It feels like the ultimate privilege to venture out on a typical chilly, fogbound summer evening in San Francisco and wistfully reach for a sweatshirt, wishing it were a bit warmer.
Meanwhile, as the news blares and a weekend sojourn 200 miles south affirms, much of the world is boiling.
Talk about living in a (climatic) bubble.
But, of course, nobody truly lives in a bubble, especially when it comes to global phenomena. No wall is high enough, no ocean wide enough, and no latitude or longitude unique enough to spare anyone from the effects of this unrelenting crisis.
It harms our physical and mental health, economy, and world order.
Even though we all share Earth, the consequences of our escalating atmospheric greenhouse gasses will strike unevenly. This equation is rooted in injustice—the wealthiest counties and individuals have been the greatest producers of the pollutants that are disproportionately killing, dislocating, and punishing the poorest and the most vulnerable who contributed the least to our centuries-long reckless ride with carbon.
Everywhere we look, we see a world out of balance. Or at least the balance upon which we once depended. Our planet will find new equilibria — the question is whether those will be habitable for us and all the other life forms we hold dear. The preponderance of data points in one direction — as do the anecdotes, like pieces of a puzzle no one wants to see finished.
The scenes of pilgrims dying in Saudi Arabia, the flood waters of the Midwest, and the triple-digit high temperatures across vast expanses of the globe produce another boiling point in our psyches and souls. How can so many people still deny reality? Why do they demonize efforts to try to thwart worst-case scenarios? How can people be so lost? So selfish? So, yes, stupid?
We must remember how the polluters and those who profit from them co-opted both the Republican Party and the truth to create a cacophonous echo chamber of cynicism, rage, and false victimhood. The folly of the lost decades of this century and last is pervasively apparent. And still, the con continues.
I remember in my early days at CBS News that “global warming,” as it was commonly referred to at the time, was still treated by many reporters, producers, and executives as a matter of legitimate scientific debate. It aggravated me to no end and helped propel me into my current science reporting and filmmaking career. These professional journalists could speak with fluency about the workings of Washington, misaligned Wall Street incentives, and the landscape of foreign affairs. Still, they didn’t have a basic understanding of how scientific consensus worked.
Eventually, they got the picture. There was a rash of reports from melting glaciers, flooding coastlines, and raging fires and floods. But precious years had been lost. This field reporting didn’t solve the damage to how the issue’s politics was covered. For starters, it was rarely mentioned. I remember writing about previous presidential debates that didn’t include a single climate question. There is also the scourge of false equivalence and the stenography of bad-faith political arguments.
If I were moderating the upcoming presidential debate, I would make climate a major part of the questioning—that and the future of democracy. Both are, in fact, intertwined because, in each case, the Republican candidate for president and large swaths of the party he has molded to his will all deny basic, undeniable truths.
Climate and democracy are the most significant threats we face because if we don’t fearlessly tackle them, we will cease to have the means to address all else that ails us. The repercussions will echo for generations to come.
The threats they pose to our long-term security are as severe as if armies were amassing to attack us.
What gives me hope is being around young people, even though the despair they feel is palpable. Polls show they see this issue as a top concern, and they understand that we will need to think boldly and courageously to find ways to save the planet.
If they give up the belief that they can make a difference, then we will all be lost.
It is imperative that older generations lend their energy and support to the movement. We must also share examples from the past of challenges that once seemed hopeless, where progress was forged through ingenuity and grit. I have seen time and again what human minds can conjure if given a chance.
But it all depends on this election. Vote like Earth depends on it. Because it does.
A good friend of mine who is a voracious reader believes that we're already past tipping points that cannot be reversed with even the most aggressive approach to conversion from fossil fuels. He points to the tundra, thawing of permafrost with the potential to release magnitudes more CO2 than any fossil fuel consumption over the coming decades. He points to the approximately 2 billion earthlings who still cook over wood fires and heat their humble dwellings with firewood. He points to population growth in places that use wood and charcoal outstripping the rate at which technology might liberate them from dependence on biomass burning. There doesn't appear to be a silver lining in that cloud. What is going to save us? The biggest volcanic eruption you can imagine? That solar "sail" the dreamers have been talking about? Another meteor the size of the one that doomed the dinasaurs? I ask myself "what can I do?" Well, my vehicle gets 40+ mpg, which is pretty good for the current moment. Better yet, I drive far less than I once did. I have two e-bikes, underutilized. I bought a heat pump. I'm replacing my windows with a modern insulated variety. I'm investigating rooftop solar systems. I've stopped mowing my lawn, am enjoying the meadow flowers that apparently also live amongst the grass. Now I need a goat or some giant bunnies to keep recycling all that high grass. These are items that are within my personal grasp. Is this enough? Should they give me hope?
Is it mere gestures after the proverbial horse is already out of the barn? We've had 50 Earth Days already. That obviously wasn't enough to motivate us to swifter action. 25 global climate summits haven't managed to put us on a true emergency footing. My best strategy is to focus on what's right in front of me and try to avoid a sort of "global despair" that only takes about 15 minutes to conjure up if I spend that much time thinking about it.
Thank you Elliot. As a science major, I first learned about the warming climate and the possible future ravages if we didn't "fix" it. But in 1970 the changing climate would give us at least 100 years to clean things up.
And here we are today, roughly 50 years later, having passed the point of no return. The best we can hope for is mitigation and that ONLY if we have full on global cooperation.
Now into the mix we have, as you said, the truly selfish (I got mine, I don't care about yours) and the utterly stupid (it's just a theory the scientists can't even agree - of course that was 50 years ago).
Phrases like 'carbon footprint' are meaningless to most people. Irresponsible policies like carbon off-set tax or cap or tradeoff do nothing. Allowing a corporation to "buy" the right to continue polluting is a foul fantasy.
What the hell are you going to do with all that money? Beg the sun to stop nuclear fusion for a hundred years so we can pollute a little longer?
The Public Utilitiies Commission in California is a big joke. They slap PG&E and Southern Edison on the wrist, but allow them to keep raking in obscene profits while they refuse to maintain their power lines. They used to hire private airlines to patrol the California forests daily to sight small fires, downed lines.
Back then most of the large forest fires occurred in the hunting season caused by careless hunters. Now most of the fires (and gas line explosions) are caused by poorly maintained power lines and gas lines.
It took years to convince the government to reel in the auto manufacturing industry to lower the high polluting cars. Now the situation is so bad the best we can hope for is increased use of electric vehicles.
Unless we get serious TODAY for many of you there will be no future. You don't like immigrants? Baby you ain't seen nothing yet. In the not too distant future Homo sapiens world wide including the denizens of the US will be desperately trying to find a safe place to live and survive.
Will the planet be destroyed? No. Will humans cease to exist? No. My biggest fear is the wrong ones will survive, the Elon Musk's and Donald Trump's of this world will start the vicious cycle all over again.