19/03/2019

Taking Up The Slack: When Governments Don’t Act On Climate Change

UNSW - Jeremy Moss

The responsibility for reducing emissions flows from federal to state to local governments, as well as to individual cities.
Jeremy Moss
Jeremy Moss is Professor of Political Philosophy and Co-Director of the Practical Justice Initiative, University of New South Wales.
Every year the governments of the world meet to progress action on climate change. And every year, governments recommits to take some sort of action to prevent climate change. That governments should make these commitments and then implement them is beyond question.
But the results have been dismal. Most nations not only have commitments that are well below what is required, they are also failing miserably to implement even the minimal policies they have agreed to. A recent article in Nature noted that global emissions increased by 2% in 2018 despite record take up of renewable energy.
Australia is not much better. We have agreed to reduce our emissions by 26-28% by 2030 against a (generous) 2005 baseline. Even granting that this is our ‘fair share’ (and it is not), governments at the national level are simply not doing enough. A government report released in December 2018 estimated that Australia’s emissions in 2030 will only be 7% below 2005 levels.
But the climate won’t wait for the federal government. The risks of climate change are increasing and we require an effective response – someone needs to take up the slack. But who?
One response has come from a collection of cities and states that are trying to do what their federal governments refuse to do. The C40 coalition (90+ cities representing 650 million people) including New York, London and Sydney have agreed to reduce their emissions in line with the ambitious elements of the Paris Agreement.
While it is good that cities and state governments act in this way, their actions should not be seen as optional – they are morally required. Some of the same considerations that apply to federal governments also apply to cities and state governments. Like their federal counterparts, they are agents who have resources and legitimate authority. They can make policies and have them endorsed by voters.
These ‘sub national’ actors are also big emitters. In 2014, NSW emitted 130Mt of C02e – more than twice as much as Portugal. It also exports large quantities of coal through the world’s largest coal port at Newcastle.
Some might object that we can’t ask smaller cities or states to do what the federal government will not do. But this can’t be right. Just as we would be horrified if someone at a beach sees a drowning swimmer and refuses to rescue them, claiming ‘it’s the lifeguard’s job’, we should not accept state governments looking on as the climate worsens.
State governments and cities (where most Australians live) are under an obligation to take robust action on climate change because federal duties ‘devolve’ to them.
State and local governments taking this kind of unilateral action also increases the likelihood of others doing so. If Victoria introduces green energy policies, that makes it easier for NSW or Western Australia to do so because they will know what works and what doesn’t. The costs also decline as economies of scale kick in.
Cities taking unilateral action can also create new norms around climate change. With each city that adopts transport, housing or energy policies that make emission reduction central, it creates expectations on others to follow. Just as the establishment of one of the world’s first national parks, the Royal National Park in 1879, created norms about preserving nature, so being an early adopter of local climate-friendly policies will create norms. NSW also introduced one of the world’s first GHG emission reduction schemes in 2003.
It would undoubtedly be better if federal governments took action. But as the urgency around climate change increases, we should not wait for our federal laggards. So as local and state elections roll around, we should ask each layer of government whether its policies do take up the slack. We need more world firsts from our governments.

Links

Climate Change Sparks Fears For Flying Foxes After 23,000 Deaths

FairfaxFelicity Caldwell

There are fears climate change will be devastating for flying foxes after a heatwave led to tens of thousands of animals perishing in Cairns.
In late November, wildlife carers reported about 23,000 spectacled flying foxes died – an estimated one-third of the total population – after temperatures rose above 42 degrees.
Thousands of spectacled flying foxes died in far north Queensland
after temperatures soared above 42 degrees.
Credit: David White

Volunteers and scientists believe it is the first time a major heat stress event has led to mass deaths of the spectacled flying fox, which is endemic to the north-eastern regions of Queensland.
Bats and Trees Society of Cairns president Maree Treadwell Kerr said it was "pretty catastrophic", with rescuers arriving at camps to find thousands of animals had dropped dead from trees.
Ms Treadwell Kerr said volunteers managed to rescue about 850 animals but were stretched thin as they already had more than 500 flying foxes in care.
"There had been a food shortage, which was probably due to the fact that it had been a very dry season and then they got the heatwave," she said.
"In one camp [at Edmonton], the whole camp was wiped out, and 11,000 animals, at least, died.
"And the flying foxes have not returned to that site yet even though since then we got a proper wet season for a change."
Ms Treadwell Kerr said flying foxes were good "indicators" for climate change and their deaths were more readily noticed than other animals which may also be affected by extreme heat.
"When they die, you see it, it's right there in front of them," she said.
"We were expecting it to happen at some stage – we weren't expecting it to happen in November."
At one camp alone, volunteers found 11,000 flying foxes dead.
Credit: David White
In February, federal Environment Minister Melissa Price upgraded the spectacled flying fox from vulnerable to endangered on the national threatened species list.
CSIRO research showed the population of the spectacled flying fox had more than halved from 214,750 in November 2005 to 92,880 in November 2014.
Macquarie University ecologist Tim Pearson said flying foxes were a keystone species, an important pollinator and seed disperser and vital for the health of forests.
"One of the reasons flying foxes are so important, and this doesn't just apply to speccies [spectacled flying foxes], but other species in Australia as well, is they fly huge distances," he said.
"So when they lick the nectar out of eucalyptus [trees], all that fur gets covered in pollen and then they fly 20 to 30 kilometres.
"They pollinate the tree next to it but they pollinate trees far away so they ensure genetic diversity."
Mr Pearson said the increased frequency of heatwaves had led to more mass die-offs elsewhere in Australia.
Almost 50,000 flying foxes perished during extreme heat in 2014 in south-east Queensland, while there have also been deaths in Adelaide and Victoria in recent months.
About 850 spectacled flying foxes were rescued
in far north Queensland, mostly pups.
Credit: David White
The Lab of Animal Ecology, led by Dr Justin Welbergen, reports mass casualties are occurring between zero to five times per year and the events are expected to escalate under climate change.
"Where they used to be very occasional events, now they're happening more and more often," Mr Pearson said.
"What was scary about the November instance in Cairns was that to the best of our knowledge, the spectacled flying fox, which just lives in north Queensland, has never been affected by heatwaves before ... They typically don't have heatwaves."
Mr Pearson said climate change meant days of extreme heat were becoming more frequent and more severe, which would lead to more flying fox deaths.
"Most of us who work with flying foxes ... are pretty convinced that their numbers are going to keep declining," he said.
"The pressures on them are climate change and habitat destruction - neither of those two pressures shows any signs of slowing down."
Official counts, revealed in Queensland open data, showed there were 1.4 million flying foxes of all species reported in the state in January to March 2016 and only 243,000 in January to March 2018.
However, a Queensland Department of Environment and Science spokesman said the data showed numbers from quarterly surveys of known roosts only and could not be used as an overall population estimate.
This is because of the nomadic nature of flying foxes.
Wildlife volunteers were stretched thin, as they were already caring
for 500 flying foxes in care when the mass die-off occurred.
Credit: David White
The spokesman said the department recognised that recent heatwave events had significant impacts on flying fox populations.
"Cyclones in north Queensland have also had a serious impact on flying fox food trees," he said.
The spokesman said the department was providing support and advice to councils across the region on the impacts of heat stress on flying foxes, and how to safely evaluate and record sick or dead flying foxes, in addition to financial assistance to flying fox carer groups.
People are urged not to touch flying foxes but instead contact a bat rescue group or RSPCA Queensland for advice.

Links

Here's A Running List Of All The Ways Climate Change Has Altered Earth In 2019

Mashable - Mark Kaufman

Global average temperatures compared to average. Yellows, oranges, and reds indicate warmer temps. Image: NASA 
Earth is now the warmest it's been in some 120,000 years. Eighteen of the last 19 years have been the warmest on record. And concentrations of carbon dioxide — a potent greenhouse gas — are likely the highest they've been in 15 million years.
The consequences of such a globally-disrupted climate are many, and it's understandably difficult to keep track. To help, here's a list of climate-relevant news that has transpired in 2019, from historically unprecedented disappearances of ice, to flood-ravaged cities. As more news comes out, the list will be updated.

1. Guess what? U.S. carbon emissions popped back up in a big way
Image: SHUTTERSTOCK / FRANK_PETERS
In early 2019, the Rhodium Group — a research institution that analyzes global economic and environmental trends — released a report finding that in 2018 carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. rose 3.4 percent from the prior year. That's the second largest gain in the last two decades.
"It’s trending in the wrong direction — it’s not encouraging," said Robert McGrath, the director of the University of Colorado Boulder's Renewable and Sustainable Energy Institute who had no role in the report but reviewed it.

2. Antarctica’s once sleepy ice sheets have awoken. That's bad.
Image: GETTY IMAGES/FOTOSEARCH RF
Antarctica — home to the greatest ice sheets on Earth — isn't just melting significantly faster than it was decades ago. Great masses of ice that scientists once presumed were largely immune to melting are losing ample ice into the sea.
"People are beginning to recognize that East Antarctica might be waking up," said Josh Willis, an oceanographer at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory that visits and measures Earth's melting glaciers.
"There’s growing evidence that eastern Antarctica is not just going to stay frozen and well-behaved in the next 50 to 100 years," he explained.

3. 60% of the planet's wild coffee species face extinction. What that means for your morning caffeine kick.
Image: SHUTTERSTOCK / AFRICA STUDIO 
A triple whammy of disease, climate change, and deforestation has threatened around 60 percent of the planet's wild coffee species. While this hasn't yet imperiled the world's coffee supply, it jeopardizes your favorite coffee's resiliency in the face of profound planetary change.
"As farmers are increasingly exposed to new climate conditions and changing pest pressures, the genetic diversity of wild crop relatives may be essential to breeding new coffee varieties that can withstand these pressures," Nathan Mueller, an assistant professor of earth system science at the University of California, Irvine who researches global food security, said over email.

4. Extreme weather — not politicians — convinces Americans that climate change is real
Reds, oranges, and yellows show 2017 global temperatures warmer than the average. Image: NASA
Americans find today's climate science increasingly convincing, and a damaging mix of exceptional drought, storms, and record-breaking heat is the reason why.
The results of a new survey — conducted in November 2018 by the University of Chicago's Energy Policy Institute and the research organization The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Researchfound that nearly half of Americans said today's climate science "is more convincing than five years ago, with extreme weather driving their views."

5. The polar vortex will return, this time with the coldest temps of the year
Temperature forecast for early February 2019. Image: UNIVERSITY OF MAINE/CLIMATE REANALYZER
The polar vortex has become a popular phenomenon for good reason: This weakening of the polar vortex and the subsequent spillover of frigid air has become more common over the last two decades.
"We are seeing these events occurring more frequently as of late," said Jeff Weber, a meteorologist with the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.
Although this increase in polar vortex frequency is a hot area of study, one emerging theory blames significantly diminished Arctic sea ice. The Arctic is warming over twice as fast as the rest of the globe and sea ice cover is plummeting. As a result, recent climate research suggests that — without this ice cover — more heat escapes from the oceans. Ultimately, researchers found that this relatively warmer air interacts with and weakens the winds over the Arctic, allowing frigid polar air to more easily escape to southerly places like Cleveland and New York City.

6. It's damn cold, but heat records in the U.S. still dominate
Arctic air flowing south into the U.S. on January 31, 2019. Image: CLIMATE REANALYZER/UNIVERSITY OF MAINE
While certain portions of the winter sure felt frigid, overall, the number of daily cold records set in the U.S. has been consistently dwarfed by the number of warm or high temperature records. The score isn't even close. High records over the last decade are outpacing low records by a rate of two to one.
In the past 10 years there have been 21,461 record daily highs and 11,466 lows.
"The trend is in exactly the direction we would expect as a result of a warming planet," said Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Penn State University.

7. Don’t forget about the colossal Himalayan glaciers. They’re rapidly vanishing, too.
A weather station in the Hindu Kush Himalaya region. Image: JITENDRA BAJRACHARYA/ICIMOD
Beyond the continually grim news from the north and south poles is the melting of the "third pole," known as the Hindu Kush Himalaya region. Spreading over 2,000 miles across eight nations (from Afghanistan to Myanmar), these mountainous lands are home to the third-largest stores of ice on the planet and provide water to hundreds of millions of people.
Under the most optimistic conditions, a new report found that over a third of the ice will vanish by the century's end. But under more extreme climate scenarios — wherein global climate efforts fail — two-thirds of these mighty glaciers could disappear, with overall ice losses of a whopping 90 percent.
"Glacier-wise, it's not a great story," Joseph Shea, one of the report's lead authors and an assistant professor of environmental geomatics at the University of Northern British Columbia, said in an interview.

8. House lawmakers finally let climate scientists set the record straight
The U.S. Capitol Building in Washington D.C. Image: SHUTTERSTOCK / NICOLAS AGUIAR
The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space and Technology is no longer under the leadership of the Republican party, which is candidly opposed to globally-accepted climate science.
Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, a veteran Democratic lawmaker from Texas, has become Chairwoman and called a hearing for Feb. 13 entitled "The State of Climate Science and Why it Matters," inviting four scientists to give testimony about major U.S. climate reports and the significance of the latest climate science.
"Climate change is real, it's happening now, and humans are responsible for it," Bob Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers University and a coauthor of the congressionally mandated Fourth National Climate Assessment Kopp said in an interview, outlining critical points he planned to make to federal lawmakers.

9. Trump fails to block NASA's carbon sleuth from going to space
Half the Earth illuminated by the sun. Image: ESA
In early 2017, the Trump Administration tried to ax NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory 3, or OCO-3. It didn't work. Then, again in 2018, the White House sought to terminate the earth science instrument.
Again, the refrigerator-sized space machine persisted.
Now, SpaceX is set to launch OCO-3 to the International Space Station in the coming months, as early as April 25. Using a long robotic arm, astronauts will attach OCO-3 to the edge of the space station, allowing the instrument to peer down upon Earth and measure the planet's amassing concentrations of carbon dioxide — a potent greenhouse gas.
"Carbon dioxide is the most important gas humans are emitting into the atmosphere," said Annmarie Eldering, the project scientist for OCO-3 at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. "Understanding how it will play out in the future is critical."

10. Earth's coldest years on record all happened over 90 years ago
In 2017 Earth's temperatures were significantly warmer than compared to the average. Image: NASA
Here's a statistic: On Earth, 18 of the last 19 years have been the warmest in recorded history.
The globe's 21st-century heating, however, becomes all the more stark when compared to the coldest years on record. As climate scientist Simon Donner, who researches human-induced climate change at The University of British Columbia, underscored via a list posted on Twitter, the planet's 20 coldest years all occurred nearly a century ago, between 1884 and 1929.
The coldest year on record occurred in 1904.

11. Earth is greener than it was 20 years ago, but not why you think
Green areas show increases in areas covered by green leaves. Image: NASA
Two NASA satellites have watched Earth grow greener over the last 20 years — in large part because China is hellbent on planting millions of trees.
Earth's greening — meaning the increase in areas covered by green leaves — has made the greatest gains in China and India since the mid-1990s. "The effect comes mostly from ambitious tree-planting programs in China and intensive agriculture in both countries," NASA wrote as it released maps of the planet-wide changes.
China kickstarted its tree-planting mobilizations in the 1990s to combat erosion, climate change, and air pollution. This dedicated planting — sometimes done by soldiers — equated to over 40 percent of China's greening, so far.

12. The Green New Deal: Historians weigh in on the immense scale required to pull it off
A New Deal project: the Chickamauga Dam. Image: SHUTTERSTOCK / EVERETT HISTORICAL 
The scope of a Green New Deal — if such a program ever truly comes to match the scale of the original New Deal — wouldn’t just put millions of Americans to work, but could very well transform the mood, culture, and spirit of the United States in the 21st century.
The New Deal wasn’t just paying people to build things. People were doing fulfilling, nation-improving work. They planted three billion trees. They built many of the nation’s bridges and roads. Today, we drive under their tunnels and walk through their parks.
“Those men at the end of their lives would take their families back to show them what they had done — because they were quite proud of it,” said Gray Brechin, a historical geographer and New Deal scholar.

13. Trump's climate expert is wrong: The world's plants don't need more CO2
Higher CO2 concentrations swirling around Earth (shown by yellows and reds). Image: NASA
Princeton physicist and carbon dioxide-advocate William Happer has been selected to head the brand new Presidential Committee on Climate Security, reports The Washington Post. Happer maintains that the planet's atmosphere needs significantly more CO2, the potent greenhouse gas that U.S. government scientists — and a bevy of independent scientists — have repeatedly underscored is stoking accelerating climate change.
Because plants use carbon dioxide to live, Happer has said "more CO2 is actually a benefit to the Earth," asserted that Earth is experiencing a "CO2 famine," and concluded that "If plants could vote, they would vote for coal."
Earth and plant scientists disagree.
"The idea that increased CO2 is universally beneficial [to plants] is very misguided," said Jill Anderson, an evolutionary ecologist specializing in plant populations at the University of Georgia.

14. A powerful atmospheric river pummeled California, and the pictures look unreal
Rich Willson paddles through the miniature golf course after the flooding in in Guerneville, California. Image: KARL MONDON/MEDIANEWS GROUP/THE MERCURY NEWS VIA GETTY IMAGES
A potent atmospheric river — a long band of water vapor that often transports ample amounts of moisture to the western U.S. like "rivers in the sky" — deluged portions of Northern California in late February. The Russian River, which winds through the Sonoma County town of Guerneville, reached over 45-feet high and swamped the area, prompting the Sheriff to announce on Twitter that the town had been surrounded by water — with no way in or out.
While California relies heavily on these wintertime atmospheric rivers for its water, scientists expect these storms to grow dramatically wetter as Earth's climate heats up.
"We're likely to see rain in increasingly intense bursts," said Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

15. The Bering Strait should be covered in ice, but it's nearly all gone
Satellite imagery of the mostly ice-free Bering Strait on Feb. 28. 2019. Image: SENTINEL HUB EO BROWSER/SENTINEL 3
During winter, the Bering Strait has historically been blanketed in ice. But this year, the ice has nearly vanished [by late February].
"The usually ice-covered Bering Strait is almost completely open water," said Zack Labe, a climate scientist and Ph.D. candidate at the University of California at Irvine.
"There should be ice here until May," added Lars Kaleschke, a climate scientist at the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research.

16. Geoengineering might not be as ludicrous if we gave Earth the right dose
Sunlight reflecting off the Earth. Image: NASA
Solar geoengineering is widely viewed as risky business.
The somewhat sci-fi concept — to use blimps, planes, or other means to load Earth's atmosphere with particles or droplets that reflect sunlight and cool the planet — has crept into the mainstream conversation as a means of reversing relentless climate change, should our efforts to slash carbon emissions fail or sputter. But geoengineering schemes come with a slew of hazards. A number of studies have cited the ill consequences of messing with Earth's sun intake, including big falls in crop production, the likelihood of unforeseen adverse side effects, and critically, a weakened water cycle that could trigger drops in precipitation and widespread drought.
Yet new research, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, acknowledges these problems but finds a potential fix: only deploying enough reflective specks in the atmosphere to reduce about half of Earth's warming, rather than relying on geoengineering to completely return Earth to the cooler, milder climate of the 19th century. In other words, giving Earth a geoengineering dose that would reverse a significant portion of the warming, but not enough to stoke the problematic side effects.
"Solar engineering might not be a good choice in an emergency," said David Keith, a solar engineering researcher at Harvard University and study coauthor. "If it makes any sense at all, it makes sense to gradually ramp it up."

17. The ocean keeps gulping up a colossal amount of CO2 from the air, but will it last?
Image: Getty Images/WIN-Initiative RM
With no benefit to itself, Earth's vast sea has gulped up around 30 percent of the carbon dioxide humans emitted into Earth's atmosphere over the last century. Critically, scientists have now confirmed that the ocean in recent decades has continued its steadfast rate of CO2 absorption, rather than letting the potent greenhouse gas further saturate the skies.
But a weighty question still looms: How much longer can we rely on the ocean to so effectively store away carbon dioxide, and stave off considerably more global warming?
"At some point the ability of the ocean to absorb carbon will start to diminish," said Jeremy Mathis, a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) climate scientist who coauthored the study. "It means atmospheric CO2 levels could go up faster than they already are."
"That's a big deal," Mathis emphasized.

Links

It’s Time For Climate Change Communicators To Listen To Social Science

Grist

Doom and gloom essays are more likely to offend skeptical readers than to convince them. Cognitive studies suggest there’s a better way.
Kelly Sillaste / Getty Images
David Wallace-Wells’ recent climate change essay in the New York Times, published as part of the publicity for his new book “The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming,” is, sadly, like a lot of writing on climate change these days: It’s right about the risk, but wrong about how it tries to accomplish the critical goal of raising public concern.
Like other essays that have sounded the alarms on global warming — pieces by Bill McKibben, James Hansen, and George Monbiot come to mind — Wallace-Wells’ offers a simple message: I’m scared. People should be scared. Here are the facts. You should be scared too.
To be sure, Wallace-Wells and these other writers are thoughtful, intelligent, and well-informed people. And that is precisely how they try to raise concern: with thought, intelligence, and information, couched in the most dramatic terms at the grandest possible scale. Wallace-Wells invokes sweeping concepts like “planet-warming,” “human history,” and global emissions; remote places like the Arctic; broad geographical and geopolitical terms like “coral reefs,” “ice sheet,” and “climate refugees;” and distant timeframes like 2030, 2050, and 2100.
It’s a common approach to communicating risk issues, known as the deficit model. Proceeding from the assumption that your audience lacks facts —that is, that they have a deficit —all you need to do it give them the facts, in clear and eloquent and dramatic enough terms, and you can make them feel like you want them to feel, how they ought to feel, how you feel. But research on the practice of risk communication has found that this approach usually fails, and often backfires. The deficit model may work fine in physics class, but it’s an ineffective way to try to change people’s attitudes. That’s because it appeals to reason, and reason is not what drives human behavior.
For more than 50 years, the cognitive sciences have amassed a mountainous body of insight into why we think and choose and act as we do. And what they have found is that facts alone are literally meaningless. We interpret every bit of cold objective information through a thick set of affective filters that determine how those facts feel — and how they feel is what determines what those facts mean and how we behave. As 17th century French mathematician and theologian Blaise Pascal observed, “We know truth, not only by the reason, but also by the heart.”
Yet a large segment of the climate change commentariat dismisses these social science findings. In his piece for the New York Times, Wallace-Wells mentions a few cognitive biases that fall under the rubric of behavioral economics, including optimism bias (things will go better for me than the next guy) and status quo bias (it’s easier just to keep things as they are). But he describes them in language that drips with condescension and frustration:
How can we be this deluded? One answer comes from behavioral economics. The scroll of cognitive biases identified by psychologists and fellow travelers over the past half-century can seem, like a social media feed, bottomless. And they distort and distend our perception of a changing climate. These optimistic prejudices, prophylactic biases, and emotional reflexes form an entire library of climate delusion.
Polls suggest that even people who are alarmed about climate change aren’t particularly alarmed about the threat to themselves. Visual: Pete Linforth / Pixabay
Moreover, behavioral economics is only one part of what shapes how we feel about risk. Another component of our cognition that has gotten far too little attention, but plays a more important part in how we feel about climate change, is the psychology of risk perception. Pioneering research by Paul Slovic, Baruch Fischhoff, Sarah Lichtenstein, and many others has identified more than a dozen discrete psychological characteristics that cause us to worry more than we need to about some threats and less than we need to about others, like climate change.
For example, we don’t worry as much about risks that don’t feel personally threatening. Surveys suggest that even people who are alarmed about climate change aren’t particularly alarmed about the threat to themselves. The most recent poll by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication found that while 70 percent of Americans believe climate change is happening, only around 40 percent think “it will harm me personally.”
We also worry more about risks that threaten us soon than risks that threaten us later. Evolution has endowed us with a risk-alert system designed to get us to tomorrow first — and only then, maybe, do we worry about what comes later. So even those who think climate change is already happening believe, accurately, that the worst is yet to come. Risk communication that talks about the havoc that climate change will wreak in 2030, in 2050, or “during this century” contributes to that “we don’t really have to worry about it now” feeling.
Risk perception research also suggests that we worry less about risky behaviors if those behaviors also carry tangible benefits. So far, that’s been the case for climate change: For many people living in the developed world, the harms of climate change are more than offset by the modern comforts of a carbon-intensive lifestyle. Even those who put solar panels on their roofs or make lifestyle changes in the name of reducing their carbon footprint often continue with other bad behaviors: shopping and buying unsustainably, flying, having their regular hamburger.
Interestingly Wallace-Wells admits this is even true for him:
I know the science is true, I know the threat is all-encompassing, and I know its effects, should emissions continue unabated, will be terrifying. And yet, when I imagine my life three decades from now, or the life of my daughter five decades from now, I have to admit that I am not imagining a world on fire but one similar to the one we have now.
Yet he writes that “the age of climate panic is here,” and he expects that delivering all the facts and evidence in alarmist language will somehow move others to see things differently. This is perhaps Wallace-Wells’ biggest failure: By dramatizing the facts and suggesting that people who don’t share his level of concern are irrational and delusional, he is far more likely to offend readers than to convince them. Adopting the attitude that “my feelings are right and yours are wrong” — that “I can see the problem and something’s wrong with you if you can’t” — is a surefire way to turn a reader off, not on, to what you want them to believe.
Contrast all this deficit-model climate punditry with the effective messaging of the rising youth revolt against climate change. Last August, 16-year-old Swedish student Greta Thunberg skipped school and held a one-person protest outside her country’s parliament to demand action on climate change. In the six months since, there have been nationwide #FridaysforFuture school walkouts in at least nine countries, and more are planned.
Thunberg has spoken to the United Nations and the World Economic Forum in Davos, with an in-your-face and from-the-heart message that’s about not just facts but her very real and personal fear:
Adults keep saying: “We owe it to the young people to give them hope.” But I don’t want your hope… I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. And then I want you to act.
By speaking to our hearts and not just our heads — and by framing the issue in terms of personal and immediate fear of a future that promises more harm than benefit — Thunberg has started an international protest movement.
The lesson is clear. Wallace-Wells’ New York Times essay will get lots of attention among the intelligentsia, but he is not likely to arouse serious new support for action against climate change. Risk communication that acknowledges and respects the emotions and psychology of the people it tries to reach is likely to have far greater impact — and that’s exactly what the effort to combat climate change needs right now.

Links