Responsibility

In my last posting I wrote about some of the types of global warming denial I have seen. I think that often these are ways of avoiding unpleasant thoughts or feelings. But they are also ways of avoiding responsibility.

Many of the absolute deniers probably know at some level that if they admitted global warming was real and that humans are causing it, they might feel some responsibility to do something about it. I’m sure most don’t want to believe that the people they have been following have been wrong or that many have been intentionally misleading them. I think most of these people will never change their views, much less take on the responsibility of fighting global warming voluntarily. And unfortunately there are many people in this category.

Even if I thought the chances of global warming having the bad effects that scientists predict was small, as many people in the United States do, I would not want to take the risk unless I had to. We don’t have to take that risk, so why do so many people behave as if they want to? Every person who denies global warming or avoids it or does nothing is acting as if they want to take the risk. Based on the past successes of science, I’d say the chances are not very good that the vast majority of climate scientists are completely wrong. I know that some people are just confused by the misinformation being spread by others, so maybe I shouldn’t judge them too harshly. But their confusion doesn’t make the results any less dangerous to us all. And those who are intentionally misleading people are guilty of the worst crime.

The willfully ignorant often know on some level that it would be better not to ignore the subject. You can get away with ignoring many unpleasant things, but you ignore others at your own peril, and often the peril of others. Many people avoid going to the doctor when something is wrong because they are afraid of what they might find out. But it is almost always easier to deal with a medical problem if you catch it early. Ignoring a major problem like cancer is only going to make treating it more difficult and painful, or impossible if you wait too long, and it will affect not just you but everyone who cares about you or depends on you. I think everyone should learn at least enough to know what needs to be done, and then do what they can to help.

The people who don’t know how bad things could get or how urgent the situation is also need to learn more. Otherwise they will continue to think other problems should have priority. This includes the vast majority of liberals and even many environmentalists. Influential people like talk show hosts, commentators, bloggers, politicians, and other leaders have a special obligation to put important issues into perspective. Global warming is the most important issue for many reasons, but my best argument is that if it goes out of control, none of the other issues will matter any more. If you doubt this, read “Six Degrees” and really think about the implications of what the scientists predict. It’s not just that people living on the coast will have to move inland, it’s also that droughts, encroaching deserts, and melted glaciers will make food and water scarce worldwide, severe weather events will become common, diseases will spread, mass extinctions will occur, wars and conflicts will arise as people fight for resources, and so on. When all these things happen at the same time, I think the economy would inevitably collapse, along with most other systems we rely on and take for granted. Think about every issue that you think is more important than global warming, and ask yourself whether it will be relevant in a world like that. Don’t ignore other issues, of course, just give global warming the importance it deserves.

The head of the IPCC said recently that the minimum we must do is have emissions peak by 2015 and fall rapidly after that to 85% by 2050. Their reports also seem to indicate emissions need to fall 25-40% by 2020. This is projected to make the peak temperature 2.0 – 2.4 degrees C above preindustrial levels. A recent model says we need to reduce emissions 95% by 2020 to keep temperatures to 2.0 degrees C below preindustrial levels. I do not know which is closer to the truth, but my guess would be that it’s somewhere between those two estimates. In order to accomplish either, we have to make massive changes in a very short period of time. That means we have to start now just to have a chance of being successful. How could it be any more urgent?

I hope that the question in your mind now is, “What can I do?” The people most likely to survive cancer are the fighters, the ones who not only get all the information they can from the experts but who take the recommended actions and even do more. We need all the fighters we can get, and we need to fight on many levels.

One obvious level is to try to reduce your personal carbon footprint. Many people are already doing this, but most of us could do more. Still, as important as your personal carbon footprint is, it is not the most important thing you could do right now.

Communication is another important thing you can do, but it is not enough either. Many people have been talking and writing about global warming for years, and look where it has gotten us. The situation is way worse than ever before. Also, there are many people and organizations spreading misinformation and blocking progress any way they can. They are doing a very good job of making vast numbers of people think global warming is a hoax and have stalled meaningful action in this country for decades.

So communication and reducing your own footprint are both necessary, but it will take more to solve this problem quickly enough. The most important thing is to do whatever you can to influence your government, especially at the national level, to take aggressive action without delay. Government action is the most important right now, and it will get you the most bang for the buck.

This is such an important point that I want to explain my reasoning. A friend of mine said that the only solution is for each individual to do their part and that government can’t solve the problem. I would agree if I thought everybody would buy an electric vehicle and a solar panel big enough to supply all their needs, only buy locally grown food and locally made products, never buy any manufactured goods, and never fly, invest only in green companies, and so on. But do you even know one person who does all that? To think everyone will do this voluntarily is a fantasy, not a solution. The system as it exists now makes it almost impossible for people to do enough, even if they want to (and many do not want to). Electric cars and solar panels and wind turbines are still way too expensive for the vast majority of people. But if we changed the system in the right ways, we could make it much easier. We could even make it difficult not to do your part instead of difficult to do your part. If the only vehicle you could buy was electric or other zero-emissions vehicles, and if all of our electricity came from zero-emission sources, then it would require no special effort to dramatically reduce your personal carbon footprint. That is the type of changes to the system we need.

I think it is absolutely essential for government to get heavily involved. That doesn’t mean government can or should do everything. The task is so huge that government and other organizations working with individuals is the only solution. But almost no government is close to doing their part yet, so individuals need to push their governments much harder. Right now that is the most important part of each individual’s responsibility. The Copenhagen talks that will happen this December (2009) will set the stage for what happens all over the world for the next several years. I seriously doubt we can wait for the next such meeting. By then we would already be committed to such high temperatures that runaway global warming would be almost certain.

It might help if I compare this to a problem we faced in the past. Would a grassroots effort or personal responsibility have been the appropriate response to the bombing of Pearl Harbor and to Germany declaring war on the U.S.? It’s obvious that would not have worked. Even if everyone planted a victory garden and got their handguns and rifles ready, we would have been no match for the opposing armed forces. People may have tried to organize and do more, but it would not have been enough. For example, let’s say someone had the idea to get a bunch of people together to manufacture tanks. Most of the people who would have wanted to help would not have been able to, because they had a family to support, maybe a farm or business to run. And where would the money have come from? What about the expertise? Winning that war required not just personal responsibility, effort, and sacrifice, it also required heavy participation from the government, including ordering people and corporations to do what was needed. Nobody would seriously have considered a volunteer army. The government drafted people, essentially forcing them to fight. Of course many would have volunteered, but not enough, not quickly enough. And in the corporate realm the government had to be just as heavy-handed. For example, the federal government forced the auto companies to stop manufacturing cars and start building jeeps and tanks and other war machinery.

Another thing WWII required that is missing now is leadership appropriate to the task. That brings up the responsibility of the government. Why isn’t the federal government encouraging people to buy climate bonds to help fund the fight to stop global warming? Why aren’t they pouring money into research and recruiting scientists the way they did to create the atom bomb and all the other weapons and war machinery? Why aren’t we racing to a green energy future the way we raced to the moon? Why isn’t Obama using his great oratorical skills and passion to get people fired up about the greatest threat we have ever faced? The task is too great and the time is to short for anything less than an all-out effort such as this. We must all demand that our leaders do their part. That is part of our personal responsibility.

I have not even brought up the responsibility of corporations, because they don’t feel any responsibility that people don’t make them feel, and they think mainly about the short term. But we can influence corporations via petitions, boycotts, and encouraging the government to create rules and regulations that will force corporations to do what is in their own best long-term interests.

In one sense the climate scientists are the heroes of this story. They are the ones who first discovered the problem and have been getting us a clearer picture with every year. But I don’t think most of them are doing enough either. Some are too narrow in their vision to understand the big picture. They don’t think about the implications of their findings, in terms of the lives of people and other living things. Others think they must stick only to the science and stay completely out of policy or opinions of any kind. I think if any person knows something is threatening us all, it is their duty to speak out loudly and clearly. If nobody else is saying what needs to be said, or if the people propagating misinformation are drowning out the truth, you need to say something. Even most scientists who are willing to talk about the future speak in a way that trivializes the dangers. They use terms like “there may be increased pressures on the food supply” instead of “millions, perhaps billions of people could starve”. They will say that what we are doing is “not sustainable” instead of saying that if we don’t make drastic changes, our children or grandchildren may not live to have children of their own. If you are a scientist, those might mean similar things, but to non-scientists they have very different meanings. And it is the non-scientists you need to reach, both the people in power and the citizens. Be more like James Hansen, be more of a human being and talk to your fellow human beings in clear and unambiguous terms.

During WWII, Americans and people in many other countries made great sacrifices and did not make the excuse of being too busy. Many gave their lives, many suffered immensely. I think if people realized this threat is much worse than any war we have yet experienced, they would be willing to do much more. But it doesn’t feel like the threat is so great, because the worst is too far in the future and the problem is too abstract. I don’t feel threatened the way I would during a world war either, but I know the threat is there, and so I keep trying to do more and to think of ways to be more effective. Still, I feel like I am not doing nearly enough. David commented on my previous post that it is difficult to make a difference because of how rotten our system has become. I agree it is more difficult to make a difference now than it was in the 60s, but on the other hand they didn’t have the internet like we do now. Maybe we can take advantage of this amazing tool to get around the obstacles. I often feel like we need something very dramatic to shock people out of their complacency. If anyone has ideas for something dramatic, or any good ideas for solving this problem, please leave a comment.