Hi everyone, Joe for jaspyscasebreaks.com coming at you with a four box break of the brand new 2019 Panini Spectra basketball just dropped yesterday. We did that first half of late last night And then I marked these pick your team four so we know that they're all from the same case Very big. Thanks all the people who got into the action who bought their team straight up. I appreciate that and Thanks to the people who joined at this 15 team number block That randomizer is in a separate video. Did I upload it? Yes Checklist for you copied somewhere No, I might might might want that Checklist up just in case There is a redemption or something goofy like that All right, here's the checklist in the chat for you ladies and gentlemen It'll open up a PDF On your browser No, Ryan H asking for one Kobe white six out of whatever and a hachimora six out of whatever and that's all Is that asking too much? Let's see in case there's no housekeeping there. All right first out of the gate is Gonna be Terry Rose here 18 out of 25 that's Hornets 8 That will be for Matthew we got Shaq Lakers that'll be for Matthew Shearer and then behind Andrew Wiggins Not numbered Golden State Warriors Mike Sharp is icons autograph Byron Russell Nice Douglas Warden with the jazz last spot mojo 68 out of 99 Next up. Oh, we got a redemption on the bottom. Will it be for one of those teams there? There's Josh Richardson for the Sixers So this will be part of the non numbered group That'll be randomized to someone on that list right there as one lot there's Nikola Melly Pelicans Adam and Kevin Knox for the Knicks Serenity has the Knicks got the Knicks straight up Good luck rookie Jersey autographs meta C Oh B White Kobe white Brandon with number zero zero gets any and all redemptions There you go. Nice. What is that? What is that meta parallel? Not good with memorizing all of these Parallels here. Let's go to cardboard connection.com. That's a good resources resource with that meta I think is out of 49 rookie Jersey autographs meta out of 25 maybe Think it might be out of it's our lustrious. That's icon. That's aspiring Oh, there's your out of 25. It's what it should be out of 25. All right, there's ties your own 31 out of 49 for the Sun Sun's number one Martin We got for the Clippers Montrezzar el that's for Adam and the clip show and behind the hoon to Murray is Illustrious legends autograph Ralph Samson. Nice. I like that sort of that pulsar design that they have their rockets shang with the rockets 50 out of 75 and The spur Steve Locke will get the de Hoon to Murray card We've got go go batadze 92 out of 99 Pacers number two will be Sean and behind poor zingas is Terrence Mann and behind Terrence Mann is icons autograph Kenyon Martin Brooklyn Nets edition and then Brooklyn Nets is a number blog team. So that'll be Brooklyn Number zero Brandon with another zero Nice one Brandon Mavs is Mark said you'll get that Christos poor zingas card next box All right, Draymond green silver for the Warriors Mike sharp got ties your own for the Sun's That's part of the non numbered group and kuzma Lakers and goes to Matthew Shearer and We've got illustrious legends Bill Walton For the Portland trailblazers, that's a number blog team and that is 16 out of 49 nice So trailblazers six. It's gonna be Ryan H Kylauri Raptors, and it'll be 22 out of 49 goes to Sean in the number two This Lakers Kuz goes to Matthew Shearer Ky Bowman goes to Mike Sharp and the Warriors All right, that's Jimmy Butler for Miami mark with that one And we've got a Scott Skiles radiant autograph Orlando magic That there's number right there 13 out of 75 Orlando three Josh proofs It's like another redemption down there. Yeah Another redemption down there. There's Kemble Walker 22 out of 25 for Sean Terence man Adam Kelly Dominique Wilkins Matt Silverstein. We've got rookie Jersey autographs inner stellar That is out of 49 and we've got K e Kevin Keldon Kevin Kevin Porter jr. Cavs Walter with the Cavaliers nice pretty solid Jared Culver 20 out of 99 Timberwolves zero Brandon Admiral Schofield wizards That'll that's that'll be for the non numbered pile right there and Carmelo Anthony Reveals a Jersey auto gogabit Todd's a Pacers who are a number blog team 002 out of 149 that goes to Sean Maddock in number two Nice There's trailblazers Carmelo Are that non numbered pile right there? The Mac what time is the fourth of July fireworks pack probably around one o'clock Pacific? I'll bet they'll sell out tonight, and that'll probably be one of the first breaks We do tomorrow one o'clock Pacific four o'clock Eastern We keep an eye on our Twitter at Jasper's breaks And subscribe to our channel Hit the notifications, and then you'll know exactly when we go on air. All right. There's Isaiah Roby Okay, see mark. There's town Horton Tucker Lakers Matthew Shira and behind Lonzo Not numbered is Eric Pascal aspiring autographs for the Golden State Warriors I like the colors and designs of this set this year, and that'll be Mike Sharp with the Warriors 23 out of 25 There's Lonzo right at him hoping hoping we'll find his teammate Kundari weather spoon 82 out of 99 for the Spurs teablock. Oh, are those fire whack fire? Fire whack fireworks packs already sold out Mix up works and pack and turn into whack Kyrie with the Nets non-number group Donovan Mitchell Reveals an Isaiah Ryder nice Timberwolves Icons autograph Timberwolves are a number block team eight out of 49 So that goes to Matthew Shira and number eight. Yeah, Derek Braden looks like they're sold out So it'll be the first break of the day tomorrow There's Donovan Mitchell for the Jazz for Douglas not number. There's Grant Williams 14 out of 49 for the Celtics that'll be for Brandon. No, I don't think we're planning on going going live any earlier Joe LMB Sixers so one o'clock Pacific Four o'clock Eastern as usual and we've got Avery Bradley catalysts really unfortunately not a catalyst This year. He's opted out folks. I think his kid has like asthma and some health issues. So Totally understandable though. I would I would like selfishly. I would like his perimeter defense Matthew Shira with the Laker 32 out of 49 nice Avery Bradley Kellan Johnson Steve Locke One more pack and then one more box folks We got Wendell Carter jr. Bulls to 99 22 out of 99 so that'll be for Sean Andre Drummond calves that'll be for Walter and behind Colin Sexton also for the calves and Walter is illustrious legends artists Gilmore Steve Locke with the spurs. I wonder if old-school guys look at these card and they're just like is that what that what kids are collecting these days? 25 out of 75 nice Yeah, Adam. Absolutely. Yeah for Avery Bradley, you know, it's serious when he's opting out of a serious chance for a ring absolutely He had a very specific role with the Lakers too. He was getting minutes. He was Definitely there for the defense and some veteran presence, but Yeah, definitely under a very understandable All right last box. Good luck. We've got more in the store jaspies case breaks calm So check it out. There's Steve Nash for the Suns two out of 49 Phoenix to Sean Nicola Melly Adam with the pelicans and behind Donovan Mitchell for Douglas not numbered It's gonna be a Marcus Kambi radiant autograph Marcus Kambi for Serenity got the Knicks straight up 35 out of 99 There's Robert Covington for the Rockets. That's gonna be for Shang and the Rockets gets the silver Robert Covington Jared Culver Timberwolves That's part of the non-numbered group and behind Lonzo is Bull-Bull two-color Jersey and autograph Denver Nuggets are a number block team. So let's check out the number on the on the back 19 out of 25 so Kevin Mendoza number nine Harrison Barnes 24 out of 49 Kings four that's gonna be branded Admiral Schofield Wizards non-numbered part of that group and behind Kevin Knox is Scott Skiles radiant autograph for the Magic Eight out of 99 Matthew Sheeran with number eight and the last pack Yeah, that's a pretty it is a pretty sweet-looking card. The patterns are really nice this year I think got a good mix of the colors and patterns this year. I think There's Dehunta Murray 69 nice out of 99 spurs Steve Locke We got Nicola Melly for Adam and the Pelicans and behind Dame For the trailblazers is gonna be Illustrious legends Chris Mallon nice There you go warriors Mike Sharp 47 out of 49 Nice. All right, so this is the small stack of non-numbered cards. That'll be randomized to that number block group So let's see what we got. We also have two box random number block versions of it of this as well from a fresh case So yeah, that means someone could get I mean if there were any Zion non-numbered cards. Yeah, someone could get that randomly Okay Multiple it's possible to let's roll it. Let's randomize it after they check my browser There you go six times one out of five one Two three four Five and six and final time name on top is mark L. So mark There's a little consolation prize for you a little extra handful of Non-numbered base cards and that's silver Josh Richardson as well. There you go pick your team four in the books The next pick your team will be from a fresh case the two box random number block break also from a fresh case So check it all out on Jasper's case breaks calm. I'm Joe and I'll brave more with you next time. Bye. Bye


Good to see you guys be of zoom there Terry and coach can see him. Yeah just you know as we set out on the offseason here what or you know some of the priorities for Terry you know getting ready for the draft first question for Terry on the offseason priorities for the franchise. Well, we're going to take a take a few days here to separate from the emotions of where we are right now and and we'll get back in the building and obviously we'll have a collaborative effort and sitting down with author and the staff and the coaches and the scouts and evaluating the season and every single player. And that'll be the beginning of whether players under contract or not under contract. That's the start we evaluate every player and how we want to proceed. Each player and and then we start to formulate that offseason plan. So we need to just separate a little bit and so we can come in and with fresh eyes and be objective and evaluate every single aspect of this year. And for coach how will your offseason evaluations of the season go have the coaches started on those and you know where you all at with the evaluation process of 2021 season. Yeah, D-Led. Yeah, that's kind of standard operating procedure. We will after anything any any thing we've done here. You I think the smart thing is to go back and look at it. What can we do better? There's certainly not to be every year whether whether you won the Super Bowl or not. I think you've got to be objective and see where you can evolve and adapt. It can never stay the same. It just can't and we feel like we've got a great foundation here D-Led and you know we got a bright future and we'll look at every single thing we've done and see what we can do better. Michael. Hey y'all. Thanks for. He froze up on us. Mike. Mike you're frozen. Tori we'll roll to you real quick till we get Michael back. Yeah, that sounds good. Just kind of I guess I'll start off this question for Terry. Salary cap rising in 2022. How do you kind of feel like this organization do you feel like this organization is in a better spot in 2022 because of that and how do you foresee that kind of shaping out the offseason for you guys? Well, yeah we're in a better spot because the cap did increase this year. That was one of the big challenges last year because of the cap going down so much and we already had challenges prior to that. But this offseason the cap did increase and yet there still are challenges here for the next couple years. But again we have to look at every contract every player whether they're under contract or not and make the best decision for this team moving forward. And then this question is kind of for both of you guys big picture. What do you think is the difference between how you feel like this organization operates cohesively this offseason in comparison to where you were at this point last year both of you guys just coming in here. Well, I think everybody's more familiar with each other. Certainly the second time around if you've done your due diligence and your process is good it should go smoother. And it's just because there's so many things to do here one as you're getting you know you start and hit the ground running. It should be a lot easier this time because you kind of understand how everybody operates and there's some things we want to do better than what we did last time and it just you're just more familiar it's like any relationship. You feel like you know everybody better. Michael, you're muted Michael. Sorry about that. Sorry about the Internet is apparently bad. Yeah, so Terry I was going to ask this that last year you were talking about some of the cap constraints that you guys were working with. How do you manage the cap this year you think versus what you had to do a season ago. Well, again still some some constraints but we just have to look at look at every player and every contract and just do the best job we can. We know we have to bring in competition and continue to work to improve this offseason. So they're going to be challenges every year with the cap but we just have to make the right decisions and the players we bring in make sure we have clear visions for them and do the best job we can. And for Arthur, you talked about desk kitchens last week. Is that the only anticipated staff change that you're going to have or do you anticipate more changes? Well, it's hard to predict the future Michael. There's a lot of moving parts. I think, you know, we'll take our time for the running back job. You know, we want to talk to a lot of people. There's a lot of movement going on and so right now that's the only only movement we've had but you just can't predict the future. Because there's a ripple effect and who gets what job and so we'll see but we'll take our time. Make sure it's the right person that we bring in here. Home team. We can't hear you Brandon. Audio issue on your end. Josh, this one's for you. Do you have a how will you handle the Calvin situation Calvin Ridley situation going forward in terms of when you feel like you need to know something. Has there been any communication thus far? What's your expectation for kind of how it walks out? Well, it really hasn't changed and we've as an organization we've done the best job we could to just support Calvin and do everything we can for him. And I know he made the statement when he did and we made a statement during the season as well and really up to this point nothing changed with that. Do you expect him to be on your roster in 2022 or is it too early to tell to say at this point? Well, it's look we have a roster of a lot of players you can go down and ask that about every single player and we obviously we're not going to answer those questions but again regarding him specifically. Nothing changed. We just continue to support him. Thank you. Home team, try it again. Still no audio burning. D-Led, go to your follow up. Okay, yeah, what's the what's the plan to fix the lines and the trenches are offensively and defensively a lot of sacks weren't able to run the ball and defensively our last in the league and sacks. Well, you know, I love the loaded question D-Led but like the whole team we got to improve. I think that's again, statistics, however you want to manipulate them. Those are easy. Those are the low hanging fruit doesn't tell a story the whole season doesn't tell a story.  Like I said before, you know, we went seven to one possession games. We got to close the gap in the other game. We got to continue to improve and there's a lot of ways you can fix it. D-Led obviously down to the end of the year, we need more shots on goal. I think when you get in the game and you don't have the ball very long and a lot of it was self inflicted. But when you average five yards a carry to make a grand indictment on the run game, I think that's a little bit at the surface level there. We need to be better all around. So there's a multiple ways you can improve the front. We got to improve this whole team, you know, as we climb. I mean, the goal here is to sustain, sustain success and to win championships. That's not your objective and you're just playing survivor and trying to manipulate narratives and stat pad. But that's not what we're trying to do. We're trying to build a championship level team roster and that's our objective. What do I make of it being 30th in the league then?  I'm not saying that D-Led, you're kind of missing the point. Okay, yeah, help me out then. I need some help then. What I'm just trying to do is you're trying to win games, correct? And so if you sit there, we need to be better. We need more plays offensively. So we need to extend drives. We need to get off the field and third down. And like I said, we need to close the gaps in those games that we lost. That's clear and there's multiple ways to do that. But like I said, when you, we, I think we're 31st and offensive plays run and that's a team issue. And that's what we'll do. I mean, there's everywhere you got to get better.  No, we clearly, we're going to continue to improve. But it doesn't tell the whole story. There was times where it gets really good defensive Randall Ball. Well, we need to do a better job sustaining drives, getting into the red zone and scoring more points than the other team. It's pretty, pretty practical. And we got to close the gap in those other games. Thanks, coach. Thank you. Bear. Hey guys, this question is for, is for, skid me. I'm sorry. Tori. Yeah, I want to kind of stay on the topic of what D led was talking about. Dean was speaking to us last week on the need to develop a passion. He spoke specifically through the lens of talent acquisition and talent development. So my question for Terry is when it comes to the acquisition part of that, what is the blueprint of what y'all are looking for? Yeah, we're always looking for pressure players. You're always looking for cover corners. Like author said, it's a complimentary game. And so as we improve the roster and bringing competition at every position that's going to help when you're playing with leads, obviously you have more opportunities to rush and it's a complimentary game. So we have to improve the entire roster, but we're going to look at every avenue to bring in competition, whether we're talking about free agency, the draft after the draft, we're going to work hard to bring in players to compete. And one more for you, Terry. I know this roster turnover was something that we talked about earlier in the year and kind of how this roster was going to change a lot. And I was just kind of curious how you feel like the front office did providing players in season to kind of be slotted in to this active roster. I kind of think of guys like Anthony Rush, James Spotters. I was just kind of curious your thoughts on that and kind of how important that process will continue to be moving forward. Yeah, Tori, I appreciate that question and it's really twofold. I think the personnel department did a really good job. The pro department and bringing in players, but then the coaching staff into developing those players, getting them up to speed and implementing them and having the confidence to play them. Because those players, some of the players you mentioned and some other players helped us in all offense, defense, special teams. So being able to bring in players during the season, the coaching staff and the scouting staff, I think they did a really good job with that. And we're going to have to continue to do that and finding players however we can. And Tori, that's why it's such a collaborative effort. I've said it before and I'll say it again. And the way we operate here, I think the easy thing to do is, and have you seen this done a lot in this league, is you bring a player in and everybody wants credit for it.  There's so much work that goes in and you've got to be in sync because those guys, personnel department, they do a terrific job of trying to sort through the roster to see who's available in the spring. And then it's our job to make sure we have a vision for them and you've got to play them.  And that's why it's such a collaborative effort. You have to have a vision. You have to be in sync. So nobody's looking at here to jump in front of the parade because everything discussions we have daily. Terry and I and our staffs, it's about the vision of building this roster to get to a championship level and operate that way to win championships. And that's what we feel we're on the right path. Michael, how to follow up? Yeah, Terry, this is for you again when it comes to kind of decisions that might need to be made down the road on some of your own guys, whether it's Cordero or Foyer or Youngway. How much do you weigh maybe their familiarity now and what their price points might be versus kind of that cap situation that we were talking about before? Like, where does that balance for you in building this? Well, you go through that process again. It starts with meeting with the coaches and determining who you do want to proceed with. And that's the beginning of it. And then we go through the process of looking at their market value. And it does make a difference when a player is in your building. And ideally, the best former for agency is developing and signing your own players, players that because you're not guessing. We know exactly who they are in the building. And so that's important. So ideally, when it's players in your building, those are players you want to invest in. But there are a lot of variables and you want to look at the market value and making sure you're making the right decisions. But when you can do that, when you can reward your players in your building, that's something that we want to do. And this is, I guess, for both of you. I know, Arthur, I asked about Matt after the game and you said, you know, after the game, you didn't want to be penned into a corner with a couple more days.  It would be the same answer I gave you Sunday. The same answer I gave you in March or in April. I mean, we're always evaluating our roster.  I mean, that's not being objective and not trying to improve the roster. Same thing, you know, with Kyle Pitts or Jake Matthews or Grady Jarrett.  There's not going to be no State of the Union because it's a constant evolution. You got to look at it and you never want to pass up an opportunity to improve your football team. So I understand, you know, the headline you're seeking and what you're, and you got to ask a question, but the answer hasn't changed. Home team, give another shot. Yeah, we're still not getting audio. Charles. Terry, I appreciate you doing this. It's never too early to look ahead to the draft and I wondered if you could give us a little insight as to you and your team and how you, how soon do you start putting together a draft board and at number eight, do you feel like this is going to be a year where you go for best available, regardless of, regardless of position? Yeah, man, I appreciate you. And yeah, we've been, we've really had a draft board. It's really ongoing and you have a draft board at the beginning of the season and it changes as more grades come in and as players declare or whatever happens so that it's really a fluid thing. We've had a round of meetings. We have meetings. The next set of meetings are in February, so it's an ongoing process. And I think we've kind of talked about that draft process and that we always want to be a team that doesn't reach for needs and we go into the draft with needs and you know you want to feel those needs, but you always want to take the best player on the board and not reach for something. And I think we think that's how you make mistakes. So it's an ongoing process. The college staff has been grinding all year and now it's the point where the coaches are going to get involved in that process. It's going to be a collaborative effort to make sure we bring in the best players we can. And if I can follow up on Josh's question to you about Calvin and I understand you guys have been diligent and being sensitive to his needs, but of course you've got to be protective of the team's needs as well. And so when you say nothing has changed as you're looking at your team needs, do you have to assume that he is not available to you for 2022? Well, I wouldn't assume anything. Like I said, we handle each situation individually. There are so many variables we deal with. We're going to try to add to every position this offseason. So whatever player we're talking about, whether under contract, not under contract, we have to be prepared for everything. Mark Bradley? Yes, thank you. This is for Mr. Fontenot. Would you say that 7 and 10 is an accurate reflection of where your team was? Or do you think that that record was flattering or that you were actually better than 7 and 10? Well, it's funny because I read something at some point that said, talked about the point differential and how many games we should have won. And I think that says a lot about our team that would I really appreciate about our would author has built here, the coaching staff, the players that I do believe we're building a winning culture. We're not where we need to be. We don't want to be having this press conference right now. We want to be preparing for a playoff game. So we're not happy that we're not playing right now. That's going to be our charge moving forward. But I really believe everything that our head coach preaches about the culture and having a winning culture and being a smart, tough, competitive team. And you look at any game you can look in the fourth quarter where the game can be out of hand and we have players flying around competing. Those players were bought in. Those guys in the locker room love each other. They love the coaches and they really went out and competed. So there's probably some statistics that can tell you how good we were as a team and how many games we should have won. But I believe we're moving in the right direction and we're building that winning culture. And that's a credit again to art, the staff and the players. Thank you. Thank you. Chris room. Hey, Terry and either as y'all head into year two, how would you both of you define success in this next year when you're sitting here in next, you know, next year when January forever, whatever it is, how would you define success for for year two for y'all. For me, it's pretty simple. I mean, we'll be better than we are right now. And hopefully, like Terry just said, we're not having this press conference this time of the year. It's later in the year. So then that's the ultimate objective. I mean, for me, that's pretty clear cut. We continue to improve one more games next year, continue to get better. Like I said, our ultimate goal, you got to be the one in championship, not playing survival area. Sorry for you. Yeah, I agree. It's about without looking at scores in the game or records, it's about continued development and continued improvement. And again, that's something we saw throughout the year, continued development, continued improvement. We'll see that in the offseason. It's about developing and getting better. And that's our goal. That's our challenge to continue to get better. I guess to follow up with that then. So in year one, what were some of the challenges that you face this season that you've learned from that you'll apply in year two? For me or Terry? For both of y'all. Sorry about that.  We go back and look at the last year, almost 365 days now. There's a lot of things that are going on. It's been a big time transition year. We did through everything we had to compete to win, to change the mindset. I thought we made some pretty good strides. Obviously, we got a lot that we need to build on and improve. But it was a great challenge and going through it. You certainly, your lessons learned all the time, Chris.  Yeah. And one of the biggest challenges for me this year, I would say when you come into a new building, when you've been somewhere for a long time, you have relationships with everyone in the building. We kind of touched on this earlier and you're able to build those relationships and that makes the communication smooth. And yet here with the COVID restrictions with a lot of new people, you weren't able to build all those relationships as quickly as you'd like to. And that does affect things. And yet I'm excited about going into this next year where we have built more relationships. Hopefully we won't have all the restrictions that we have going into this offseason and we can continue to communicate in the right way. So I'm excited about going into this year and not having all those restrictions that we had last year. D-Led, we'll go to your follow-up. Yeah. Since the season's over, can we get an update on Matt Gano and if he's on track to be back next year or what's his status? Well, he's a free agent. And Matt, obviously we expected Matt to come back at some point in the year with that injury. That's why we handled the transaction the way we did and that didn't work out. But he's not, he's said to be a UFA. That's right. That's all. Michael. Yeah, Teri, I want to kind of get back to something you did on a little earlier. But when you were constructing this roster, when you look at how this season went, where do you think was the biggest, I don't know, miscue that you made when you were building this thing considering what you had to work with? Miscue, I don't know, we had a specific plan in building the roster and we wanted to structure it a certain way. And we obviously had a lot of one-year contracts this off-season that was part of that was because of where the cap was. And then we wanted to bring in, we brought in a lot of veterans this year that really helped this team, whether they're going to be here next year or not, that it's going to build dividends moving forward. I felt like this was a really close group and they really, we have young guys, we have veterans and so we love the way we constructed the roster this year. We've said it already. We don't want to be having this press conference right now. We want to be preparing for a playoff game. So we're going to bring in competition and continue to improve. So I wouldn't say miscue. We had a plan last year and we implemented that plan. We'll have one this off-season and we'll implement that. And also when it comes to the pass rush specifically, what do you like out of a pass rusher? What do I like out of a pass rusher? Well, Dean said in his press conference the other day about pass rushers and he said something like it's, you're not coaching it. They just figure out a way to get to the quarterback. There are pressure players, whether it's a, it can be an in, it can be a defensive tackle, a linebacker, a safety. They just figure out a way to get to the quarterback. They're pressure players. So there's different ways that they do it. There's different guys and different ways they do it. But you're just looking for pressure players. Thanks. I appreciate it, guys. Yes, sir. Thank you. Corey? Yeah, I just have one more for Terry. I was really hoping to kind of get your evaluation of this rookie class. How did their development in year one match the vision for, I guess, what you guys had for them when you picked them last year? Well, they played a lot. You look at it was Thompson League in terms of the amount of snaps our rookies, the amount of games they were active for, the amount of snaps they played, not just on offense or defense, but also in the kicking game, they contributed a lot. And that was our plan for them to come in and contribute and grow and develop. And obviously, rookies are going to, you're going to take lumps and it's not going to be perfect. There's going to be ups and downs. What I love about this rookie class is the mindset of the group. I believe we have competitive guys that fight and compete. And it's going to be a challenge for them to continue to develop even into this offseason, develop and get better coming into this next year. So we appreciate the fight that we got from that group. We believe they're wired the right way. Josh? This may be somewhat hypothetical. So forgive me.  Or is could you do it either way in your mind? Would you make the math work one way or the other? We're not going to speculate on anything regarding contracts or we're not going to go there. A couple of random ones. Isaiah Oliver, how is his rehab going? Does that complicate your decision on what you do there at all? Without talking about it because we have a number of players on IR that are free agents. So I don't want to start talking about every single player. But without talking about that, we make those decisions. We're aware of where all our players that are going through the IR process are. And some of them you'll wait until a certain period to sign them. And some of them, if you feel good about it, that we can sign them. So that wouldn't restrict a player being injured wouldn't restrict us from extending them. But I don't want to talk specifically about any players right now. And Arthur, one Jalen Hawkins didn't play much Sunday. Was he still recovering? I know he'd been on the COVID list. Was that some conditioning stuff or was that a performance issue? No, it wasn't a performance issue. Obviously, you know, let's always say it's not one size fits all and everybody was dealing with different things. And so it's where we felt he was at coming back from it. And that's why he played the amount of plays he did. Thanks. There I guess that's all the question requests we have. So appreciate you guys joining us today. Thank you. Thank you guys.


Hi everybody, Joe for jatsby's case breaks.com. Happy new release day. We got 2013 Panini prominence football one box random team number five coming at you 32 spot break no vet commons chip at the end of the break will Take all 32 customer names randomize them name on top. We'll get the stealers second name We'll get some break credit rest of the teams will get some some teams as well Big thanks to this group for getting in on it All the teams are in let's roll it and randomize it six and a one seven times For names and teams different second Second dice will be for the giveaway part, but for the break itself six and a one seven times. Good luck one two three four five six Males here and seventh and final time six and a one seven five time bye Mike Seven times four the teams one two Yeah, refer Ron's right. I Think this I think the schedule for the next probably year is going to be new release because it's going to be crazy just because of Just the pandemic supply chain issues all sorts of stuff has has really messed up the the New release calendar Here's the first half of the list right here and the second half of the list right here and let's sort All right, no trade windows in this we're just going to print this out and rip open that box They do suffer the consequences. I mean There's nothing nothing nothing they can really do they can't force it to happen. So The manufacturers the distributors the breakers such as yourselves would just have to Just have to grind it out. All right, there's prominence football. There's the checklist right there Soccer ain't popular in this country. Jay saying I Think you're wrong on that It's obviously not the biggest sport here, but it's one of the faster-growing sports major league soccer and the English Premier League Champions League stuff a lot of people are interested in that a lot of collectors too Right and a lot of collectors overseas the secondary market prices are pretty impressive. I think we have more EA I did I have not looked at our stock of Premier League, but I'm pretty sure we have more than the two cases just one base card on the bottom Could there be some surprises in here? Maybe it's March on Lynch to 199 and behind Robert Woods is Mike Lennon 55 out of 105 a little blast from the past rookie class letter going to Ryan Harold and the Buccaneers Travis Kelsey a rookie card and an E.J. Manual to 199 Travis Kelsey a rookie card going to the Chiefs That'll be for Stephen Kendrick and Robert Woods rookie card. Nice 81 out of 100 rookie Otto Rookie gridiron gems. Hopefully he gets well soon. That's Buffalo Bill's edition Joel There's this rookie card right here Andre Johnson Antonio Gates King Nick's to 199 And behind Geno Smith is Dennis Johnson rated rookie Otto 142 out of 210 not Andre Johnson But Dennis Johnson Houston Texans Brian Croft and of course Geno Smith right here. All right, so not bad But the whole point of this of course is who's gonna win teams or break credit So let's gather everybody here from top to bottom new dice new list and It's gonna be the top nine with teams Second name down will get hundred fifty dollars a break credit someone someone bought the Buccaneers basically that's the price of the Buccaneers All right, so new dice, let's roll it and randomize it four and a two six times Top nine after six will get something. Good luck one two three four Five and sixth and final time after six from ten on down sad times But I appreciate everybody giving this a shot Happy times though for the top nine because you've got a team in the next break Sean Maddock Sean D. Riley Logan M. Brian Croft Rosario Ryan Harold Rolando and Sean M Congrats to you So let's put your names in here So we'll put a little rooftop next to your name so you know you won that Rolando I'm gonna email you the spray credit as soon as I'm done with the video So Sean with the Steelers Ryan with Broncos Rosario with the Cardinals Brian with the Rams Logan M with the Seahawks Riley with the Titans Sean D with the commander Sean M with the Saints There you go. I'm Joe for jasperjasecasebrakes.com. I will see you in the next video for the next break. Bye


Okay, so let's start with the first hands-on. The Virgin STM32WB, when it comes from factory, it contains only FUS. There is no stack because the customer has to choose what he wants. So they will need to do it eventually. And we will show you a various way to do this. The nuclear boards, they are flashed with the Bluetooth stack. But it's already out of date. There has been a release of a new version since the mass market. And a thing I didn't say that even the FUS is upgradable. So we will do this as well. So let's unpack the boards. You've done that already. Just to summarize, the bigger board, we call it a nuclear. The smaller one, we call a dongle. So on a dongle, you will find a WB in a QFN48. There is no ST-link on the board. So the easiest way to program is with the system USB bootloader. So to put the device in the bootloader mode, we need to put this boot switch into the position 1. So this will make the microcontroller boot into system memory and connect in USB DFU mode. So what I'd like you to do is put the boot switch in the position 1 and execute the batch file. So the batch file is actually calling, is using KubeProgrammer, command line interface. And it's firstly erasing the old Bluetooth stack. It's upgrading the FUS. It's downloading. It's upgrading the Bluetooth stack. And then it uploads the transparent mode, which is this special firmware used with KubeMonitor RF. So there are actually four steps. When you plug in the dongle, the green LED should be off. If you have it on, then you need to turn the switch the other way. You need to put the switch on the other side. So the batch file is located in the hands on 1. And it's called dongle. If experienced an issue, there might be an old USB driver for the DFU. So in this case, it must be manually replaced. So this was just a quick exercise to upgrade the Bluetooth stack on the dongle. We could do the same thing with the nuclear. I suggest you do that after. But due to time constraints, we will continue with something else. So I'll go quickly through that. It's just connecting to the USB, putting the boot 0, tying the boot 0 to VDD, and then executing the other script. But the idea is exactly the same. So now, as I said, it can also be done with JTAG. So some customers, they don't want a USB interface or a UART interface, or they don't have it available on the PCB. So they want to flash everything with JTAG in production. So that's also possible. However, it's not a really mass market. So we have a project, which is a proof of concept. The source are integrated in your folders. It will be integrated in the Kube package in Q3. And it will become part of Kube programmer at the end of the year. So the idea is the same. We're using stlink. There are some log files to see or check for some errors.


So with the Madrid Open done and dusted, one of the biggest tournaments on the ATP WTA claycore calendar, and a little bit of extra rounds to play this year because of course it was an extended draw. We had some return champions getting the wins here and also some changes in the rankings but let's go have a look at who won last week. So only the two events last week starting with the WTA, of course, at the Madrid Open. It was Sabalenka getting her revenge over Shriyantek from losing in Stuttgart. 6-3-3-6-6-3 she wins her second Madrid Open title. And on the men's side, Elkraz also winning his second Madrid title, 6-4-3-6-6-3 against Strouf, who was a lucky loser making a final at this stage which is a little bit of history and Elkraz closes the gap on Djokovic at number one so some big wins for the world number twos this week. Alright, let's have a look at the players outside the top 10 that went up in the rankings this week. Starting with Strouf, he is now at a career high number 28 in the world, 37 spots higher than last week after that amazing run in Madrid. Also, Andy Murray, he's gone up 10 spots at number 42 after playing and winning a Challenger event this week so wasn't all the players in Madrid getting a boost? And Sharif, making it to the quarter-finals of this event, she goes up 16 spots to a career high number 43 in the world. So some players have played well in Madrid and also in the Challenger events during the second week of Madrid going up in the ranks. Players that went down in the rankings this week. Alexander Zverev, he's gone outside the top 20 now at number 22, six spots lower than last week after failing to make the final again in Madrid after what happened last year. He actually lost the same guy in Elkraz this week. So he's dropped down the ranks. Also, Alexandrova, she's gone to number 22 on the WTA rankings, five spots lower than last week. Again, losing points from last year's tournament after having a good run there. And Taikman, she's gone down 28 spots, number 58 in the world. Again, losing a lot of points from making the Madrid semifinals last year. So some players there that had a really good 2022 Madrid and able to keep their rankings high. All right, let's start with the WTA rankings now and a few changes, but no change at the top, which Fionte X staying at one, Sabalinga staying at two, Pagula at three, but Jabir unfortunately unable to play in Madrid. After the injury she sustained over in Stuttgart, she drops down three spots, losing a thousand points from last year's title down to number seven, allowing Garcia to go up to number four, Goff to number five, and Rabakena goes up to a career high number six. And another little change at the bottom of the rankings with Sacri going up to number eight in the world after making the semifinals in Madrid, pushing Kazakinda down to number nine and Caviteva, still hanging onto that top 10 spot for now. And of course, with Rome coming up next week, a lot of these players have a lot of the points to defend, including Fiontex, of course, the defending champion of Rome, and Jabir also has a final that she has to defend from last year. So we could see some more changes to the top 10 before the French Open starts. Looking at the race of the finals now and things are starting to take shape, Sabalinga still at number one though, almost 5,000 points, which is a ridiculous amount of points at this stage of the season. Rabakena still at number two, which Fiontex at three, Pagula at four, Benchanted at five, and a little bit of a change in the middle with Krijikovic going up to number six, pushing Caviteva down to number seven, Goff stays at eight, and Maria Sacri. She goes up seven spots into the top 10 of the race of the finals for the first time this year, up to number nine, pushing Azarenka down to number 10, and Lynette gets pushed out of the top 10 completely. So the top of the race of the finals looks pretty solid, but for those players sort of five and below, if you have a good week in one of these big tournaments, get a lot of points, you could really improve your chances. Over to the men's rankings now, and not too many changes, with Djokovic staying at number one, five points ahead of Elkras at number two, so Rome's going to be very interesting. A battle for number one happening over the next couple of weeks. Mervitav stays at number three with Rude at number four, just ahead of Sidney Pass at number five, Rubelev at six, with Rune at seven, Sinner's at number eight, but Felix O'Jallis seemed he drops down to number 10, making way for Fritz to go up to number nine. The only change in the top 10, that's because FA lost all his points, but he gained last year, so not too many changes there to the top 10 for the men, but of course, there is a big change potentially of the top of the rankings next week ahead of the French Open, remember. After Rome, the rankings and the seedings for the French Open will be locked, so a lot of these guys are playing for top four. Now there's a battle between Sidney Pass and Rude in the middle there, and of course that number one ranking and number one seeding at the French Open at stake. Going over to the race of the finals now, and we have a change at the top with Carlos Elkras, leapfrogging Djokovic and Medvedev to go up to number one in the race of the finals. 100 points ahead of Medvedev, he pushes down to number two, and Djokovic gets pushed down to number three, so those three guys locked up at the top, and a little bit of a change in the middle too with Sidney Pass going up one spot, pushing Sinner down to number five, so four and five changed their rankings. Very close behind at number six is Rublev with Fritz at number seven, and some more changes down the bottom with Hashinov going up to number eight after making it to the quarter-finals of Madrid, pushing Rune down to number nine. Paul comes back into the top 10 after getting to a challenger final last week, pushing Nori down to number 11 outside the top 10, so a few changes this week on the race of the finals as they were for the ladies, and again with Rome next week with a lot of points, and it takes one week to get into this top eight if you have a successful run in Rome next week, so interested to see how this plays out. So there you have it, after a huge two weeks of Madrid, we're finally done, but we're not done yet because we still have two more weeks, huge weeks with a thousand points on the line for the Rome winners, and the race of the finals is starting to heat up as well. Sabalenko on 5,000 points almost already, which is incredible. She's pretty much in the WTA finals at this stage. I think she's well and truly going to be there, but we're going to have a change maybe at the top of the rankings for the men with Djokovic only five points ahead of Elkras. Let me know down in the comments below. What do you think is going to happen in Rome? Do you think we're going to get a change to the rankings at the top of the men's in Rome? What do you think that we're going to maybe keep Djokovic at number one? He's going to have to defend the title, and I think Elkras has to pull out of Rome. That's the only chance he has, maybe, if the math plays out, but some massive changes on the cards over the next couple of weeks ahead of the French Open. And remember, seedings are locked. After Rome, the French Open seedings will be locked.


I have a great way for busy educators to learn in my online workshops. Before a workshop begins, educators become classmates in Google Classroom. They introduce themselves in a post or on Flipgrid. I post an instructional video on the first day of the workshop. That video introduces an optional assignment. Classmates share their assignments so that anyone can comment. The shareable link is posted in Google Classroom. Classmates view each other's assignments and offer encouragement and constructive feedback. So much creative genius is exchanged as classmates create, share, and comment. The next week, I post the second instructional video. I recap some of the creative genius from week one. I also answer questions that have been posted in Google Classroom and on Flipgrid. Week two's video has a new optional assignment. More creative genius is exchanged as classmates again create, share, and comment. Then another week, another video. This process continues through all the weeks of the workshop. The thing is classmates can post their assignments at any time. It's okay if classmates fall behind. The weekly videos and resources are there and the optional assignment can be completed at any time. Staying on track with the weekly pace is the best way to experience my workshops.  Classmates can catch up since the videos and posts stay online. And it happens. Some classmates don't catch up until after the class has concluded. That's okay too. The Google Classroom videos and assignments are never deleted. They remain online for years to come. Learning online doesn't have to be passive, solitary, boring, or rigid. I've taken care to design workshops where you can actively learn on a flexible schedule.


So, welcome everyone.  So, I'm Michael Albert, I'm a lecturer in the politics and international studies department. My research and teaching I focus mostly on global environmental politics and especially the politics of the climate crisis, I also teach on global security politics and I teach introduction to, to international relations. And so in this, in this, this brief lecture today, I'm just going to kind of give an overview of the global politics of the climate crisis. And so we're going to start by just giving a little bit of the background of the science because I, I assume not everyone has, I mean, obviously, most people are familiar with climate change but don't necessarily kind of have some educational background and understanding the, you know, the scientific basis of it. What makes this a crisis what are different ways of understanding it. But for the most part after giving giving kind of a brief overview of that I will shift to the global politics of it and so you know what are different ways of thinking about it politically what are the causes the political and economic causes of climate change and how should we address it and so it's going to be kind of a broad, a broad survey and it's going to introduce some, some theoretical concepts that probably not everyone, probably most people here won't be familiar with and I'll, you know, do my best to explain it but it'll be the kind of the kind of thing that many of you will learn more about if you, you know, pursue a politics or international relations degree at the university. So let's let's get into our lecture today about the climate crisis, but we should start by emphasizing and this is important to emphasize that we don't only confront a climate crisis, the climate it's one component of what's also what's often called the earth system. It's the earth system it refers to the interconnections between these different components of the earth, including its atmosphere the oceans, the biosphere, the, you know, ecosystems and biodiversity around the planet, the planets ice in the poles and the geology and the crust, the lithosphere. So there's these complex interactions between all these dimensions of the earth you know these are kind of immeasurably complex relationships and feedback loops.  So this concept that's pictured here is called planetary boundaries. This is often used to conceptualize these broader dimensions of the earth system crisis and so as you can see here the climate crisis it's kind of one dimension of that but then there's also the biodiversity crisis what you know this crisis of mass extinction with you know extinction rates being 1000 times more rapid than the kind of the background rate or the more common rate of extinctions that that is kind of more common in the earth's history. You can also see in the nitrogen cycle so you see in the red there, the nitrogen and phosphorus cycle this is because of the over application of fertilizers of synthetic fertilizers as part of industrial agriculture which leads to massive runoff of these chemicals which can lead to detrimental consequences especially for aquatic ecosystems. And so there's several other, there's several others including deforestation land use change ocean acidification so I'm not going to go into all these here but it's just important to recognize that you know climate crisis. It's not the totality of, of kind of the ecological crisis that we're confronting today. However, climate change is the most important dimension of this crisis, because all of the different dimensions of the earth system as well as human systems like the like the global economy are going to be most impacted by climate change so the climate crisis is going to have more. It's going to be the key determining factor in terms of what happens for the rest of the earth and for for humans ourselves. And so this graph here. Maybe some of you have seen something like this before. It provides a useful snapshot of what we are dealing with. So as you can see here, carbon dioxide so this this chart maps the kind of oscillation of carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere during the past several hundred thousand years. And as you can say, as you can see the current levels of CO2 are vastly higher than they've been in the last 800,000 years. And so you have to go back to between two and five million years ago to find a time in the earth's history when CO2 concentrations were this high. So the graph shows that it's regularly oscillated, you know you between around 200 to 280 parts per million so parts per million of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. However, today we've reached around 410. And so these higher periods I should say are associated with periods of warmth, more warm or wetter periods, whereas the periods of low concentration are typically associated with ice ages in the earth history. And so today we are vastly exceeding these levels that we've experienced in the last couple of millions of years. And this is of course overwhelmingly the result of humans burning fossil fuels, releasing, and combusting carbon, releasing to the atmosphere and creating a greenhouse effect as a result. And so of course, as we see in this graph as carbon concentrations have increased, we've seen a steady rise in average global temperatures.  We need to clarify here because probably not everyone's familiar with this, maybe some of you hear debates on you are here discussion of climate change that we need to limit climate change to one and a half degree Celsius, or two degrees Celsius or that today we've experienced a rise of one degree. And so just to clarify, what do we mean by this, we mean relative to pre industrial times, typically about 1850. So we'd say that the earth on average is about one degree hotter than it was around 1850. And earlier so basically around the time when we began to start burning fossil fuels coal at the time and mass. And we should also emphasize that these numbers like a one degree rise or two degree rise. These are global averages and so different parts of the earth different regions, they warm at different rates so warming over land, for example, is faster than over the oceans and warming is also much faster in the Arctic, the Arctic is much is warming, much faster than the rest of the planet. And so, so there's a lot of geographic unevenness but so one two degrees this means kind of global average temperature rise. And so this graph here on the right. This shows the observed warming that we've seen over the past almost 200 years, compared to what would be the case, if not for humans burning fossil fuels. So as you can see if humans had not been releasing fossil fuels, there would be these oscillations but basically in the green there, basically around a steady, a steady median whereas instead we've seen this continuous rise to over over one degrees warmer now. So moving on. So this striking graph here this shows us the trajectory of emissions growth over the past two centuries. And so, as we can see, emissions really began to accelerate so they were growing pretty steadily, ever since the early 19th century. But since, since mid 20th century since 1950 they really began to accelerate. And so this period after 1950 is often called the period of the great acceleration and so this was kind of this mass boom and consumer culture and the rise of the car the automobile mass consumption, especially in America and Europe and then you know these kinds of ways of life models of consumption getting exported to other parts of the world. And so we see this massive growth in emissions, since then, and even since 1990 and so it's interesting climate governance, global climate governance largely began in the late 80s, early 90s, this is when scientists began to recognize you know this is a serious problem that we need to, we need to begin curtailing emissions use and phase out fossil fuels. But only emissions have only continued to exponentially rise since then, even after we've started to try governing the problem. And so we should note that emissions, they did go down a little bit they went down about 6% back in 2020 because of course there was this major economic shock resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdowns and so this led to a little dip in emissions. And ever since then, you know because of the recovery, we've had a largely fossil fuel based recovery from that crisis I mean you know the recovery is very uneven, still ongoing and it's being called into question by the current crisis in Ukraine and Russia, but still, we've seen there's been, there was a brief dip in emissions but it's continued to go up over the last couple years and so we're continuing on this upward emissions curve, but the problem we don't have to just stabilize emissions if we're going to stop the earth from getting hotter. Emissions need to be go completely to zero, we need to bring them completely to zero if we're going to prevent the earth from getting even hotter. I should emphasize a very, very critical points that we need to emphasize is that total emissions total annual missions it only gives us part of the story. If we look at total historic emissions of different countries different regions since 1800, then we can see that the countries of the global north, particularly North America and Europe, as well as Australia and New Zealand and Japan, that they are overwhelmingly responsible for the climate problem. Collectively the global north accounts for more than 90% of emissions that have been released into the atmosphere since the 19th century, while the countries of the global south collectively only account for about 8%. So a relatively tiny proportion. We should, however, emphasize that responsibility for emissions as this graph shows this graph is a little more complicated but basically this graph shows that emissions they're not only distributed, unequally between different states, but they're also distributed unequally by class relations within states so basically you know rich people the richest income bracket, they release much more emissions than the poorest income brackets. So in this graph here this graph shows us that the richest 1% of the global population was responsible for 15% of cumulative emissions between 1990 and 2015. The next, the richest 10% on the other hand so this includes the richest 1%. So the richest 10% of the global population was responsible for over 50% of emissions during that time so 52%. On the other hand the next, the next 40% of the income ladder was responsible for roughly 40% of emissions, whereas the poorest 50% of the global population only responsible for 7% of emissions so major disparity there between the carbon footprint of the richest 10% and the richest 50% of the population. And so both these graphs in the previous slide and in this one they demonstrate a fairly obvious but a very important point that not all of humanity is equally responsible for the climate crisis, rather responsibility of climate is highly skewed following in a cloud inequalities of class nationality as well as race and gender all these socially constructed different differences that shape positions of power. Also shape, you know, relative carbon footprint.  I mean, unfortunately it's kind of a tragedy that those who are that the countries that are least responsible for the crisis, mostly countries from the global south are also the most tend to be the most vulnerable to it and that's both for reasons of geography, because they're positioned geographically in areas that are going to get hit hard by various climate impacts including heatwaves drought extreme weather hurricane cyclones. These kind of things, but also because they tend to be lower income, less resources to adapt and this is the result of historic and ongoing inequalities that are kind of structured into the global economy. So this map map here of vulnerability this comes from the most recent IPCC report the intergovernmental panel of climate change which kind of gives this regular updates on the status of climate science and so this report just came out a few weeks ago. And we should emphasize that these kind of maps of vulnerability, they're very flawed and imperfect they, they should not be taken as kind of holy risks, you know these, these are very imperfect subjective selective and partial maps that don't capture all of the, the vulnerabilities. And we should also emphasize that this map, it focuses on country level vulnerability. And so it doesn't capture unequal vulnerabilities within within countries and so for example, the United States, or the UK even you know the UK, according to this is less vulnerable than the US, but you know there's major inequalities within the UK and within the US. And so you know, and, and so lower income people, especially living in climate vulnerable areas like along coastlines or in floodplains areas that are more vulnerable to flooding mass flooding events will be much more vulnerable relative to the rest of the population. And there's very differential vulnerability both between and within states and this map only captures between states, but basically it shows us here that sub Saharan Africa in the darker orange, as well as India, Western China, also parts of the East, parts of also parts of South Africa, or sorry, South South America, parts of these regions are projected to be the most vulnerable to impacts like extreme heat drows and reduced water flow. And also the small islands pictured here this in the East in the Pacific regions there also very vulnerable to sea level rise, it's expected that if we have a couple meters of sea level rise by the end of the century, then many of these low lying island states like the Maldives, Kiribati, Tuvalu are expected to be inundated which would make it very difficult if not possible for these island, island states to adapt. But we should also emphasize that this this map can give the impression that certain states like Canada, like Australia, like Europe, it can give the impression that these states are not vulnerable to climate change but that would be very that would be very misleading, like as many of you are probably aware of Australia, it recently suffered these catastrophic historic floods. A couple years ago it suffered these historic bushfires that, you know, burned across many acres of land killed many animals, as well as humans. And so we've seen similar wildfires in Canada, Europe has faces many impacts as well like very lethal heat waves. For example, there have been lethal heat waves in Europe that have only gotten worse in the last couple of decades. So no region of the planet is going to get spared the effects of climate change it will impact everyone to some extent but the question it's it's this map at least give some sense of the distribution of vulnerability that is expected from climate change but ultimately you know these are their uncertainties these are based on model climate model projections that have a lot of uncertainty built into them so so we don't we can't say for sure what these what the distribution of vulnerability will be but we can expect with with large degree with you know relative certainty that countries in the global south are going to be hit harder at least in the earlier phases, then then rich countries in the global north. Okay moving on it's worth taking a quick look at a more fine grained projection of climate vulnerability in Africa. And so this is a composite map that ranks vulnerability levels, according to a combination of the expected climate impacts population densities, and there are options about community resilience and governance capacities. And so as you can see here, the highest levels of vulnerability are also are projected in and around the Sahel region, stretching from Somalia through Nigeria, and to Guinea and Sierra Leon. The Democratic Republic of Congo and Mozambique also projected to be at very high risk and it in Mozambique in particular we've seen this it's gotten hit success by these very major cyclones in succession from each other there was cyclone E die in 2018, followed by later cyclones happening just a year or two later which has made it more and more difficult for people to build back from these previous disasters. But one of the things we should know one of the things that I find most interesting about this map, it's not necessarily the distribution of vulnerability that it projects, but rather it's the politics and the geo strategic interests behind this map. And so, as I said there's no doubt that Africa is one of the most vulnerable regions to climate change. But who is funding this research who's funding this research and the vulnerability in Africa. So you might not be some of you might not be surprised to learn that this mapping project was funded by the US Pentagon so the defense establishment in the United States, which is concerned with anticipating future sources of social unrest and instability. In this sense, you know, the US state and other other military establishments around the world are taking a major interest in how will climate change impact vulnerability in many of these regions, not necessarily out of a humanitarian impulse but because they want to know what are the possible security risks that they perceive to their countries that may emerge from, from greater climate instability in this region, or in these different regions so there's an interesting, like, there's interesting and problematic, you know, geo strategic interest behind these often behind these kinds of mapping exercises. Okay, so now we're going to shift gears a bit now we're going to discuss different theoretical perspectives in the context of international relations on how we should think about and address the climate crisis. And so as I said I recognize that most of you here won't be familiar with these different theoretical perspectives and this is something that you would learn more about in an introduction to IR course, but I'm going to keep things very simple here. And so we should also ask you know because many of you might be wondering you know what the heck is theory what do we mean by theory. Why do we need theory. And so I'll give kind of a very basic overview here. One way to think about theory a way that I think is a useful way to think about it. It's a lens. It's like a pair of glasses that we put on, and it enables us to see certain things more clearly. It enables us to identify certain patterns or to see certain causal relationships in the world, and it can also obscure other things. And so each theoretical framework it's like a different pair of glasses that we put on the glasses and then the world appears to us in a different way we see certain things, and we may it may obscure other things. And so this, this, this, this picture from this movie called we live it kind of gives a useful metaphor. A description of kind of what we mean by theory. And so as you can see the main character here he puts on these glasses, and then suddenly the world appears differently to him he can see into the nature of things. In this case we can see we can say he's, he's putting on what we could call it kind of a Marxist feminist lens.  Kind of telling everyone to do their parts do your parts in reproducing a hetero patriarchal capitalist order. And so that's that's kind of what we mean by theory we put on the glasses that we see the world in a particular way. And in the same sense in the context of climate change, different theoretical lenses, they help us to see the causes of and possible solutions to climate change in different ways or you know how how should we respond to climate change. And so yeah if you put on the lens it's going to highlight certain ways of thinking about the climate crisis and how we should respond, while also obscuring other possible ways of thinking about it other possible responses. So let's start with realism. So realism. It's a theoretical lens in international relations that it highlights the struggle for power between states. In the realist view, they see you know the international politics is kind of a dog eat dog world that states they're mainly just looking up for themselves they're kind of pretending they're they're interested in maximizing their own power vis a vis states and they're simply seeking to protect their own security so it's kind of a brutal pessimistic view of international politics which is just to say that you know we just states just got to look out after themselves. The strong do what they must, or the strong do what they will so like stronger more military, terribly powerful states, they're just able to get their way in the world through the through brute military force, whereas weaker states, they just kind of have to suffer the consequences they're not able to, to shape their fate in the same way. So how do, how do realists how do realists think about the climate crisis. So as I suggest here there are two different ways that realists think about the climate crisis. This is what we can call adaptationist. And so by adaptationist we mean that they're not interested in actually solving the crisis, they do not care about actually bringing down emissions. Rather, they are, they are more concerned with how states can prepare to defend themselves against the threats posed by climate change, and how to improve their relative power position their relative geopolitical power in a climate changed world. So this is what I mean it's interested in adaptation, rather than mitigation, rather than bringing down emissions. And so for example, this can mean taking advantage of the resources and the shipping routes that are opened up in the Arctic, as it melts and so, so from this from a kind of pure realist geostrategic perspective. In states like, like, like Russia, for example, or the US they might say like oh we can actually benefit from climate change because it opens up the shipping routes it opens up opportunities for us to exploit fossil fuels and mineral resources in the Arctic giving us easier access to it and so this is kind of one way that this form of thinking can take. And so this picture from the left here this is from a US military exercise that was carried out in the Arctic, because here the thinking among these military agencies is that as the Arctic melts that you know there's going to be more competition between states over access to the Arctic and so between, between Arctic states like the US Canada, Russia and China the idea is that they're going to be increased competition for those resources and so that the region is being militarized as a result or you know military bases are being developed and military troops deployed to this region. So this kind of this kind of thinking this kind of adaptationist thinking about climate change, we can say it's common among certain elements of the US military, as well as Russia, like we can say that Putin, for example, he expects that and many people in Russia, expect that Russia may actually benefit more from climate change at least compared to other states so they don't have much of an interest or at least for Putin. See, he doesn't think that Russia has an interest in mitigating the crisis because he thinks that Russia may actually benefit from it. And this was also this was very common in the US under the Trump establishment, in particular, and so it's important to note here that there are figures like Trump like right wing politicians who often they often use the rhetoric of denialism. I wouldn't say like oh climate change you know it's a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese or you know this is the kind of rhetoric they use, but in reality, people like Trump they know that climate change is real. But they in reality they take what we could call an adaptationist realist approach so you know they, they, they recognize, you know, they're not dumb I mean maybe they are in some ways, but they know that the crisis is real but the question for them is not you know they're not interested in actually addressing the problem, but how do we adapt and try and achieve maximum power or achieve hegemony or control the dominant position in the international system in a climate changed world. That's really, that's really you know their main goal. Well, we should also note so I also I also hear say that we can also identify realist mitigationists. And so this this perspective is maybe a bit less common. But there are people who kind of from a realist perspective that they say actually we need to dramatically reduce emissions, because the thing here is that realists, they say that security survival for states is the ultimate imperative. The goal of any states should be to survive to protect its national security. And so from this perspective. A realist could say and so Anatole the Evan is, if some of you want to follow up you know this he gives an example of this kind of argument, he would say that if states want to survive, then it's in their interest to dramatically bring down the climate change because they may not survive a radically climate changed world and so a realist mitigationist would be very critical of an adaptationist or someone who thinks that we can just adapt to whatever climate change happens. And it's worth noting here that even within a single theoretical perspective, it's possible to come to different conclusions on how one should respond to climate change. And so just which just kind of goes to say, you know, things are complex and there's different ways of thinking, even within a single theoretical approach because there's different tendencies within any given theoretical lens. So I think it's worth briefly thinking about how do realists think about the renewable energy transition, because this, this is a, it's a, this is very relevant right now, especially in the context of the, the Ukraine, Russia conflict which kind of raises questions about energy the geopolitics of energy and the kind of questions that are raised by the shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy which is going to have major implicate it already is having major implications for international politics and it will continue to do so. And so we should remember that fossil fuels especially oil has been central to world order since the 19th century, so you know control over oil, especially Middle Eastern oil which is the largest largest set of reserves of oil reserves in the world, you know that this has been central to the to the Constitution of World Order and patterns of military intervention, ever since the 19th century. And so then a big question is, and so this is the kind of question that a realist would be interested, they would ask how will the renewable energy transition reshape the balance of power between states by balance of power this basically means relative power position so like will China become more powerful will it will boost China's relative power position compared to other states like the US and Europe, you know how what new forms of competition between states will it create. So, I identify here for four issues that are worth exploring that are kind of a realist would look at and this is coming, you know how how an international relations approach would think about the renewable energy transition. So first, it's the issue of interstate competition over renewable energy technologies and so like new technologies like electric vehicles, wind and solar energy, battery storage technologies. So these are all these are all kind of new technologies they're new industries of the future that are going to you know potentially bring major profits for the for the countries that that dominate in the innovation and the export of these technologies. So, who will be the major innovators that are going to win the patents, and then gain the most market share globally and thus reap major profits and influence as a result. So China currently dominates the production of solar panels, wind turbines and electric vehicles so China produces something like 60 to 70% of the world's solar and wind exports and battery exports. But most of the technology patents belong to American and European companies who have been kind of the main. Some Japanese companies as well who have been the main innovators in these industries, but China has taken the lead in mass producing and exporting these things to the rest of the world. Another issue is mineral supply chains. So renewable energy technologies, like solar and wind energy, for example, they are very mineral intensive. So they rely on these minerals like nickel cobalt lithium rare earths copper manganese, many others. And so it creates new forms of dependence on mineral imports. And so because these are these are all critical components of renewable energy technologies. And so as you can see this is this is this graph in the top left here shows that China dominates the renewable energy mineral supply chain. And as you can see it controls the processing of of 80% of the world's rare earth minerals, almost 60% of its lithium over 60% of its cobalt, nearly 40% of its nickel and copper. As a result, there's many strategists like kind of realist informed strategists in the US, and in Europe, they're very concerned they're saying you know this is not good for our relative power position if China has this stranglehold over the world's mineral minerals that are key to the renewable energy transition. So you see in the US under Biden and and the EU in its green deal. It wants to try and ramp up its own domestic production of these minerals, so that it's less dependence on China so this is a key area of competition or at least realists would frame this as kind of a key area of competition. Another issue that a realist would look at the implications for contemporary petro states or states whose whose revenues are highly dependent on fossil fuel income. So this includes states like Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Libya, the Republic of the Congo and others, which is many of them are lifted listed in this chart here on the bottom left. In this chart, it brings together the level of state dependence on fossil fuel revenues as like a percentage of their GDP, as well as the total size of their GDP. So this this chart assumes that the states in the upper, the upper left quadrant that they're going to be most vulnerable to the energy transition, because they derive the most percent of their GDP from fossil fuels, and they have the they have the income that they could spend on transitioning to you know trying to diversify their economies to you know derive income from other sources that aren't based on fossil fuel exports. And so according to this map here, East Timor, Libya, Iraq, the Republic of Congo are the most vulnerable. And as you can see states like Russia and Saudi Arabia so Saudi Arabia derives a much higher percentage of its GDP from oil exports, but it also has a larger economy overall so the ideas that Saudi Arabia, at least in principle, it has a lot of revenue that it could devote towards diversifying its economy away from oil and this is what it's currently trying to do. And so Russia has let it derives less of its GDP. Not only fossil fuels but still a significant percent at like around 10 to 15%. And so of course this is why you know there's, it's both. Many states have been pushing for a ban on oil and gas exports or imports from Russia and so the UK and US have done this, but it's very difficult for Europe to do this kind of thing, especially states like Germany who get like 40% something of their gas from Russia, which makes it very difficult to pose a ban on these energy sources. So I'm going to leave it there. It's worth also noting that military power itself is run by fossil fuels currently and so there's also this question of can we decarbonize military power? How will the renewable energy transition shape the balance of military power? So this is also an important question that realists would ask. Okay, so moving on, let's shift to the liberal position on climate change. So the concept of liberalism, this is a very complex concept that can mean different things in different contexts. So it can sometimes be confusing to people when they hear one idea of what we mean by liberalism and they're like, oh, I thought liberalism meant something else. And because in the United States, for example, liberalism tends to mean something different than it means in Europe and in other states. But in the context of international relations theory, liberalism, it refers to a way of seeing the world that highlights the potential for cooperation and mutual gains between states. So mutual gains basically means that both states can benefit together by engaging in cooperative relationships. So realists tend to see the world as kind of a zero sum competition that one states gain is at the expense of other states. Whereas for a liberal, they're more optimistic about the potential for cooperation between states to solve global challenges. So in this sense, from a liberal perspective, or if we put on a liberal lens, then we see we're more optimistic about the potential to cooperatively address climate change that we see climate change as a common threat to humanity and that we need international agreements like the Paris Agreement, which was signed in 2015 to cooperatively govern the global economy to phase out fossil fuels. The liberal position it can also be described as a form of green capitalism. So by green capitalism, we basically mean the belief that to solve climate change that it doesn't mean we don't need any radical system change. Rather, we simply need to adopt key policy reforms that would enable the global economy to phase out fossil fuels. And the key policy reform here is to put a price on carbon. And so there's different ways this can be done, whether through a carbon tax and economy wide carbon tax that raises the cost of fossil fuel products relative to non fossil fuel products, or an emissions trading system like what the European Union has. China has also recently implemented emissions trading system. So we're not going to get into the details of these policies here which are very wonky, but the key claim is that by internalizing so called internalizing these costs, or accounting for the costs of climate change in these market transactions that market actors consumers and investors will begin to shift their consumption and investment decisions away from fossil fuels towards zero or low carbon technologies. And so we can say that overall this this approach is largely concerned with securing global capitalism from the threats posed by climate change. And so it tends to be critical of perspectives emphasizing climate justice, which I'll talk about in just a second, or the need to address, you know, historic injustices, because from a liberal or kind of centrist perspective. I would say that you know this overly politicizes the issue. The key problem here we simply need to get carbon out of the system, we simply need to get rid of fossil fuels, transition to a zero carbon economy, so that we will all survive because it's a common threat to us all.  We just got to focus on the root of the problem which is, you know, getting rid of fossil fuels. So in contrast, now let's shift to the critical perspectives. So there's many different kinds of critical theory approaches, which includes Marxism, post colonialism, feminism, critical race theory, and there's others as well. And so what these approaches what these theoretical approaches share when you put on a critical theory lens that it means you want to, it shares a desire to challenge the status quo. And other approaches like the realist and the liberals, they simply accept that the world is a given way that the power relations that structure the world that they just kind of accept that that's the way the world is, we have to act within the constraints of that world. Whereas critical theory approaches, instead they want to denaturalize the state of things they want to challenge the status the status quo, and promote alternative visions of world order that promote the struggle for social justice. So these kinds of these approaches share some core principles. So first is that they they're not simply aiming to secure capitalism, but they want to transform the system itself. And so hence the slogan system change not climate change, very common to these movements. And so this can what they mean by system change though can mean different things you know this can mean a green new deal which is basically kind of a more egalitarian more regulated form of capitalism. Ecosocialism, you know, completely post capitalist alternative de growth when we veer post development. These are all kind of ways of getting at a different kind of economy that's not organized around profits, but instead organized around meeting people's needs sustainably so creating a very different kind of economy. And so a key principle here is that these these approaches foreground the principle of climate justice. What do you mean by climate justice. This is a can this is a multi dimensional concept, it can mean different things, but we can roughly define climate justice as a way of responding to climate change that directly addresses and mitigates past and present injustices. And so we can define different things whether foregrounding relations of class, race, gender, imperialism and colonialism that have created the kind of world that we have today.  And so apparently the product of these systems of capitalism colonialism, you know white supremacy, hetero patriarchy, they would say we cannot disentangle the problem from these systems of power. And so if we're going to address the problem in an equitable way, we also simultaneously have to address these systems of power. And the key principle here that these approaches share is to say that climate solutions do not necessarily promote social justice. So even things like renewable energy simply accelerating deployment of renewable energy solar and wind, certainly we have to do that. By itself that does not guarantee a more socially just world, because many climate solutions. Today, they may continue these same processes of dispossession and exploitation, not only exploiting workers, but also displacing indigenous communities potentially to build wind farms. Or as we noted earlier remember that the renewable energy transition it's going to require a major increase in mineral extractivism. And so this this graph this chart here in the upper right. It shows that lithium extraction is going to have to increase by 42 times higher than contemporary levels. Graphite's going to have to increase 25 times above contemporary levels, and so on and so on. There's going to have to be a massive increase in extractivism and so this can have very socially damaging consequences, just in the same way that we've seen these extractivist conflicts around the world, mostly in the global south not only in the global south where you know you've had indigenous rural communities fighting against extractivist companies like mining companies fossil fuel companies to protect their rights to their land to clean water clean environments. And so these same kinds of struggles are going to are going to emerge in the context of the renewable energy transition because of the met the major increase in extractivism that we can expect. And so already we've seen major struggles against this and so the bottom the bottom left picture this is a struggle in Chile against lithium extraction because lithium extraction is very ecologically damaging very water intensive. And then the right this is from a recent struggle in Serbia against Rio Tinto one of the major mining companies against proposals to develop a lithium mine. And so the basic the basic point here I don't have time to go into all these different policies. But the key point is that climate solutions are not necessarily just solutions. And so, if we focus on just we just got to deal with climate change we can't worry about justice concerns, then the danger is that we then promote solutions that then merely reinforce the same forms of historic and ongoing injustice in the in the contemporary global economy. I'll just quickly move to a conclusion. And so, and so here I'm kind of giving my own sort of personal personal views here which you know you're all welcome to agree with or to disagree with. But so I would say that a climate justice lens is needed in order to illuminate how the causes of and solutions to the climate crisis are inherently shaped by power inequalities and a historic and an ongoing forms of exploitation and oppression. So from this view you know climate change it's inherently deeply political. So it doesn't make any sense from this view to say that oh we don't want to pull it over politicize the issue because it's already inherently inescapably political. However, we also need to engage with existing realities. So the fact that we live within a capitalist system that's very entrenched at least in the current context, especially in rich countries in the global north. There's the fact of geopolitical competition between states and this is becoming more prevalent now with the Ukraine Russia crisis in Europe trying to ramp up military spending to because it perceives the security vulnerability. And so these kind of these. This makes it hard to advance radical climate action these conditions. And so this question how do we work within the constraints of the existing world order, while struggling for a climate justice future. And you know this is a tough question there's no there's no good answer and it kind of poses this question of this relation between reform and revolution, on the other hand. And I mean, I think that we need to, we need to challenge this binary we need to think between between the seams of this binary in order to think about how we can advance a climate justice future. And if we do that concretely, you know that's beyond the scope of this lecture but I think it's, I hope it's something that you will all be, or many of you will be thinking about and working on in the future. Okay, so I'll stop there. I'll stop sharing. Now I'm happy to take questions. Okay, thank you for that Michael that was very interesting and I'm sure the participants agree. And we've only got a couple of minutes here if any students have any urgent questions or queries. I will also highlight that we do have a live chat session which is on the 13th of April. If anyone has any queries questions or queries, more broadly about so us about their application requirements anything like that then we'll be able to answer them during that session. And we'll be sharing those details, along with the recording of this session over the coming weeks so just keep an eye out for that in your inbox. But I'll give it one or two moments here so if anyone has any comments or questions. If not we can we can wrap up the session there. I have a question in the chat here from Pia so what is the sustainability Academy think of circular economy. So I don't know about the sustainability Academy, I will say this concept of the circular economy I mean that's an important it's an important concept so it refers to basically dramatically increasing recycling. An economy and in which waste simply accumulates just kind of throw it out in the landfills. Instead it becomes inputs and other industrial processes it gets reused much more dramatically. And so this is a very important strategy to reduce extractivism for the renewable energy transition so if we're able to reuse many of these minerals like you know when when solar panels when wind turbines are at the end of their lifespan if we're able to recycle many of those minerals, then it'll reduce the pressures to increase extractivism and so it'll reduce the pressures that would then fall on, you know, on communities in these extractive zones as well as ecosystems. But one of the big questions here is, if we live, if we are still within a capitalist system that relies on endless growth that needs to keep growing in order to maintain stability. The issue is, would a circular economy go enough, go far enough. I mean, so there's the question. Many people would say that we can only go so far with these kind of strategies if the economy just keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger requiring more and more energy more and more materials that they say recycling circular economy would help, but it would get overwhelmed by the tendency for the economy to just get bigger and bigger. And so there's different views there that there is that there is a debate to be had there but yeah it's it's an important concept to bring up in this context of the renewable energy transition. Okay, so there's question from SK in the chat. So I wonder what to which extent policy pathways will be taught like carbon border adjustments. Also, there's only one module on energy aspects such as feed and terrace or other mechanisms of energy economics be put into. Yeah, good question so yeah within. So there is, yeah, the class taught by Harold headbomb which goes a bit more into the specifics of energy and climate policy and so yeah I don't I don't know the specifics of that class because I don't personally teach that class but I am confident that yeah there's like carbon border adjustment taxes carbon pricing the debates on that and also like renewable energy, you know policies to increase renewable energy deployment. Those, those would be covered in that class. Yes. So I'm not sure exactly what you mean but if by capitalizing you mean like kind of using a capitalist profit driven logic to promote sustainability goals. In my view, I would say, yes, I think that you know the profit motive, it can, it can harness, it can harness economic activities and investment to a certain extent to, you know drive the shift to renewable energy, but if the if the focus is primarily on profit, rather than broader goals not just addressing climate change but also like social well being, then many of these capitalist strategies like I've said can still have can still have damaging consequences and the renewable energy can still help by rapid by ramping up extractivism it can have very, it can have major consequences for biodiversity, for example, and so it's a it's a reason why it's important to think about the ecological crisis in a multi dimensional way that even if we successfully address climate change. It does not mean that we will necessarily successfully address the biodiversity crisis the mass extinction crisis, deforestation, ocean acidification or some of these other planetary boundaries that I alluded to. Okay, if you wouldn't mind answering just the last question I think there was one additional one in there from the question about yeah extractivism. Yeah, and then we'll leave it there. And if anyone has any further questions then I don't suppose would like would you prime my sharing your email address perhaps and yeah sure. Yeah, so there are other questions like like I see Tolu Lopez also asked a question which yeah feel free to email me since I don't, since I don't have time to get into them all here but yeah what do we mean by extractivism extractivism simply means that you're extracting primary materials from the earth. So this can refer to primary energy extraction like like extracting coal, extracting oil and gas, but it can also mean minerals like extracting lithium, extracting silver gold. Many people also use it like deforestation to create to you know, extract timber resources. So any any practice through which you are, you know degrading earth systems in order to extract resources that then ultimately get sold into circuits of capital accumulation to, you know, to fund the economic growth basically so yeah so extractivism it's a broad concepts in that sense to refer to all these forms of you know resource extraction from the earth. Perfect well thank you again Michael for giving your time up today for delivering that great session and to our participants for joining. Like I said we will share the recording and if you do have any follow up questions do reach out to Michael. Without saying I hope we hope to see some of you on the course soon and it's very soon, and I wish you a lovely rest of the day as well. Thank you everyone. Yeah great thanks everyone and thanks Rachel for organizing.