Why Nobody Cares about Climate Change
We can’t fix a problem if we don’t face its root cause.
I have a loaded question for you. Are you CO2-Neutral?
We are rational people. The readers here likely care about climate change. We know our daily activities contribute to the problem, and the easiest way to combat this effect is to purchase carbon offsets. For all their faults, offsets are the most direct way to fund green energy sources — and the best way to reduce fossil fuel dependence. And yet, very few people even consider it. Why is this?
If you are going to solve a problem, it pays to understand the root causes. Climate change isn’t happening because Dr. Evil is trying to destroy the earth. We clearly understand the cause & effect, so we can’t claim ignorance. And yet intelligent people make it worse every day. So if the problem isn’t malice or stupidity, what is it?
Ironically, the problem is that humans are rational, and climate change is a massive example of the prisoners’ dilemma. In this classic game theory puzzle, two prisoners are accused of a crime and have a choice. If both plead innocence, they receive light sentences. However, if either claims the other did it, they walk free and the other receives all the punishment. If both betray the other, they both receive medium sentences. The best outcome for the group is to cooperate, and the worst is to betray. Unfortunately for the group, each individuals’ outcome is better if they betray the other.
This thought experiment is valuable for understanding our apathy toward climate change because it explains why we refuse to act and offers some suggestions on how to approach the problem.
Climate action is sacrifice. This is true whether you are a single person, a corporation, or the US government. If reducing carbon were profitable, it’d be gone already (and we’d be stressing over an impending ice age). If we all worked together, we’d get the best outcome. However, if one entity cheated just a bit, they would be better off, and the world would still be mostly the same. If everyone were honest, cheating would be a very logical decision. Unfortunately, the more people cheat, the more those who don’t will be penalized, and the more irrational honesty becomes.
“Nobody cares about climate change.”
I take the controversial position that the world is not overflowing with honest people, corporations, or governments. We all know this, so we do the rational thing which is nothing. All the while we tell ourselves that “Nobody cares about climate change.”
So, how can the prisoners’ dilemma be solved? There are various approaches, most of which are being applied to climate change right now.
- Change human nature
If the problem is that humans are selfish, can they be persuaded to be not-selfish? This has been attempted — communism and the de-growth movements seem to have this at their heart. However, there is a reason you won’t find the board members of Exxon championing these movements. Those advocating these approaches are (generally speaking) those who benefit from them.
2. Use an external authority to enforce behavior
Most of human society works because we rely on governments to enforce agreements. However, the only enforcer in international politics is power. Is anyone going to police the US if it breaks its agreements? After Trump, should other countries assume US agreements are reliable?
3. Remove the penalty
This is the approach of the business community. The prisoners will always cooperate if there is no threat of punishment. Electric cars, solar energy, and efficient insulation are great at reducing emissions because they are ultimately better products. However, while we certainly hope we can profit our way through the climate crisis, there are excellent reasons to expect otherwise.
4. Change the incentives
Carbon taxes or limits effectively change the balance of the penalties. These work by introducing a penalty on defectors, increasing that actions cost to make cooperation more desirable. While this sounds good, it isn’t easy to apply globally because we still have a different set of actors in prison. An implementing country penalizes its industry — a tough political pill to swallow when others don’t follow along.
5. Make choices visible
NASA recently launched a satellite capable of monitoring regional fluctuations in CO2. The prisoners’ dilemma is about trust, and trust is about verification. Suppose the prisoners can talk to each other, wouldn’t the odds of cooperation increase significantly? Measuring CO2 in real-time means it is possible to prove our promises, and we can hope this will incentivize countries to work together. Of course, if they can see others aren’t pulling their weight, it could also go the other way.
So is it hopeless? No, of course not! We’ve solved the prisoners’ dilemma millions of times. However, we need to realize the challenge in front of us in order to apply pressure effectively. After all, if you aren’t offsetting your footprint, that is entirely rational. Trusting a large corporation to penalize itself is slightly less rational. All entities act in their self-interest, and a successful approach to the climate crisis can’t ignore this time-proven facet of humanity.
