Climate change concern is not doomerism. We must take action.
A recent opinion piece by James Briggs laments "climate doomerism," which he perceived in a news article that took a "dark turn" (Brigg’s words) about a jogger in Chicago who said she was "not enjoying" prematurely warm weather that she attributed to climate change.
I agree that messages focusing solely on climate doom are unhelpful. A jogger should not have to feel guilty about enjoying warm winter weather. However, it is important that we recognize this "new normal" warm weather as signaling the reality of climate change that increasingly affects us. Awareness of this fact does not make me ashamed or depressed. Instead, it makes me more determined, as a climate activist, to work harder to support actions to reduce carbon emissions and their climate impacts.
Briggs explains his angst as follows: “The links between individual choices and human-caused climate change are tenuous.” This statement seems misdirected in implicitly suggesting that individual actions can be disregarded as contributors to climate change. I fear it also may discourage those who might otherwise support climate action.
While the carbon emissions attributable to an individual — if viewed in isolation — may have a minuscule climate impact, we must recognize that much of the carbon emissions contributing to global warming are the collective sum of the actions of billions of individuals.
Roughly 20% of U.S. carbon emissions are attributed to household energy usage. We should encourage individuals to reduce household emissions without making them feel ashamed or blameworthy for those emissions. And we must work together to urge our governments and large-scale industrial emitters to take effective action to reduce emissions.
Briggs further remarks, “In reality, there’s been no better time in human history than now.” He contrasts “now” with references to high infant mortality and higher child mortality over most of human history and then asserts “no mainstream climate models suggest a return to a world as bad as the one we had in 1950, let alone in 1150.” This statement confusingly conflates the past ravages of diseases now controlled by modern medical science with the present and future impacts of climate change.
Current global temperatures are high enough to melt summer sea ice in the Arctic and the massive ice deposits of Greenland. Existing temperatures are also thawing the Arctic permafrost, releasing methane — one of the most potent greenhouse gases — from vast ancient deposits of decomposing organic materials.
We are looking at a future in which wildfires, droughts, flooding and summer hot spells, already more damaging due to climate change, will worsen. The open question is how much worse. The answer depends on how much and how quickly global carbon emissions are reduced.
The good news: We have the necessary technologies to successfully decarbonize almost all human sources of carbon emissions. But we cannot assume the political will exists to use these available technologies. The fossil fuel industry has aggressively resisted actions to eliminate carbon emissions for over 50 years.
Larry Kane is a former environmental attorney. He lives in Carmel.
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Climate change solutions require all of us working to decarbonize
