The US atmospheric chemist on why she doesn’t share the pessimism of most climate scientists, fixing the ozone layer, and why Jacques Cousteau is her hero
Sharing this here as I feel it's relevant to the GE campaign.
The evidence suggests that in about three weeks, we're going to give a landslide to the party promising the most radical green policies in this country's history. Environmentalism is just about to win the argument in Britain, as long as we vote for it on the 4th of July. Don't give in to cynicism and despair!
I'm very cynical and I despaired long ago, but giving these Tories a kicking is giving me motivation. I live in one of those formerly safe Tory seats, so I'm going to enjoy placing my cross this year.
There's not enough evidence for that statement imo. We see a drop in emissions here because we see a drop in emissions in general. This is however not strictly scalable and might bottom out at a certain point, at which point GDP growth will again cause emissions to rise.
Global energy related CO2 emissions could peak by 2025:
Not a good thing (and also hypothetical), considering that we should be carbon neutral within the decade.
Remember, pessimism isn't useful:
I'm rather pessimistic and want much more action to be taken, instead of spreading toxic positivity that causes people to slack off or shift blame.
toxic positivity that causes people to slack off or shift blame.
To be fair, the general public, even the slack ones, do not deserve much blame. It should be much much easier to live plastic-free or fossil-free than it is. We're all under financial pressure and nice-to-haves like eco-friendly purchases are naturally the first thing to go when your other choice is to choose between heating and eating. We need to target our blame thoughtfully.
No one is pushing toxic positivity. Positivity becomes toxic when it’s based on suppressing feelings. Instead of accepting and working through negative or challenging emotions, toxically positive behavior simply pushes them away. I'm not advocating for the latter or suggesting we ignore the many problems the world is facing, only that in doing so we don't also ignore the tangible positives to.
I'm sorry that the information I provided doesn't meet your requirements. Personally I believe that optimism and hope is important, and that we shouldn't let perfect be the enemy of good - any progress is better than none at all.
Indeed we see this mentioned in the article linked in the header:
...in this case there has long been a group of people out there who believe we should tell the worst stories we possibly can, because then the public will get it and wake up and that will enable change. That practice has not really worked.
If positivity doesn't feel right for you, or doesn't feel right in this specific situation, that's okay. Sometimes we use worry and other negative outcomes to help us. Just remember to look after your mental health. There's a lot of negative news out there at the moment and constant doomscrolling is bad for you: https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/cravings/202208/are-you-negative-news-junkie
Maybe take the time to remind yourself of what is going right in the world:
No one is pushing toxic positivity. Positivity becomes toxic when it’s based on suppressing feelings. Instead of accepting and working through negative or challenging emotions, toxically positive behavior simply pushes them away. I'm not advocating for the latter, indeed you will see from my response I was simply providing additional positive content.
Yet here you are, basically trying to shut me up and go as far as accusing me of mental health issues and doomscrolling. You know what causes change? Anger. You even see it with all the far right movements gaining massively all over the West. People need to be angry at all those things that are actually wrong, people need to demand change. Yet, most people can't even bother to vote for climate relevant parties or candidates, because they rather live their comfortable lives instead of being potentially affected by actual climate policies that would be necessary.
But getting angry at something doesn't mean we have to be angry all the time. Neither does it mean we have to do so at the expense of other emotions, including hope and positivity. Emotional engagement with climate change is complicated, and it's important we understand that one size doesn't fit all. If anger works for you, great, but it may not work for everyone: