you use languageand connect with them on a way
that they can understand thatspeaks to their particular set
(09:12):
of interests.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
Now.
I think that's absolutelyfantastic advice.
Now, with the 400% increasethat you received, what are some
of the biggest accomplishmentsyou achieved and your team
achieved with the additionalfunding?
Speaker 2 (09:27):
Yeah, we were able to train thousands more
epidemiologists.
We were able to build labs tofaster detect outbreaks and stop
them at their source.
Public health is one of thosefunny things where you only hear
about things when they don'twork, but you don't hear about
all of the outbreaks that werecontained at their source, all
(09:47):
of the people whose lives weresaved.
You don't hear about any ofthat.
I do think that it also theCOVID pandemic would have been
much, much worse in a lot ofcountries without these systems
that we had built prior to thepandemic happening.
And having that workforce,having those structures, having
the information systems andsupply chains all of that got
built and that's pretty unsexy,unglamorous work, but it is so
(10:11):
essential and so, again, it'sabout making that work that
unglamorous, unsexy workinteresting to the people who
have to fund it.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
It's a similar parallel to the structure of a
house.
It's not sexy.
The wood that's put up, thesupport beams are not sexy, but
they're essential in order tokeep building and to make the
house what you want to say asgood and as stable and as
(10:45):
possible.
So you know definitely someparallels there, and you
mentioned the COVID-19 pandemic.
So what role did you playduring the time of the global
pandemic that we were dealingwith?
Speaker 2 (10:59):
Yeah, absolutely.
I sometimes joke that I'm likethe Cassandra of public policy
because I spent 2016 to 2019saying a pandemic is coming.
A pandemic is coming and Idecided to leave CDC for a
little while and I went to theGuttmacher Institute to work on
reproductive health and rightsand while I was there I was
saying the end of Roe v Wade iscoming.
The end of Roe v Wade is coming, and unfortunately, I was right
(11:23):
on both those counts and CDCasked me to come back during the
pandemic as somebody who'dworked on policy on pandemics,
and so I spent a year as thehead of policy and government
affairs for the COVID-19response, working 365 days
talking to all members ofCongress and trying to address
their needs, make sure we weremeeting the needs of their
(11:45):
constituents, and really sawfirsthand how much of an all of
government it takes when there'sa really serious crisis, and
all of the skills and benefitsthat each agency brings to the
table that are so essential.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Oh, definitely.
Now, how did you know Now, howdid you know what, in your
professional career, yourresearch, everything that you,
the different agencies you'veworked with, what made you say
to yourself there's a pandemiccoming and it's going to be the
end of Roe v Wade?
Speaker 2 (12:18):
A very dark crystal ball, I guess, but we had
modeled out the impact of apotential pandemic and written
three papers modeling what wouldhappen, even in a small
outbreak overseas that wouldaffect US jobs, exports, the
health of chickens, all thesethings.
We wrote three papers aboutthem in 2017 and 2018 because we
(12:38):
knew we were due for a hundredonce in a hundred year pandemic
Right, and we were like it willhappen around this time and sure
enough it did.
So epidemiologists are smart.
They really know what they'retalking about and they predicted
it almost to the year.
So some of these things areevidence-based and are known.
And I think the other part of itis that I do have a political
(12:59):
science degree.
I have that orientation.
I've worked on the Hill and fora mayor and for a state
legislature and you can kind ofunderstand the political winds
and where things are going toland, and so it's really
important for people who work inpolicy to think about things
from their different angles andexperiences and say what do I
need to deal with right now, forsure, but also what can I
anticipate happening in thefuture and how can I work with
(13:20):
my organization to get ahead ofthat?
Speaker 1 (13:24):
Do you think there was anything that the United
States could have done to helpbetter prepare for the COVID-19
pandemic?
And it's?
You know the effects on,obviously, the economy here,
supply chains, global tourism, Icould go on and on.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
Yeah, another thing that public health and climate
have in common is a cycle ofpanic and neglect, and so when
something like the pandemichappens, we all panic, we throw
money at the problem, and that'san important thing to do,
certainly, but the better timeto be putting money into
(14:04):
something is before the pandemic.
Right, you can't magicallymaterialize a bunch of
healthcare workers out ofnowhere.
It takes time to train thosepeople, to get systems and labs
and supply chains in place.
All of that has to happenbefore an outbreak.
The same is true for climate.
Right, you can't justmaterialize out of nowhere
firefighters, in the case of theLA wildfires, for example.
(14:25):
You have to invest in thosesystems and those people ahead
of time, rather than fallinginto this cycle of panic and
neglect.
Speaker 1 (14:33):
Yeah, we definitely have a reactive approach and I
think you see that acrossindustries and hopefully that
will not always be the case whenit comes to dealing with
pandemics or climate emergencies.
Now, pivoting just a little bitobviously still on talking
about climate, but climatepolicy and market dynamics, I'm
really interested to get intothis part of our conversation.
(14:55):
The voluntary carbon market hasseen significant fluctuations
in credibility and participation, so what lessons from global
health financing can be appliedto stabilizing and strengthening
voluntary carbon markets?
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Great question.
So, importantly, the voluntarymarket is still voluntary and
because of that it's largelybuffeted from political forces,
which is a major difference fromglobal health where, as we're
seeing, politics can dictatefunding.
So, in general, wheregovernment and the voluntary
carbon market intersect, it'slargely just for investment to
(15:35):
encourage climate emissionsdisclosure and to support
nascent green technology andnational government leadership
on climate action is shiftingworldwide and there's new
leaders anticipated to makesignificant advances, to advance
climate policy and to catalyzethe growth in the VCM.
Now, while the Trumpadministration is expected to
slow down federal action, thatmeans that the role of states in
the US, other countries and theprivate sector, as well as
(15:58):
non-governmental authorities,are all the more crucial for
improving the integrity of theVCM.
I will say that we thinkcertain climate provisions, such
as the 45Q carbon sequestrationtax credit, should remain
durable, and they do have strongbipartisan support.
So, again, because it's avoluntary market, companies have
(16:18):
the freedom to opt in or out ofthe market to the degree that
they see fit, based on theirbusiness objectives objectives,
and so governments may providebest practices or guidance or
even limited regulation oncertain aspects of the VCM, but
directing the operation of theVCM is not a core function of
the government, and so, in termsof strengthening the VCM, we
(16:39):
encourage all participants,whether that be states or the
private sector, or NGOs, themedia, whomever it is to focus
on two key things.
So the first is to identify andbuy actual carbon removal
credits, rather than avoidanceor reduction credits, so that
you can have the biggest climateimpact.
And then the second is toprioritize quality.
(17:00):
So less than 10% of the removalcredits on the voluntary carbon
market actually meet thecriteria that we and Microsoft
set out about what is highquality carbon removal, and
there's only less than 4% of thecredits on the VCM that are
actually removal credits.
So we're talking about a verysmall subset of this voluntary
(17:21):
carbon market that is highquality, high integrity and high
impact, and so what we want todo is encourage people to invest
in that corner of the marketand really grow it in order for
it to, overall, have greaterintegrity.
Speaker 1 (17:36):
So because it really is only 4%.
What advice do you have forstate governments, local
governments, corporations oreven small businesses to be able
to hone in on the carbonremoval that 4%?
What advice do you have forthem and how can they find the
information that they need to besuccessful?
Speaker 2 (17:59):
So there are two documents I think everybody in
this space should be reading.
So the first is every year,carbon Direct puts out a report
called the State of theVoluntary Carbon Market and I
would highly encourage everybodyto read it.
It's super informative.
It's short and it's a greatread and you get to understand
(18:19):
the dynamics, includingnature-based solutions versus
high durability solutions.
What are the trade-offs inthese things?
It's a really complex thing tounderstand.
The second is to look at everyyear with Microsoft, we update
the criteria for high qualitycarbon removal credits and we
talk about them overall.
What are things that apply toall technologies?
And then we go technology bytechnology and explain across
(18:40):
multiple dimensions.
What are the things that aregood to have, what are the
things that are necessary tohave in your project?
So it's all transparent when wesay you know less than 10% meet
our quality criteria, you cansee the grading rubric here and
if you're a project developer,if you're a potential buyer,
look at those.
And then the other thing is askfor help.
(19:00):
This is a lot of what we do atCarbon Direct.
We help the biggest buyers onthe voluntary carbon market find
and source those high qualitycarbon removal credits.
It's a very difficult thing totry and do by yourself.
We have a whole fleet ofscientists who specialize in
this, and so ask for help getoutside opinion, because
otherwise you're risking wastingyour money on non-impactful
(19:24):
credits.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
Now.
I think that's very importantand just to say, it is okay to
ask for help.
We should all be in.
We should all be workingtogether to solve as many
problems in terms of dealingwith climate change and climate
impact as possible, and don'treinvent the wheel you might,
you're going to, you can spendso much money and so much time
trying to reinvent the wheel.
(19:46):
That doesn't need to bereinvented Absolutely.
So now it's.
I think it's going to be veryinteresting.
I live in the state of Maryland, which is a very democratic
state, and our governor is stillcontinuing to push forward with
climate initiatives, with EVfunding, infrastructure funding.
Do you anticipate they'reseeing a divide in the country
(20:12):
over the next four years when itcomes to climate policy based
on, you know, the red or bluestates?
Speaker 2 (20:21):
The thing about climate action and policy is
that it benefits everybody,right?
Wind energy comes to your houseif you're a Republican voter or
a Democratic voter, right,that's the great thing about it
it benefits everybody.
So, for example, I live inOklahoma and Oklahoma received
as much money from the InflationReduction Act as California
(20:43):
about $40 billion and we have a10th of population.
So the impact is actuallygreater here in this little red
state than in the giant bluestate of California, right?
People don't necessarilyrecognize that and the benefits
that brings.
So much of this is like how wetalk about the benefits of
climate action.
We don't need to talk about itin partisan terms.
(21:04):
We just need to talk about itin the terms of regular people,
in terms of making your powerbill cheaper, providing you a
new job that's well-paying.
We don't have to talk about itas a green job, just a great
paying job, and get peopleexcited about things.
That way, I think states thatare going to be proactive in
this space and understand theeconomic opportunities that
(21:24):
climate action can bring arereally going to be ahead of the
game.
I don't necessarily think it'sgoing to break down along
partisan lines as long as wekeep talking about this in terms
of the benefits that it comesto everybody.
This doesn't need to be apartisan issue.
It can actually be a completelynonpartisan one.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
And it just brings me back to the fact that we have
solar on our house and, honestly, we got it.
For the economic benefits, thatwas number one Great.
We're helping the environment,lowering our carbon footprint.
We have an EV.
We have an EV charger set up inour home, so we charge using
our solar panels.
But when I talk to people aboutit, I always start with the
(22:04):
financial impact, because wherewe live Baltimore Gas and
Electric is unbelievably.
The rates are unbelievably high.
A house of our size it's about3,500 square feet People are
paying over $1,000 a month fortheir electricity bills and we
pay $200, some pricetransparency here a month for
(22:28):
our solar loan and that's it.
And we're going to own oursolar outright and we sell
credits back.
And there are so many differentincentives financial incentives
that when I talk to peopleabout the benefits of having
solar, that's what I focus on,because that's right now what
makes sense to the normaleveryday people is the economy.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
The solar panel doesn't care who you voted for,
right.
It's providing you that benefit, that peace of mind, that
resilience in case of a stormcoming your way.
And that's the thing that wecan connect with people on.
Is, what is the personalbenefit to you of your state
doing something?
You individually doingsomething?
It does not have to do anythingat all with politics.
Speaker 1 (23:14):
Do you think because there are so many climate
actions at the federal levelhappening right now, do you
think that it's going makeprivate companies hesitant to
continue on the path of becomingclimate positive or really
sticking with the goals thatthey have their ESG
(23:36):
sustainability goals?
Or because they know thestakeholders their stakeholders
are on board.
They're just going to keepmoving forward.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
I think if you are in the private sector and you
choose to focus only on the USright now, sure, you might get
scared off of climate action.
But if you are going to bestrategic, you're going to think
both globally and long term.
And if you do that, then youare going to charge ahead with
climate action.
Right, because these thingstake a long time to build.
(24:07):
Right, if you want to increaseenergy, you're going to have to
start building a power plant now.
You're going to build a solarfarm or wind farm.
You better start that now ifyou want to be ready in a few
years.
Right, if you want to diversifyand strengthen your supply
chain, if you want to lower thecarbon intensity of your product
because you can see whereconsumer demand is going you
(24:28):
should be doing that now.
So the key is not to fixate onoh no, the immediate term,
what's happening right now, andallowing yourself to kind of be
like thrown around by thepolitical winds.
Rather, you're going to saywhat is best for the long-term
global development of my companyand obviously, if you do that,
climate action is going to be atthe top of your list.
And it's not again, it's notabout politics or anything.
(24:50):
It's actually about strategyand economics, right?
So wind is cheaper in manyplaces than fossil fuels.
We know that renewables aregoing to be even cheaper in the
future.
We know that regulation isgoing to come from other states
and from other countries.
All of those things are comingdown the pike at you, and so
best time is to get your housein order now.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
No, I think that is great advice.
Now, can you talk to us about atime where I don't want to use
the word convinced, but you wereup against policymakers that
maybe were not going to be onboard with your plans and what
you wanted to accomplish in yourroles at the CDC, and how did
you bridge that gap?
(25:38):
I know we talked a little bitabout the language you use and
focusing on what their strengthswere, but do you have a
specific example that you couldshare?
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Sure, so I teach negotiations at UNC, chapel Hill
, and I love it.
It scares everybody.
When I say the word negotiation, everybody kind of breaks into
a cold sweat.
But I think it's one of themost important skill sets that
anybody can learn over thecourse of their career.
And one of the most fundamentalthings to understand about
(26:06):
negotiations is the differencebetween positions and interests.
So positions are what peoplesay they want, and then the
interest is what's theirunderlying motivation or concern
or reason for saying that.
And oftentimes we get fixatedon the position.
So somebody might say I don'tlike climate, I don't like
(26:27):
global health, and we tend tojust try and convince them no,
you should like this, don't likeclimate, I don't like global
health.
And we tend to just try andconvince them no, you should
like this, you should like this.
And what we don't do is take ita step further and seek to
understand their underlyinginterest or motivation.
And maybe it's I don't want myconstituents tax dollars wasted,
and so we need to plug in there.
And that's really what we didwhen we were trying to secure
more money for global healthsecurity post Ebola.
(26:48):
So we said, okay, we're notgoing to just talk about the
humanitarian response or thebenefits of this we're again
we're going to talk specificallyabout for your state, for your
congressional district.
Hey, x number of jobs in yourdistrict are tied to exports to
other countries, right, and iftheir economies are shut down
(27:09):
and they don't have money to payor they close their border,
this is what's going to happento jobs from your voter base.
The other thing is that we didis we pivoted and we talked
about language that met theirinterests, around what committee
they were on, for example.
So when we were talking tosomebody who was maybe on the
defense committee, we would talkabout how global health
(27:30):
protects US military forcesoverseas from disease outbreaks.
Talk about in terms of forceprotection.
So it really comes down totalking about the interests of
the other person.
It's not about you, it's aboutthem.
And so the other thing I wouldsay is to use social math, right
, so oftentimes you'll be likethis costs $150 million.
Well, you could also just saythat that costs $1 for every
(27:53):
taxpayer Way more digestible,easier to remember, and you're
giving them a talking point thatthey can use to be your
advocate further on.
And so we did that again a lotwith global health, and you see
this right now in some of themessaging about trying to
explain USAID's budget is tobreak it down into simple terms.
(28:14):
Right, nobody really knows likehow much a military destroyer
costs or something like that.
But if you break it down intolike dollars per person or it's
the equivalent of something elsepeople can, it's much more
digestible.
So I'd say, make thingsdigestible and hyperlocal.
And then the last thing I'd sayis sometimes we're not the
right messenger and we getfixated on I want to convince
(28:38):
you of this but somebody who'syou already have a relationship
with or you have things incommon with more than you and I
do.
They may be the right messenger.
So broaden out your base andbring people into the fold who
you may be very different frombut can reach your target
(28:59):
audience.
Speaker 1 (29:00):
I think that might be one of my favorite quotes from
our conversation.
You might not be the bestmessenger, and I think that is
that can transcend whatever youdo professionally and personally
, so I think that's a really,really important message.
To drive home is again, alsowe're not one person.
You're not one person.
You have a team.
You have your own expertise,your own experience, but you
also should rely on theexpertise and experience of your
(29:24):
team members and theirrelationships to be able to work
towards a common goal.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
Absolutely.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
Now so well.
I feel like we could continuethis conversation for a very,
very long time.
It's been wonderful so far, butI want to look ahead now.
Looking ahead what are thebiggest risks and opportunities
for climate action in the comingyears, not just during the next
four years of Trump'spresidency, but beyond that?
Speaker 2 (29:53):
Yeah, I can think of three major risks, but they're
also the biggest opportunities,and when we have this complex
landscape, it's really easy justto focus on the risk side of
the equation and not thinkstrategically about the
opportunity side.
So a few big risks andopportunities that come to mind.
So first is obviously and we'reseeing this very intensely
(30:13):
right now political uncertaintyand policy reversal.
So flip-flopping and changingand we're part of the Paris
Agreement, now we're not, nowwe're in, now we're out.
That can be very unsettling anddisruptive and we realize that
the lack of federal governmentaction may slow or reverse some
of the climate progress we'vemade to date.
But, however, the flip side ofthat, the opportunity side, is
(30:36):
again, if you look nationally,like more globally, or if you
look more long-term, you'll seethat other businesses, your
competitors, your investors,local governments, other
countries are increasinglydriving climate action
independent of national politics, and so the opportunity there
is to get ahead of everybodyelse and to make those
(30:57):
investments.
Another big risk I think thatpeople are focused on is
insufficient climate funding andthis investment gap.
I said earlier we all want moreresources, excuse me, okay, and
so how do we scale private andpublic climate finance and the
flip side of that risk is theopportunity to think about green
(31:20):
bonds or getting more engagedin the carbon markets or using
other types of climateinvestment frameworks to close
that financing gap, to use theexisting resources from the
Inflation Reduction Act,particularly around the tax
credits, to scale uptechnologies.
And then the last one I thinkthat people are very focused on
is the slow adoption ofdecarbonization in key sectors.
(31:44):
So that might be in heavyindustry like cement, steel or
aviation, where cost is stillquite high and there's technical
barriers.
But on the flip side of thatthere's been a number of
advancements in green hydrogenand sustainable aviation fuel
and carbon capture andsequestration electrification,
which make that deepdecarbonization more feasible.
And so, again, if you get inearly with those technologies
(32:07):
and integrate them into yoursystem, you'll be well
positioned for the future.
One of my favorite things isthat I work with about 70
scientists at Carbon Direct whoare some of the smartest people
I've ever met and I really seethem think strategically about.
Here are the challenges, buthere are all the incredible
opportunities and they translatethat work with clients to get
(32:28):
ahead of the challenges thatthey're facing, and that
competitive advantage is what'sgoing to make climate action
possible.
Speaker 1 (32:36):
Oh, definitely Now, on a personal slash professional
level, what technologies areyou most excited about in the
future?
Speaker 2 (32:44):
I have recently been diving in a lot on
electrification.
I think it's a reallyfascinating area and we see this
growth of data centers and thehyperscalers.
There's huge electricity demand, so understanding things like
as wonky as different carbonemissions methodologies to
understand your carbon footprintwe just put out a great white
(33:05):
paper on this I learned so muchReally fascinating Understanding
about purchase power agreementsfor renewable energy it's
incredible.
The other thing is to thinkabout natural gas with carbon
capture and storage.
We have this huge demand forenergy and electricity.
How are we going to meet it,especially in a way that doesn't
(33:26):
affect regular people?
Like you and I don't want tosee our electricity bill go
through the roof we all have tocome together around that
technology.
Speaker 1 (33:34):
Now, I couldn't agree more with you there and I think
, when it comes back to some ofthe things that you've talked
about, the messages that youmentioned earlier, which is the
messaging, and make sure thatthe messaging that's being put
out is factual and accurate, anexample of offshore wind farms
off the coast of Virginia,virginia Beach, and people are
(33:57):
up in arms because their billsare going to go up, but if they
did a little bit of researchthey would realize they're going
to go up 47 cents a month onaverage.
So it is.
You know, I think in today'ssociety and I'm sure you can
reiterate the sentiment you haveto take it upon yourself to do
the research and and look atdata and evidence and make the
(34:22):
best decisions.
You know, on a personal level,but at professional level too,
if you're, if you are runningthose companies or working with
policymakers.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
Yeah, I would also say it's incumbent upon us who
have the energy, the education,the privilege to spend time
doing the research, to share itwith others and make it
understandable for them.
So, 47 cents I'm not going toforget that number.
Now, right, you just taught mesomething that makes my life
better and easier, and youshared that with me in a way
that I could understand, and so,for those of us who have these
(34:53):
insights, it's really importantfor us to share them as much as
possible and bring these bigideas about offshore wind farm,
bring it down to a very personallevel so that we can be better
informed consumers, betterinformed voters, better informed
investors going forward.
Speaker 1 (35:09):
No, I think that that's a great, great message to
take home for our viewers andlisteners.
So I keep going back in my headto the debate between clean
energy and fossil fuels.
And how can there be a balance,not just in the United States,
(35:30):
but globally?
And can there be a balance ifwe're not just looking at energy
production but we're looking atthe economy, job creation, all
of that?
Speaker 2 (35:49):
It's complicated.
I think that one of the bigthings to understand is that in
so many places, renewable energyis the cheapest form of energy,
right, and you want to run tothat not just because it's good
for the environment, but it'sgood for your bottom line, right
.
And so I think it's very easyto get caught up again in the
political conversations about weshould drill more, we should
export more natural gas, whenreally the conversation should
(36:10):
be like what is the most costeffective or the cheapest
solution for me personally, orfor me for my company?
Speaker 1 (36:18):
No, I think that's.
That's a great point.
And not many know too that thestate of Texas is just behind
California in the number ofclean energy initiatives and job
creation.
So when you think of Texas atleast when I think of Texas I
think big oil companies.
But there's actually a lot ofpush towards clean energy in
(36:39):
that state because the resourcesare there, the space is there
to generate additional sourcesof energy.
Speaker 2 (36:48):
Absolutely.
I mentioned I live in Oklahomaand driving around.
Sure, you see oil wells, butyou know what?
You see more of Wind farms, waymore wind farms.
Right, because we have thisbase, we have that abundant
natural resource here and itmakes sense, regardless of
political affiliation, to tapinto that resource.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Now, definitely Now.
I know we have to wrap up.
We so appreciate you being herewith us today and I hope this
is not the last time that we getto sit down and have a
conversation, because we wouldlove to have you back.
But what final advice do youhave for policymakers, business
leaders and advocates working toadvance sustainable and
equitable policies inunpredictable political
(37:30):
environments?
Speaker 2 (37:31):
Yeah, great question.
So I have three pieces of advice.
The first is to make your workpersonal and relevant to other
people.
So we talked about talking totheir interests, not just their
positions.
To talk about the things thatthey care most about, to use
language that resonates withthem.
So I live here in Oklahomasurrounded by farmers, ranchers,
(37:52):
hunters.
You know they actually care alot about the environment.
They are very knowledgeableabout changing weather patterns,
so I talk to them about that.
I don't try and talk aboutgreen jobs, we just talk about
jobs.
Maybe they don't want to talkabout climate change or climate
policy, but they care a lotabout like hey, the rain doesn't
come when I need it to anymore,and so we talk about that.
(38:13):
So, first is to make your workpersonal and resonate with other
people.
The second is be ready whenopportunity arises and don't let
a good crisis go to waste.
So, as I was joking aboutearlier, being like the
Cassandra of public policy andbeing like the next crisis is on
the horizon, whether that be alegal change or an outbreak,
whatever it is, but be readyissue, and then all of a sudden
(38:44):
it breaks into the spotlight.
So, when it does, be ready withthose messages.
Be ready with your asks, notjust, oh my gosh, now.
Now people want to talk to meabout my niche issue.
Be ready, have a game plan,because you never know right
when that Overton window shiftsand now you're in the spotlight.
And then the third is to takecare of yourself.
And then the third is to takecare of yourself.
This is a long game.
These are stressful times.
(39:05):
I got stress-induced shingleson my face when I was 25 and
working on the H1N1 outbreak inRwanda, and I think that it was
the best thing that everhappened to me, because it
taught me that nothing is moreimportant than my health and
taking care of myself so that Ican show up in the long term for
these fights, whether it beabout public health or about
(39:26):
climate.
So take care of yourself.
Step away if you need to Take abreak.
Speaker 1 (39:36):
But remember that we have to be here and we have to
continue showing up long termWow, fantastic advice and not
getting lost in the noise whileyou have to step back.
I know there's a lot ofindividuals in my network,
professionally and personally,that just have to turn, turn the
TV off or turn their socialmedia, social media channels off
for now, because it's just toomuch and they need to focus on
themselves and what they cancontrol and what they can do,
(39:58):
which is not always easy.
Speaker 2 (40:00):
It's not easy, but the only person who's ever going
to take care of you really isyou, and you know what you need
and when you need it and how.
But you have to show up foryourself, just as we show up for
these issues.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
No.
Well, on that note, I think weare going to conclude today's
conversation.
Thank you again so much forbeing here.
We will have some links in thepodcast episode to Zara's work
and other ways to connect withher, and thank you again for
being with us.
Thank you so much, jessica.
In the next 60 seconds, askyourself how can I contribute to
(40:35):
a brighter, more sustainablefuture, not just personally but
professionally?
Let's embark on this journeytogether and shape the landscape
of sustainable leadership fortomorrow.
Take the first step now andmake a commitment to lead with
sustainability in mind.
That's all for this episode ofSustainability Unveiled.
Join us next time as wecontinue exploring the forefront
(40:58):
of sustainable businesspractices.
Until then, stay informed, staysustainable.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com