Things Won't Change Before We Scream "Uncle"

 


I just read Gwynne Dyer's preview of the COP 26 climate summit published on October 31 but written a few days earlier.

Dyer panned the summit, concluding that beyond the already-negotiated pact on methane emissions there would be little meaningful coming out of the summit. Why? Well, that's your fault.

Reaching the Paris goal would require a 45 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. That’s not unthinkable if we treated this as an existential emergency — only five percentage points a year — but the grim fact is that we have never yet managed to cut global emissions.

“We are not going to get to a 45 per cent reduction,” admitted a UN official, who understandably wishes to remain anonymous, “but there must be some level of contributions on the table to show the downward trend of emissions.”

Why would a conference full of highly educated, well informed and mostly well intentioned people behave like this?

They’re not wicked people, and almost all of them know the truth. They just cannot afford to get too far ahead of the people they lead. A majority of citizens in almost every country worry about global heating, but dramatic change isn’t possible because it hasn’t reached their pain threshold yet.

...Three years of bombing never did find Hanoi’s pain threshold. Similarly, the accumulating damage to people and property by wild weather has not reached the population’s pain threshold anywhere except for a few low-lying island countries close to going underwater.

On our current track, we will irrevocably commit to plus-1.5 degrees by 2029 or 2030, but the time lag with CO2 means the effects might not be severe enough to shock a critical mass of people into action.

He's right. We want solutions but damned if we want to pay for them. We don't want to sacrifice. We want more, better and sooner.

A survey of residents of 10 developed countries found a solid majority want immediate action but they also want someone else to pick up the tab.

Only 51% said they would definitely act to protect the planet, with 14% saying they would definitely not and 35% torn. People in Poland and Singapore (56%) were the most willing to act, and in Germany (44%) and the Netherlands (37%) the least.

The most common reasons given for not being willing to do more for the planet were “I feel proud of what I am currently doing” (74%), “There isn’t agreement among experts on the best solutions” (72%), and “I need more resources and equipment from public authorities” (69%).

Other reasons for not wanting to do more included “I can’t afford to make those efforts” (60%), “I lack information and guidance on what to do” (55%), “I don’t think individual efforts can really have an impact” (39%), “I believe environmental threats are overestimated” (35%) and “I don’t have the headspace to think about it” (33%).

“Citizens are undeniably concerned by the state of the planet, but these findings raise doubts regarding their level of commitment to preserving it,” the study said. “Rather than translating into a greater willingness to change their habits, citizens’ concerns are particularly focused on their negative assessment of governments’ efforts.”

It's obvious that Dyer's "pain threshold" isn't even on the horizon. The great unknown is whether, when we achieve that point, our problems will be beyond our collective ability, government and the people, public sector and private, to solve anything. We may be reaching for the brakes when the front axle is already over the cliff.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Cognoscenti Syndrome

  There is a group of people I think of as the Cognoscenti, people who are well educated, very informed and of rapidly diminishing relevance. Their ranks include writers such as Chris Hedges and Glen Greenwald. These are people who have honed an almost Puritanical value system, readily finding fault in any direction. They are scathing in their attacks on Republicans and Democrats alike to the point where they become nihilists. They don't endorse. They prescribe. This is where they fail. They're unable to advocate for anything that might resonate with the public whose interests they argue are being trammeled. Donald Trump was bad but Joe Biden is scarcely better. This is where their elitism comes in.  74 million may have voted for Trump but, hey, they didn't know any better. The mob that stormed the Capitol. They were just victims of the system venting their frustrations. All the racism, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, white nationalism - inevitable side effects of their oppr...
Read more

The Gun We Point at Our Own Heads

Image
  If you're sitting at a table and there's a loaded pistol in front of you, do you pick it up and point it at your own head?  Probably not, unless something has gone terribly, terribly wrong. How would you feel if someone else was holding that pistol to your head? But there is a pistol pointed at our heads and, unless we do something about it, we're goners. It's not a Glock. It's fossil fuels and the industry is slowly squeezing the trigger. Proven fossil fuel reserves are sufficient to generate 3.5 trillion tons of greenhouse gas emissions .  Russia and the United States each have massive reserves of fossil energy sufficient to push humanity through the 1.5C heating limit, sometimes called the "carbon budget."  I have it on reliable authority that Washington and the Kremlin aren't getting along very well these days. After all, if you won't hold the line on nuclear proliferation, you might not be inclined to voluntarily give up a major source of na...
Read more

Who Asks "Why?"

Every time there's a conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, all we hear is 'why?'  Why, as in, whose fault is this? It's easier to affix blame if you can truncate the event. Pick a convenient start date, something recent. In this case we'll make it either the Israeli eviction of Arabs from Jerusalem or the scuffle that took place outside the mosque in response. If those don't work, let's go for Hamas launching unguided rockets into Israel. That's even better because it tags Hamas with the blame. The nice thing about this approach is you can just keep using it. It goes on and on, just as it has for the past half-century since the '67 war. You can even date this whole mess to the beginning of the occupation of the Palestinian territories. The Israelis are said to have called these periodic wars, "mowing the lawn." The idea is that, every now and then, you have to take these Arabs to the woodshed. And then you keep your powder dry unt...
Read more