"Silver Bullet vs. Silver Buckshot": More questions regarding the Dan Kammen Interview

In watching the video interview with Dan Kammen, I was most struck and interested by his commentary on the “silver bullet vs. silver buckshot” approaches to climate change. I was specifically intrigued by how Kammen identified that the solution is not a one miracle technological solution like many think and hope, but rather a series of innovations and advancements that will contribute to improving the state of our Earth and climate. With all of that being said, I would have maybe gone off on this tangent idea a little bit more and discuss his phase of “silver buckshot” and what that means in terms of how scientists are currently combating climate change. Are there any notable breakthroughs going on that are contributing to this conglomerate of advancements that would support this way of thinking about the solution trajectory of climate change? Kammen also highlights how theory plays a significant role in sparking changes like the simple idea of how it is “better not to waste” and by utilizing the momentum behind these theories to change public mindsets and shifts to more eco-friendly practices. Learning about this perspective from Kammen, I would ask a follow-up question to this idea to ask about his opinion on other climate change theories and the feasibility to implement these theory-based changes on a more national and global scale? What would it take to make the uncertainties of solutions and theories more certain and widely accepted by the public to enact concrete changes? I was also curious about the ideas about “performance contracts” and if this would be able to be implemented in cities in the U.S. and also why it hasn’t already been put into practice in the U.S./more widely if it has not only financial benefits but also positive environmental implications?