Balancing the urgency of climate action with what’s possible
The younger generation is pushing us in the right direction
There’s a disconnect when it comes to addressing the climate crisis. Each week, it seems, we read about a new scientific report predicting dire impacts if we fail to act. On our TV and phone screens, we see entire towns burned to the ground in California, more than a billion animals killed by wildfires in Australia, and storms causing unimaginable destruction in Puerto Rico. But while a growing, overwhelming majority of Americans supports action to stem climate change, that public sentiment has not yet spurred the action necessary to meet the scale of the problem.
Much of the blame for this inaction, of course, lies with the current administration. President Donald Trump and the federal agencies he runs mostly ignore or deny climate change, and have taken repeated actions that will result in more global warming emissions.
But even among climate advocates, there’s disagreement about the path forward, both substantively and politically. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said in its 2018 report that the world needs to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 to avoid dangerous levels of warming. Given our inaction at the federal level, some states are attempting to pick up the slack, but experts say that those collective efforts aren’t enough, yet.
That has led to a growing frustration that not only haven’t we taken sufficient action, but the solutions currently being put forward aren’t bold enough. This tension between what is necessary to tackle climate change and what some view as politically possible has resulted in an incredible groundswell of action, led by teenagers, and even some young children.
Whether it’s the climate strikes led by Greta Thunberg, the rapid rise of the Sunrise Movement, or the kids suing the federal government over its failure to protect their future, the younger generation is taking matters into its own hands and pressuring our leaders to act. It’s hard to watch one of Greta’s speeches, see the fear and anguish she has about her future and the future of the planet, and not wonder: what on Earth are we waiting for?
Unfortunately, like so many other issues, response to the climate crisis has become mired in politics and polarization. The result is a vicious cycle: Political gridlock means delay in action, which makes the situation worse, and therefore, as renowned environmentalist Bill McKibben often points out, requires bolder solutions. After all, he says, our “adversary” here is science, not each other. All the while, because of this gridlock and partisanship, the scope of what elected officials deem politically possible diminishes.
So how do we break this cycle? First, our elected officials would be wise to take the advocacy of younger generations seriously and set their sights higher in terms of what they view as politically possible. The politics of climate are changing rapidly, and the old rules might soon not apply.
On the other side, climate advocates would be wise to realize that despite their understandable frustration with the lack of action, we have to start somewhere. Take the little victories where we can find them, bring others on board — even unlikely allies — and continue changing the politics of the issue so that we get to the point where bold action is possible. First and foremost, that means voting people into office who take climate change seriously and prioritize it.
In other words, this isn’t an either/or proposition. We should balance lofty ambition with taking advantage of low-hanging fruit. That’s what the hard work of building support for an issue entails. Is it frustrating? Of course. But it’s possible, as we’ve seen with the incredible movement toward 100 percent renewable energy in the states.
Every fraction of a degree of warming that we prevent matters. Even as the timeline for action gets tighter, we’d all be wise to remember that, and keep pushing forward.
