I forwarded this to several friends, all of whom give me a hard time when I send around 'depressing' or 'negative' information. So, in the spirit of trying to keep my friends and maybe open communication, I don't do it as often as I'd like. I've never NOT believed in the urgency of the climate crisis -- maybe I'm just predisposed to high anxiety -- and I could no more pretend that it's not happening than pretend that I can no longer go outside often for months at a time in south central Texas... Here's what I said as an intro to your (per usual!) excellent piece of writing:
"I choose Bill McKibben most often to read about climate. While he echoes other writers with his message, he's a little bit less frantic; I suspect that's because he's been in this field, trying to get people to take climate change seriously, for 35 years.
I hope you'll read this as it's a marker of where we are. I believe that we are obligated, particularly to future generations, to at least make note of that and to take it in regardless of how frightening it might be. In the spirit of end-of-the-year summaries, he starts out:" [and then I quote most of your 1st 2 paragraphs].
Thanks for this great piece; I hope something will click into place in time within our collective consciousness.
I imagine most people who do not want to feel depressed by reading serious news about climate change, will be truly and deeply depressed when one of these catastrophic climate events happens to them.
It's not that simple, I think. There are many many people -- and I've met some of them -- who just don't read/pay attention to news because they're too busy raising children, working multiple jobs, etc. and those people don't really understand that climate change is a thing vs. just regular cycles of weather... there are also other many many people who believe in climate change but are so overwhelmed by it that they just return to their religious faith or addictions or that lovely (and sometimes useful psychological mechanism) denial. What can I do, they say? And, that's not illogical; climate change has been well-known and somewhat well-;prophesized since the 70s and here we are. Human beings just don't change until they have to. Maybe that's an adaption, evolutionarily? I don't know.
I understand that many people are overwhelmed, and they need to live their lives and take care of their children; but the future for everyone, and especially for the younger generations, is going to be deeply affected by climate change. It’s better to face that now rather than later.
Good stuff Bill. As a journalist writing on climate change since 1985 - including for The Times from 2000 through 2016 - I strongly endorse your critique of how news media hyperfocus on novelty (new science, which is implicitly provisional) and conflict - the battles through which science progresses, which are often interpreted by the public as, "Oh they don't really know, move on." A few weeks ago I tried to nudge #SustainWhat readers past the debate on the Hansen et al acceleration paper and will continue to press the case that #realityisbadenough: https://revkin.substack.com/i/138517402/heat-around-a-stark-new-climate-paper
Andy, you’ve made a career out of downplaying the consequences of anthropogenic climate change, so help us out here, please explain why you don’t think everyone in the world should be scared out of their wits over the unprecedented and unexplained rapid increase in global ocean and air temperatures.
That may be your view of my 38 years of climate change reporting, but it isn't matched by the AGU, AAAS and NAS (multiple awards). Awards aside, in my work I continue to weigh the full body of climate science, not just that of Jim Hansen (whom I have greatly respected ever since I began writing on his work in 1988). Michael Mann and Andrew Dessler and a heap of other climate scientists note that what has been measured on short time scales is not outside the modeling bounds, particularly when accounting for the rapid shift from a sustained La Nina to an El Nino. As for trends in climate *impacts* (distinct from warming itself), I heed the IPCC-cited work of Laurens Bouwer and others showing that the rapid growth of exposure - and pockets of deep climate vulnerability - remain the dominant driver of losses. Happy to do a webcast on this, and invite you on to ask questions. Here's a piece on Hansen's role: Here's a look at Jim's work: https://revkin.substack.com/p/hansen-on-a-human-heated-planet-its Here's my take on how to cut climate risk: https://revkin.substack.com/p/how-to-defeat-the-climate-change I'm way way overdue to have Bill on a Sustain What conversation, by the way. We can haave an open discussion of journalism, activism, science and solutions.
When I read the title of your article I thought the silence you were referring to was the silence of the environmental movement about the horrors occurring right now in Gaza.
Lots of labour groups, indigenous groups and, of course, peace groups have spoken up, but I've heard very little from environmental groups.
Besides being highly immoral, military activities are the most environmentally destructive things humanity can do.
Greta Thunberg came out on Day 1 and there was activism at COP28 and from several climate groups (example Just StopOil, Sunrise). Unlike climate news, there has been tons of reporting on Gaza, and there are abundant forums to protest the Gaza genocide without also mobilizing climate resources specifically. Like marches every weekend in many cities. It’s not like the climate movement has special social or political power: Quite the contrary, in many quarters. I also think Israel is motivated by oil. Won’t it be nice when that motive is gone?
Yes, it will be really nice when the oil motive is no longer an issue for Israel.
I'm inspired by labour and indigenous groups speaking out in solidarity with Gaza, but here in Canada I'm seeing ver little of that, and I follow a lot of environmental groups closely. And, I admit, it's a big disappointment to me.
I was glad to see Greta Thunberg speak out about it, and the few people in Canadian environmental groups speak out about it, but mostly they're silent on Gaza. I wonder if they're afraid that speaking out will jeopardize their funding, or if there's a higher level of support within these groups for Israel.
COP28 ended up being more toothless blah blah blah. The Houthis have done more for the climate by raising the shipping cost of moving fossil fuels and spreading some wealth along African ports. The security council ensures there will not be a Ministry Of The Future, only parochial interests around resource predation. The western world political class and infoganda are aligned against humanity; with the Holocaust in Gaza the US veto and arm shipments say it all about not caring about public opinion, UN resolutions, or a catastrophic crisis. IPCC6 WGIII and the ocean and biodiversity conventions have all we need to get to safer climate but the politicians and their corporate sponsors will run the show eliminating any and all dissent over how critical resources are allocated- politics. Science is in the service of the death machine, inching us toward omnicide. What true as ever is we need humane leaders.
I think you've touched on one of the key obstacles. Human evolution prepared us for immediate problems - where will I sleep tonight? What will I eat? What's trying to eat me? True long-term thinking is more rare than perfect pitch. The challenge is as great as Cassandra's. How do we persuade people to act?
Your question, Tim, How do we persuade people to act? ...seemed like the main theme in Kim Stanley Robinson's novel, The Ministry For the Future. It's a long, fascinating, courageous, realistic, horrifying, comedic journey... to the world coming together to finally make progress on drawing down emissions and stimulating a thriving planet again. It's worth reading (and sticking with it to the end). I now feel like there could be some light at the end of the tunnel.
I still think the greatest fear is fear itself and doomsaying just makes you part of the problem. Cracks in the firmament: Trump
Off the ballet in 2 states so far, regeneration to feed people, Heal the Reef to bring coral reefs back to health, XR youth standing up to Wells Fargo, Gavin Newson suing the 5 largest oil guys for decades of deceit.
I liked Stan's book, but I'm not sure about the "realistic" part. It posits that the world has come together to deal constructively with the crisis. Might happen, but there's not much sign of it so far.
True it didn't happen in 2020 in the book. But a couple decades later, when all that focus and building of passionate connections across the world began to come together, the biggest players finally got on board.
I would like to see his take on the environment and his solutions because they seem much saner and doable than what's been put forward by the "leaders" we can't seem to influence.
You're right. Maximizing survival odds in the short-term vs. the long-term is really about values, not evolutionary fitness. And of course, we are not perfectly rational, as economists and others have reluctantly come to accept. In your anthropological studies you no doubt learned there are countless examples of individuals making sacrifices for the long-term survival of their genetic heirs, even those that aren't closely related. We are at a point in history where we may well find out whether selfishness or cooperation leads to better odds of survival. We'll be long gone before the answer is clear. But to me selfishness seems a closed loop that inevitably spirals down to zero. I pray humanity survives to answer the question.
I find some comfort in reading these comments from like minded people. I have none amongst friends and family. I waste energy in trying to figure it out. I said to one friend in a related discussion about the mid-East war, that I think our differences are that we get our news from different sources. Kudos to Bill McKibben for his persistence.
I think the hardest subject we all need to address in the area of climate change is the fact that little or nothing will change our behaviour at present, unless it is forced on us. To lesson the impacts of climate change, we collectively need to drive our vehicles less. We need to slow the activities of business which in its self will create havoc, less profit, less pay, less consumerism, so less ‘stuff’. All this is not exactly a vote winner, so collectively, we need to look at our personal choices. Imagine if a group of people, maybe green voters or like minded people such as us choose a month and said, ‘we will not pay our taxes, we will shop as little as possible, we will drive at little as possible, etc, etc.’ I am sure far brighter minds than mine can design a campaign. (Ironically as I type this, our recycling collection vehicle has just stopped as it empties our kerbside bin. Its message on the side of the vehicle is “Let’s waste less.” How about that for timing!!)
Like a "just say no" campaign. Cool idea. Although you'd have to ensure it wouldn't look too much like the scary "less of everything" future that a lot of resisters are worried about. Have you heard about "Take the Jump"? It's a social movement focused on the benefits of reduced materialism: slogan is "less stuff, more joy". It started in England recently, and NZ (where I'm from) was the first country to charter it.
Here’s some novelty, for those of us in the hyper-privileged world: skiers. In past “bad snow” seasons (usually attributed to El Niño or La Niña, depending on where you looked), there was always somewhere around our continent that had good conditions. Not this year, at least so far--conditions suck just about everywhere. There’s been plenty of precipitation, but it’s tended to be rain, or snow followed by warmth followed by freezing followed by more rain.
Here in Oregon, the heat dome of 2021, following the Portland fires of 2020 brought home to more people that the climate situation is spiraling out of control. The winter of 23-24 could be the one that gets that message across to those wealthy influencers who partake of snow sports. Several ski areas now make more money from summer mountain bikers than from winter skiers and riders. There will no doubt be improvements in conditions over the next month or so, but this may become the recognized benchmark for the end of a set of activities that have allowed many of America’s and Europe’s wealthier residents to commune with the great outdoors.
As you and others have pointed out repeatedly, the awareness of climate change’s impacts will likely be segmented and sequential. At some point soon, hopefully, the cumulative realization will be widespread enough to translate into more rapid political and policy change.
Thank you for your work. Below is our info-ad to the NYT 12/31 (please consider, there is no time for piecemeal gradual progress and we do not need a billion new electric cars and trucks.) I had also info-ads in the 12/10 NYT, p. A18. and in the 12/24 NYT magazine). And PLEASE RESPOND - work with Humane Civilization Worldwide [humanecivilization.org]
Heinz Aeschbach, MD, co-founder and president of HCW, Austin, TX, 512.689.6142
THE TRAJECTORIES OF CLIMATE CHANGE ARE TERRIFYING.
A GOVERNMENT RESPONSE, AS RADICAL AS DURING WWII, IS URGENTLY NEEDED.
Scientists, activists, NGO leaders, science writers – please help educate the people about alternate paths forward and demand corresponding government actions. We are on a destructive path!
· Dire consequences have been predicted, if global temperatures surpass 1.5°C above preindustrial levels. But in spite of COP28 pledges, we are now on a trajectory to reach the 1.5°C point before 2040 and 2.5°C or more by 2100. Still, always focusing on some “good news,” few want to visualize scenarios of the 2040s and beyond: worsening, deadly heat waves, droughts, storms with flooding, wildfires and crop failures; probably hundreds of millions dying or having
to migrate, and much violence with war-like conditions at borders. Do we really want a gradual ‘energy transition’ while promoting profit-driven, greenhouse-gas-spewing economic growth?
· Like the human body, the world’s ecosystems are very delicate concerning temperature and mineral balances. “Our world has a fever, and we keep covering it with thicker blankets!” Polar ice, glaciers and permafrost are rapidly melting;
CO2 acidifies the oceans, vicious cycles are worsening; we are overstepping points-of-no-return.
· Efforts to lower emissions only slow the rise in atmospheric CO2 levels - we must lower levels from presently 420ppm to about 350ppm to prevent further worsening of climates.
· Where are we growing trees, bamboo, algae and other fast-growing plants for carbon absorption, reforestation, and for commercial uses? Where are we building ultra-light, slow, electric mini cars? and trains, high-speed and a dense network of light rail lines, most small, narrow track, 100cm and less, many on existing roads? As feasible, we must replace steel and concrete with wood, bamboo and recycled materials, in buildings, light vehicles, rail cars, bridges, etc. Radiative cooling paints, shade trees, and geothermal heating and cooling must minimize buildings’ energy needs. In
addition, our diets must become mostly vegetarian, rich in legumes.
· We must durably sequester huge amounts of carbon: any organic material, particularly plants that were grown for carbon sequestration may be buried and covered with stagnant water, kept dry, or prevented in other ways from decomposing.
· Our government must severely restrict bank lending to curb consumerism and inflation; it must create new money to fund public-private partnership nonprofit enterprises that will reform industries and land management. We need high taxes on all greenhouse gas releases and on wealth. Governments must take care of people’s needs and establish comprehensive safety nets.
Living simpler and healthier, more leisurely, closer to nature, with more interpersonal connectedness, people will be happier.
Have you read, "Don't Even Think About It" by George Marshall? It explores why human beings are hardwired to ignore climate change. I've read it twice now and it not only strikes a chord (very disconcerting to find echoes of my own thinking/emotions in his explanations) but makes me wonder how we can get past this ingrained denial. Given Marshall's findings, I'm not surprised that the media has no interest in reporting on or calling people's attention to something their readers are unable to face and need to pretend does not exist. I read your work because I admire and respect you, even if what you have to say often dismays me. But what about those who have no interest in exploring difficult realities and have bought the lie that climate change is either a hoax or will not affect them? I am sharing with my tribe in hopes our collective smarts can help. Thank you for cross posting @Revkin and for all you wisdom and insights @billmckibben
I am favorable to doing things to lower greenhouse gases because they will also improve air quality. However, I still haven’t seen good data on how much manmade CO2 is responsible for the T rise compared to natural cycles for example Milankovich Cycles. Can you suggest some studies?
Is there some sort of problem with the idea of starting to replace the actual sources that are polluting the atmosphere with non-polluting electric sources?
And I don't include batteries - because of al of the pollution caused during the mining and manufacturing of them.
We know what the problem is -- but have yet to see anything concerning directly replacing retrofitting / repowering these existing sources.
Environmental and social damages caused by mining for battery components is one of several fake issues planted in media by fossil fuel interests, like turbine blade and solar panel recycling. No one asks about recycling pipelines and tankers and oil wells. To put into perspective, the sheer scale of operations for battery minerals is about 1/1000th the scale of coal and fracking operations.
To Suzanne Crawley: concerning your environmental and social damages comment - you are correct in pointing out that the comments generally come from the pro fossil fuel types: and the "blame the media" thing -- that's the new "standard response" when one doesn't like something that is actually truthful.
Both we - and they know who they are.
Two out of three of your other subject could be put in use -- and was enclosed in the information I sent to Mr. McKibbens.
I'm talking about fuel tankers and pipelines -- using them as conduits for getting "ship-based" Sea Water to Potable Water Desalinization Plants converted and in use - to make potable water available / pumped through new and existing "repurposed" fossil fuel pipelines / to any location on the planet that needs it - and we're going to need it.
What is needed is the electric power to accomplish it -- and that power supply has been deveoped - and Mr. McKibbens knows about it.
I was trying to prime the pump for him to bring the subject forward -- but he hasn't, and so I am thanks to your comment.
"WE" now have an alternative choice - as to how we choose to produce our electricity and power our vehicles -- we just have to put it to use.
Thanks for your consistent focus on the need for humanity to wrap our collective focus on this almost intangible crisis that threatens our very survival as a civilization. I had been sucked into the fallacy of hopeful thinking, (facilitated by the media coverage of the Hansen paper) that maybe the warming isn't accelerating, despite the oddity of the landscape right outside my window. That was before reading your post, which had the sobering effect of good mental medicine.
i fear that is beyond my technical competence--i'm pretty good thinking about solar panels and batteries, but payment schemes defeat me. don't worry about it, enough people have figured it out to keep this going for the moment!
My wife (far ahead of both of us on these technical matters) noticed some really fine print under the Apple Pay option that allowed a standard credit card payment. So she took out a paid subscription on my behalf.
Thanks for all you do to help us save ourselves from ourselves.
I forwarded this to several friends, all of whom give me a hard time when I send around 'depressing' or 'negative' information. So, in the spirit of trying to keep my friends and maybe open communication, I don't do it as often as I'd like. I've never NOT believed in the urgency of the climate crisis -- maybe I'm just predisposed to high anxiety -- and I could no more pretend that it's not happening than pretend that I can no longer go outside often for months at a time in south central Texas... Here's what I said as an intro to your (per usual!) excellent piece of writing:
"I choose Bill McKibben most often to read about climate. While he echoes other writers with his message, he's a little bit less frantic; I suspect that's because he's been in this field, trying to get people to take climate change seriously, for 35 years.
I hope you'll read this as it's a marker of where we are. I believe that we are obligated, particularly to future generations, to at least make note of that and to take it in regardless of how frightening it might be. In the spirit of end-of-the-year summaries, he starts out:" [and then I quote most of your 1st 2 paragraphs].
Thanks for this great piece; I hope something will click into place in time within our collective consciousness.
I imagine most people who do not want to feel depressed by reading serious news about climate change, will be truly and deeply depressed when one of these catastrophic climate events happens to them.
It's not that simple, I think. There are many many people -- and I've met some of them -- who just don't read/pay attention to news because they're too busy raising children, working multiple jobs, etc. and those people don't really understand that climate change is a thing vs. just regular cycles of weather... there are also other many many people who believe in climate change but are so overwhelmed by it that they just return to their religious faith or addictions or that lovely (and sometimes useful psychological mechanism) denial. What can I do, they say? And, that's not illogical; climate change has been well-known and somewhat well-;prophesized since the 70s and here we are. Human beings just don't change until they have to. Maybe that's an adaption, evolutionarily? I don't know.
I understand that many people are overwhelmed, and they need to live their lives and take care of their children; but the future for everyone, and especially for the younger generations, is going to be deeply affected by climate change. It’s better to face that now rather than later.
https://rumble.com/v1mnbo8-flashback-climategate-2009.html
https://rumble.com/v1mnbo8-flashback-climategate-2009.html
Good stuff Bill. As a journalist writing on climate change since 1985 - including for The Times from 2000 through 2016 - I strongly endorse your critique of how news media hyperfocus on novelty (new science, which is implicitly provisional) and conflict - the battles through which science progresses, which are often interpreted by the public as, "Oh they don't really know, move on." A few weeks ago I tried to nudge #SustainWhat readers past the debate on the Hansen et al acceleration paper and will continue to press the case that #realityisbadenough: https://revkin.substack.com/i/138517402/heat-around-a-stark-new-climate-paper
Andy, you’ve made a career out of downplaying the consequences of anthropogenic climate change, so help us out here, please explain why you don’t think everyone in the world should be scared out of their wits over the unprecedented and unexplained rapid increase in global ocean and air temperatures.
That may be your view of my 38 years of climate change reporting, but it isn't matched by the AGU, AAAS and NAS (multiple awards). Awards aside, in my work I continue to weigh the full body of climate science, not just that of Jim Hansen (whom I have greatly respected ever since I began writing on his work in 1988). Michael Mann and Andrew Dessler and a heap of other climate scientists note that what has been measured on short time scales is not outside the modeling bounds, particularly when accounting for the rapid shift from a sustained La Nina to an El Nino. As for trends in climate *impacts* (distinct from warming itself), I heed the IPCC-cited work of Laurens Bouwer and others showing that the rapid growth of exposure - and pockets of deep climate vulnerability - remain the dominant driver of losses. Happy to do a webcast on this, and invite you on to ask questions. Here's a piece on Hansen's role: Here's a look at Jim's work: https://revkin.substack.com/p/hansen-on-a-human-heated-planet-its Here's my take on how to cut climate risk: https://revkin.substack.com/p/how-to-defeat-the-climate-change I'm way way overdue to have Bill on a Sustain What conversation, by the way. We can haave an open discussion of journalism, activism, science and solutions.
When I read the title of your article I thought the silence you were referring to was the silence of the environmental movement about the horrors occurring right now in Gaza.
Lots of labour groups, indigenous groups and, of course, peace groups have spoken up, but I've heard very little from environmental groups.
Besides being highly immoral, military activities are the most environmentally destructive things humanity can do.
Greta Thunberg came out on Day 1 and there was activism at COP28 and from several climate groups (example Just StopOil, Sunrise). Unlike climate news, there has been tons of reporting on Gaza, and there are abundant forums to protest the Gaza genocide without also mobilizing climate resources specifically. Like marches every weekend in many cities. It’s not like the climate movement has special social or political power: Quite the contrary, in many quarters. I also think Israel is motivated by oil. Won’t it be nice when that motive is gone?
Yes, it will be really nice when the oil motive is no longer an issue for Israel.
I'm inspired by labour and indigenous groups speaking out in solidarity with Gaza, but here in Canada I'm seeing ver little of that, and I follow a lot of environmental groups closely. And, I admit, it's a big disappointment to me.
I was glad to see Greta Thunberg speak out about it, and the few people in Canadian environmental groups speak out about it, but mostly they're silent on Gaza. I wonder if they're afraid that speaking out will jeopardize their funding, or if there's a higher level of support within these groups for Israel.
COP28 ended up being more toothless blah blah blah. The Houthis have done more for the climate by raising the shipping cost of moving fossil fuels and spreading some wealth along African ports. The security council ensures there will not be a Ministry Of The Future, only parochial interests around resource predation. The western world political class and infoganda are aligned against humanity; with the Holocaust in Gaza the US veto and arm shipments say it all about not caring about public opinion, UN resolutions, or a catastrophic crisis. IPCC6 WGIII and the ocean and biodiversity conventions have all we need to get to safer climate but the politicians and their corporate sponsors will run the show eliminating any and all dissent over how critical resources are allocated- politics. Science is in the service of the death machine, inching us toward omnicide. What true as ever is we need humane leaders.
I think you've touched on one of the key obstacles. Human evolution prepared us for immediate problems - where will I sleep tonight? What will I eat? What's trying to eat me? True long-term thinking is more rare than perfect pitch. The challenge is as great as Cassandra's. How do we persuade people to act?
Your question, Tim, How do we persuade people to act? ...seemed like the main theme in Kim Stanley Robinson's novel, The Ministry For the Future. It's a long, fascinating, courageous, realistic, horrifying, comedic journey... to the world coming together to finally make progress on drawing down emissions and stimulating a thriving planet again. It's worth reading (and sticking with it to the end). I now feel like there could be some light at the end of the tunnel.
I agree with that--his combination of scientific, cultural, and political movements seem required to me
I still think the greatest fear is fear itself and doomsaying just makes you part of the problem. Cracks in the firmament: Trump
Off the ballet in 2 states so far, regeneration to feed people, Heal the Reef to bring coral reefs back to health, XR youth standing up to Wells Fargo, Gavin Newson suing the 5 largest oil guys for decades of deceit.
In your second paragraph, you meant "off the ballot," not the ballet.
I liked Stan's book, but I'm not sure about the "realistic" part. It posits that the world has come together to deal constructively with the crisis. Might happen, but there's not much sign of it so far.
True it didn't happen in 2020 in the book. But a couple decades later, when all that focus and building of passionate connections across the world began to come together, the biggest players finally got on board.
Fingers crossed!
I would like to see his take on the environment and his solutions because they seem much saner and doable than what's been put forward by the "leaders" we can't seem to influence.
You're right. Maximizing survival odds in the short-term vs. the long-term is really about values, not evolutionary fitness. And of course, we are not perfectly rational, as economists and others have reluctantly come to accept. In your anthropological studies you no doubt learned there are countless examples of individuals making sacrifices for the long-term survival of their genetic heirs, even those that aren't closely related. We are at a point in history where we may well find out whether selfishness or cooperation leads to better odds of survival. We'll be long gone before the answer is clear. But to me selfishness seems a closed loop that inevitably spirals down to zero. I pray humanity survives to answer the question.
Perhaps. But with all due respect to Von Neumann and John Nash, I'm not sure we are ultimately reducible to math.
I find some comfort in reading these comments from like minded people. I have none amongst friends and family. I waste energy in trying to figure it out. I said to one friend in a related discussion about the mid-East war, that I think our differences are that we get our news from different sources. Kudos to Bill McKibben for his persistence.
I think the hardest subject we all need to address in the area of climate change is the fact that little or nothing will change our behaviour at present, unless it is forced on us. To lesson the impacts of climate change, we collectively need to drive our vehicles less. We need to slow the activities of business which in its self will create havoc, less profit, less pay, less consumerism, so less ‘stuff’. All this is not exactly a vote winner, so collectively, we need to look at our personal choices. Imagine if a group of people, maybe green voters or like minded people such as us choose a month and said, ‘we will not pay our taxes, we will shop as little as possible, we will drive at little as possible, etc, etc.’ I am sure far brighter minds than mine can design a campaign. (Ironically as I type this, our recycling collection vehicle has just stopped as it empties our kerbside bin. Its message on the side of the vehicle is “Let’s waste less.” How about that for timing!!)
Like a "just say no" campaign. Cool idea. Although you'd have to ensure it wouldn't look too much like the scary "less of everything" future that a lot of resisters are worried about. Have you heard about "Take the Jump"? It's a social movement focused on the benefits of reduced materialism: slogan is "less stuff, more joy". It started in England recently, and NZ (where I'm from) was the first country to charter it.
....and here is the NZ website - www.takethejump.org.nz
Hi Camille - I checked out their website takethejump.org. What a great idea!
Bill,
Here’s some novelty, for those of us in the hyper-privileged world: skiers. In past “bad snow” seasons (usually attributed to El Niño or La Niña, depending on where you looked), there was always somewhere around our continent that had good conditions. Not this year, at least so far--conditions suck just about everywhere. There’s been plenty of precipitation, but it’s tended to be rain, or snow followed by warmth followed by freezing followed by more rain.
Here in Oregon, the heat dome of 2021, following the Portland fires of 2020 brought home to more people that the climate situation is spiraling out of control. The winter of 23-24 could be the one that gets that message across to those wealthy influencers who partake of snow sports. Several ski areas now make more money from summer mountain bikers than from winter skiers and riders. There will no doubt be improvements in conditions over the next month or so, but this may become the recognized benchmark for the end of a set of activities that have allowed many of America’s and Europe’s wealthier residents to commune with the great outdoors.
As you and others have pointed out repeatedly, the awareness of climate change’s impacts will likely be segmented and sequential. At some point soon, hopefully, the cumulative realization will be widespread enough to translate into more rapid political and policy change.
https://rumble.com/v1mnbo8-flashback-climategate-2009.html
How to cultivate the long view in a population weaned on conspicuous consumption?
Thank you for your work. Below is our info-ad to the NYT 12/31 (please consider, there is no time for piecemeal gradual progress and we do not need a billion new electric cars and trucks.) I had also info-ads in the 12/10 NYT, p. A18. and in the 12/24 NYT magazine). And PLEASE RESPOND - work with Humane Civilization Worldwide [humanecivilization.org]
Heinz Aeschbach, MD, co-founder and president of HCW, Austin, TX, 512.689.6142
THE TRAJECTORIES OF CLIMATE CHANGE ARE TERRIFYING.
A GOVERNMENT RESPONSE, AS RADICAL AS DURING WWII, IS URGENTLY NEEDED.
Scientists, activists, NGO leaders, science writers – please help educate the people about alternate paths forward and demand corresponding government actions. We are on a destructive path!
· Dire consequences have been predicted, if global temperatures surpass 1.5°C above preindustrial levels. But in spite of COP28 pledges, we are now on a trajectory to reach the 1.5°C point before 2040 and 2.5°C or more by 2100. Still, always focusing on some “good news,” few want to visualize scenarios of the 2040s and beyond: worsening, deadly heat waves, droughts, storms with flooding, wildfires and crop failures; probably hundreds of millions dying or having
to migrate, and much violence with war-like conditions at borders. Do we really want a gradual ‘energy transition’ while promoting profit-driven, greenhouse-gas-spewing economic growth?
· Like the human body, the world’s ecosystems are very delicate concerning temperature and mineral balances. “Our world has a fever, and we keep covering it with thicker blankets!” Polar ice, glaciers and permafrost are rapidly melting;
CO2 acidifies the oceans, vicious cycles are worsening; we are overstepping points-of-no-return.
· Efforts to lower emissions only slow the rise in atmospheric CO2 levels - we must lower levels from presently 420ppm to about 350ppm to prevent further worsening of climates.
· Where are we growing trees, bamboo, algae and other fast-growing plants for carbon absorption, reforestation, and for commercial uses? Where are we building ultra-light, slow, electric mini cars? and trains, high-speed and a dense network of light rail lines, most small, narrow track, 100cm and less, many on existing roads? As feasible, we must replace steel and concrete with wood, bamboo and recycled materials, in buildings, light vehicles, rail cars, bridges, etc. Radiative cooling paints, shade trees, and geothermal heating and cooling must minimize buildings’ energy needs. In
addition, our diets must become mostly vegetarian, rich in legumes.
· We must durably sequester huge amounts of carbon: any organic material, particularly plants that were grown for carbon sequestration may be buried and covered with stagnant water, kept dry, or prevented in other ways from decomposing.
· Our government must severely restrict bank lending to curb consumerism and inflation; it must create new money to fund public-private partnership nonprofit enterprises that will reform industries and land management. We need high taxes on all greenhouse gas releases and on wealth. Governments must take care of people’s needs and establish comprehensive safety nets.
Living simpler and healthier, more leisurely, closer to nature, with more interpersonal connectedness, people will be happier.
AN ODD (Not so odd) SILENCE
Have you read, "Don't Even Think About It" by George Marshall? It explores why human beings are hardwired to ignore climate change. I've read it twice now and it not only strikes a chord (very disconcerting to find echoes of my own thinking/emotions in his explanations) but makes me wonder how we can get past this ingrained denial. Given Marshall's findings, I'm not surprised that the media has no interest in reporting on or calling people's attention to something their readers are unable to face and need to pretend does not exist. I read your work because I admire and respect you, even if what you have to say often dismays me. But what about those who have no interest in exploring difficult realities and have bought the lie that climate change is either a hoax or will not affect them? I am sharing with my tribe in hopes our collective smarts can help. Thank you for cross posting @Revkin and for all you wisdom and insights @billmckibben
Here's the Link: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00J5ED8CE/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Ecological grief. 💔
true that.
An odd silence? I tell you I can base load wind turbines without chemicals and you don't even ask me how? Typical useless apes.
I am favorable to doing things to lower greenhouse gases because they will also improve air quality. However, I still haven’t seen good data on how much manmade CO2 is responsible for the T rise compared to natural cycles for example Milankovich Cycles. Can you suggest some studies?
Is there some sort of problem with the idea of starting to replace the actual sources that are polluting the atmosphere with non-polluting electric sources?
And I don't include batteries - because of al of the pollution caused during the mining and manufacturing of them.
We know what the problem is -- but have yet to see anything concerning directly replacing retrofitting / repowering these existing sources.
Environmental and social damages caused by mining for battery components is one of several fake issues planted in media by fossil fuel interests, like turbine blade and solar panel recycling. No one asks about recycling pipelines and tankers and oil wells. To put into perspective, the sheer scale of operations for battery minerals is about 1/1000th the scale of coal and fracking operations.
To Suzanne Crawley: concerning your environmental and social damages comment - you are correct in pointing out that the comments generally come from the pro fossil fuel types: and the "blame the media" thing -- that's the new "standard response" when one doesn't like something that is actually truthful.
Both we - and they know who they are.
Two out of three of your other subject could be put in use -- and was enclosed in the information I sent to Mr. McKibbens.
I'm talking about fuel tankers and pipelines -- using them as conduits for getting "ship-based" Sea Water to Potable Water Desalinization Plants converted and in use - to make potable water available / pumped through new and existing "repurposed" fossil fuel pipelines / to any location on the planet that needs it - and we're going to need it.
What is needed is the electric power to accomplish it -- and that power supply has been deveoped - and Mr. McKibbens knows about it.
I was trying to prime the pump for him to bring the subject forward -- but he hasn't, and so I am thanks to your comment.
"WE" now have an alternative choice - as to how we choose to produce our electricity and power our vehicles -- we just have to put it to use.
All of this needs an elect-ric power source
Thanks for your consistent focus on the need for humanity to wrap our collective focus on this almost intangible crisis that threatens our very survival as a civilization. I had been sucked into the fallacy of hopeful thinking, (facilitated by the media coverage of the Hansen paper) that maybe the warming isn't accelerating, despite the oddity of the landscape right outside my window. That was before reading your post, which had the sobering effect of good mental medicine.
How can I upgrade my subscription to PAID without ApplePay?
i fear that is beyond my technical competence--i'm pretty good thinking about solar panels and batteries, but payment schemes defeat me. don't worry about it, enough people have figured it out to keep this going for the moment!
My wife (far ahead of both of us on these technical matters) noticed some really fine print under the Apple Pay option that allowed a standard credit card payment. So she took out a paid subscription on my behalf.
Thanks for all you do to help us save ourselves from ourselves.
Just go to substack, subscribe to the newsletter, and pay with your credit card.