Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
Today sees the launch of ExtinctionRebellion, which describes itself as an international movement using mass civil disobedience to force governments to enter World War Two-level mobilisation mode, in response to climate breakdown and ecological crisis.
Can we use our opposable thumbs, our love of tools, our hyper-ability to communicate, and our unending need to conquer new challenges to reverse climate destabilization? What will it take for you to believe it’s worth trying?
The IPCC report meticulously lays out how the serious climate impacts of 1.5°C of warming are still far less destructive than those for 2°C. Sadly, the IPCC then fails, again, to address the profound implications of reducing emissions in line with both 1.5 and 2°C. Dress it up however we may wish, climate change is ultimately a rationing issue.
This week, scientists and representatives from every country on Earth are gathering in South Korea to put the finishing touches on a report that, if followed, would change the course of history.
There may be more electric vehicles on the world’s roads, but there are also more internal combustion engines. There be more bicycles, but there are also more planes. It doesn’t matter how many good things we do: preventing climate breakdown means ceasing to do bad things.
Understanding climate anxiety, and how to incorporate psychology into our plans for tackling climate change is growing, but only slowly.
People engaged in the climate debate are often bewildered by society’s lack of response. How can we ignore such overwhelming evidence of an existential threat to social and economic stability?
In our view, at some point scientists and policy makers must begin discussing the one scenario that world leaders seem to want to avoid at all costs, i.e., managed economic contraction. The irony is that this scenario could reliably cut greenhouse gas emissions and is achievable without appeal to magic (CCS or decoupling).
Can a “never-seen-before ” weather event that happens every few years really be called “never-seen-before”? Does a “1 in a 1,000 year” event that happens twice in two years become a warning of something different happening?
In San Francisco this week, Fossil Free California hosted a panel discussion on the most recent municipal litigation against the fossil fuel industry.
The results are starkly clear: there is NO evidence of an increased public interest in global warming as a result of the fires. One thing that can be said is that no major environmental problem was ever solved by means of a bottom-up meme diffusion mechanism.
American governments thus face a challenge on the scale of mobilizing to win World War II—perhaps bigger. Unprecedented measures must be put in place both to move completely out of fossil fuels well before mid-century and also to pursue far-reaching and costly adaptation.
