Should we feel hopeless about climate change?

Over coffee with friends, one provided a lengthy list of climate-related matters of grave concern, and expressed his extremely pessimistic views on where we’re headed.

I’m wary of extreme pessimism. It easily becomes despair, which I reject as a matter of principle.

The day before, I had discussed this same issue with a federal employee whose job includes reviewing modeling of the financial impact of climate change. He’s immersed in this stuff, and has a centrist view on it. He speaks against what he calls “catastrophism” which he regards as unproductive and paralyzing.

He says that the planning models provide a range of possible outcomes, and that in light of major developments that haven’t been incorporated into the mainstream media narratives with which we’re familiar, it isn’t prudent to rely on edge cases in the projections with regard to our personal assessments (and emotional responses).

Big businesses that rigorously analyze the literature don’t rely on the edge cases, and whatever we may think of their values and social concerns, their profit motives may cause these businesses to make assessments that are not entirely catastrophic.

This is not to say that the edge cases can’t happen. It’s just that their probability is relatively low, and in some instances lower that one might think. Too, my friend’s perspective is that the mainstream media often hasn’t caught up with this changing perspective, and because of the desire to garner “clicks” (“if it bleeds, it leads”) may tend to overemphasize the likelihood of the worst case happening.

I claim no expertise on climate change. I’m just a layperson informed by mainstream media. For me, this is one of those areas where it’s hard to know what and whom to rely on. I, like most of my friends, accept that climate change is happening right now, and it’s bad.

There’s a lot of cherrypicking of science and experts in advocacy. Fear is used to motivate us. For example, a friend became suicidally depressed after watching An Inconvenient Truth. I recall criticisms of that film for inaccuracy. And, of course, those critics aren’t necessarily trustworthy.

Here’s what looks to me like a balanced view:

1. There is an unprecedented global climate and ecological emergency. If governments do not undertake enormous measures to mitigate climate change, then some form of “societal collapse” is plausible — albeit in varying forms and undoubtedly far worse for the poorest people.
2. Policymakers and society at large are not treating this grave threat with anything approaching sufficient urgency.
3. The climate crisis is dire enough in any case to justify urgent action, including mass sustained nonviolent disruption, to pressure governments to address it swiftly.
4. However, neither social science nor the best available climate science support [a] core premise: that near-term societal collapse due to climate change is inevitable.
5. This false belief undermines the environmental movement and could lead to harmful political decisions, overwhelming grief, and fading resolve for decisive action.
6. Respecting the distinction between the coming hardships and unstoppable collapse clarifies our agency to minimise future harm by mitigating and adapting to climate change, whilst freeing us from moral and political blinkers.

Source: The Faulty Science, Doomism and Flawed Conclusions of Deep Adaptation
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/oureconomy/faulty-science-doomism-and-flawed-conclusions-deep-adaptation/

Below are more resources, some of which are from my friend. I’ve included some excerpts with the links. I offer them for what they’re worth.

The evidence and conclusions (which are two different things) don’t, in my view, support optimism on the impact of climate change. Yet, they don’t require hopelessness.

And if there is hope, we can act fruitfully to limit the impact of climate change. And we may be favorably surprised by what actually happens. I hope that is the case.

Emissions-the business as usual story is misleading
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00177-3

Nine Reasons to Have Climate Hope in 2020
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/9-reasons-have-climate-hope-2020

Our Planet is Not Doomed
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/07/our-planet-is-not-doomed-that-means-we-can-must-act/

Which Climate Path Are We On?
https://www.resources.org/resources-radio/which-climate-path-are-we-zeke-hausfather/

Shifting carbon emissions sources: “What’s interesting, particularly in the last few years, is that global coal use is no longer the biggest driver of increasing emissions. These days, it’s actually natural gas that’s adding more CO2 emissions than anything else.” (4:38)

Problems with conventional “business-as-usual” metrics: “In a world where global coal use peaked in 2013, where clean energy prices are falling, where 2019 saw a record decline in coal use, the idea that we’re going to turn around, re-embrace coal in a huge way, and have it drive pretty much all the growth and global energy use of the next century is very unlikely … But a lot of climate science papers in the intervening years have referred to [this scenario] as ‘business-as-usual.’ We’re making the argument that we really need to stop doing that.” (12:18)

Next steps to hit climate targets: “[Our current climate trajectory] is a reason for hope: we are making progress, we have falling clean energy prices, we have clean renewables … The trends are moving in the right direction, but not nearly fast enough to get to where we need to in terms of these climate targets.” (18:15)