Climate Talks and Forests

One of the encouraging elements of the COP talks has been the abundantly clear trend that governments and the private sector are, at least publically, in favor of halting forest loss by 2030. This is essential because trees and forests can capture excess CO2 in the atmosphere. In many ways, ACC has been made worse by deforestation and the removal of these essential carbon sinks. Ending forest loss will require several industries to cooperate. Not only must palm oil or paper companies re-think their operations, agricultural practices in especially the beef industry have to change. This is a huge problem in South America, where forests are cleared en masse to provide grazing land to the detriment of biodiversity. Vague promises of “investing in sustainable products” is not enough.

There is not a universal response by all countries. As we read about previously, some countries like those in SE Asia have adopted a REDD+ strategy to promote sustainable forest management. Particular bright spots were in Africa and Latin America, where some states have committed to preservation of twenty million hectares by 2020. Nearly 20 more countries have committed to invest more in rural development, as most deforestation occurs in rural areas where economic opportunity is limited. Another positive development is the Landscape Restoration project in collaboration with the Bonn Challenge are setting aside five million hectares of forest and are working to preserve another sixty million.

These developments are profoundly positive, and would not have been achieved without passionate, committed activists. However, forests are relatively low-hanging fruit politically and (most) everyone supports forests. The biggest challenge is keeping fossil fuels in the ground, something industry largely opposes.

ACC and its Impacts on Grizzlies in Yellowstone

The US Fish and Wildlife Service is likely to remove the Yellowstone grizzly bear (ursus arctos) population from the endangered species list, which gives federal management and protection through the Endangered Species Act. This action would return the grizzlies to state management, even in light of the fact these agencies have already indicated that they would immediately start sport hunting seasons on the bears, despite very limited evidence of increased population.

The scientific evidence used to justify the removal of the Yellowstone grizzly from ESA protection is based on range expansion, not verifiable increases in population. Environmentalists and wildlife advocates argue that range expansion is not the same as growing population and indicates that bears are using different habitats at lower elevations. This is because the whitebark pine nut, an important food for grizzlies in vulnerable times of late autumn and early spring, has been in decimated by climate change. The temporal range of the parasitic mountain pine beetle has allowed them to feast on the trees later into the fall and earlier every spring, as a result this nutritious, fat-laden resource is less available, causing grizzlies to move down the mountainside in search of increased sustenance. In short, range expansion is a consequence of climate change, not increased grizzly numbers.

In addition, the Yellowstone grizzly population is suffering from a lack of genetic diversity. Large mammals and especially carnivores need to disperse over long ranges to maintain genetic viability. As the Yellowstone grizzly is cut off from other populations to the north and west, there is a dangerous lack of genetic diversity in the Yellowstone grizzly population, another argument to keep the bears protected.

Furthermore, the USFWS is using the ESA distinct population segment language against the original intent of the ESA. The distinct population segment provision was added to the act so that population segments of non-threatened species could get protection where they needed it, but the agency is using this language in the opposite way: to divide up segments that are already vulnerable to justify removing them from the endangered species list.

Costello, C. M. et al. 2014. “Influence of Whitebark Pine Decline on Fall Habitat Use and Movements of Grizzly Bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem”. Ecology and Evolution 4: 2004-2018.

Craig, C.R. and Waits, L.P. 2003. “The History of Effective Population Size and Genetic Diversity in Yellowstone Grizzly: Implications for Conservation”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Scientists 100 (7): 4338.

Mattson, D.J. and Merrill T. 2002. “Extirpations of Grizzly Bears in the Contiguous United States, 1850-200”. Conservation Biology 16 (4): 1123-1136.

Merrill, T and Mattson D.J. 2003. “The Extent and Location of Habitat Biophysically Suitable for Grizzly Bears in the Yellowstone Region”. Ursus 14:  171-187

Indigenous Peoples at COP21

The first climate refugees in the lower 48 will be indigenous peoples from Washington state. The Quinault Indian Nation of the Olympic Peninsula has already begun the process of relocating further inland as the Pacific Ocean threatens to wash away their ancestral home. This is tragic. Not only were these  native peoples the victims of genocide, epidemic, and discrimination and dispossessed of their land and culture, now they must surrender what little land they have left due to ACC and the burning of fossil fuels, a process by which they benefited very little.

Furthermore, the glacier that feeds the Quinault River (which the QIN has relied on for thousands of years as a fishing people, known for centuries for high quality salmon) has melted completely. The glacier was very important for the river system's ecology by providing a steady stream of cold water, which is now gone. You'd think Big Oil would be satisfied with the damage they've done thus far, but they're trying to further intrude on the Quinault by sending for oil trains through their land.

Faced by these and other injustices, native nations have adopted advocacy and litigation practices of the dominant Euroamerican society. This includes advocacy and protest at international meetings on climate change, such as COP 21. The QIN as a sovereign nation is considering formally adopting the Kyoto Protocol, despite the United States' refusal to adopt it.

Ahearn, Ashley (2015). Facing rising waters a native tribe takes its plea to Paris climate talks. http://www.npr.org/2015/12/01/455745765/facing-rising-waters-a-native-tribe-takes-its-plea-to-paris-climate-talks

More on Wildlife and ACC: Bees

It is now relatively common knowledge that pollinators such as bees have been in severe decline in recent years. This is a troubling prospect, given the fact that 75% of all crops in the United States are dependent on insect pollination. The decline of pollinators is not well understood and the only consistently studied bee species is the European Honey Bee (apis mellifera) with wild species largely ignored in the scholarly literature. Studying these insects will be more difficult, because wild hives have been largely wiped out due to a combination of factors: changing land use which reduces habitat and nectar-bearing plants which bees use for food, neonicotinoid pesticides, climate change, as well as diseases and parasites that are made more deadly by the preceding stressor factors.

The most robust evidence for pollinator declines as a result of anthropogenic climate change are in butterflies. Essentially, climate change is throwing off the reproductive cycle of butterflies when winter comes too early or spring too late. The increasing rate of extreme weather events can also have a huge impact on butterfly populations, especially during vulnerable times of the year.

Pesticide companies are applying tobacco and fossil fuel industry tactics to protect profits by attempting to take attention away from the causal function of neonicotinoid seed treatments and pesticides. These companies such as Bayer and Syngenta claim that “parasites and diseases” are the main factor in pollinator decline without mentioning that pesticide makes bees more vulnerable to mites and diseases. Pesticide manufacturers also distract from the situation by blaming farmers for improper use of pesticide (maybe if your product can be so easily misused to the detriment of the environment, it’s not a good product) and funding research institutes that downplay the role of pesticides in pollinator decline. As we can see, pesticide giants are using Big Tobacco’s classic “doubt is our product” playbook to sew public controversy and discord around the alarming decline of bees.

Potts, Simon et al (2010). Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution Vol. 25 No. 6 1-9 CEL Press. http://www.ufz.eu/export/data/1/22686_Potts_et_al_2010.pdf

Simon, Michele (2015). Follow the honey: seven ways pesticide companies are spinning the bee crisis. Friends of the Earth. http://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/93/f0/f/4656/FollowTheHoneyReport.pdf

Resource Guide

The Quinault Indian Nation (QIN) is a confederation of several tribes that have inhabited the Olympic Peninsula in Washington state for several thousand years. Traditionally, they have relied on seafood but mostly salmon as the major economic and culinary staple supplemented with hunting and gathering in the dense temperate rainforests of their homelands. Indigenous peoples were devastated in the Pacific Northwest by disease and discrimination, and ceded most of their land in 1855. Populations are beginning to reach pre-contact levels in the early twenty-first century. They are soon to be climate refugees as their main community on the Pacific coast, Taholah, will need to be relocated inland due to rising Pacific tides.

I sought to find out what strategies the QIN was taking to mitigate the impacts of ACC and extractive industries, but found that to make a living QIN members were largely co-opted by timber and fishing industries and it is already too late to save their ancestral coastal settlements. Currently, QIN is trying to prevent the construction of oil terminals and increased oil rail traffic through their land. I will begin the resource guide with the multimedia sources followed by scholarly works.

Decker, Jerry. "Paddle to Quinault Tribal Canoe Arrival". KSQM station 91.5 FM, Port Angeles, WA. Accessed 11/10/2015.

This is a brief news story summarizing the "Paddle to Quinault" event hosted by the QIN. It brought members from tribals all along the Pacific Coast from British Columbia to Oregon. The canoe, carved from a single, massive cedar, was an essential element of QIN culture because the massive ocean-going crafts not only allowed from the hunting of whales, but also helped establish a vibrant trade network that ran along the coast. This system would not have worked if they relied on going afoot due to dense rainforest. The practice of ocean-going canoes has been revived since the 1980s after a long absence.

Johnston, Tyson. "Quinault Indian Nation: Standing Up to Big Oil". Standing Up to Big Oil (9/24/2015). Accessed 11/10/2015.

Big Oil wants to add crude oil storage terminals and significantly increase rail traffic in Grays Harbor County, WA where the QIN has made its home since time immemorial. Despite the fact that ACC due to burning carbon is forcing QIN to move communities in the face of rising tides, oil company called "Imperium Renewables" and storage company Westway Terminals want to increase oil development on QIN lands. QIN Vice President Tyson Johnston elucidates the tribal position: they want no increase in oil transport through or storage on their lands. He argues that treaty rights and court precedents support the independence of the Quinault and their federal trust relationship with the federal government give them the right to prevent increased oil development. You can add your opposition to increased oil development on Quinault lands to a petition, here.

Matsukawa, Lori. "Quinault Tribe Explores Moving Town of Taholah". King County 5 News NBC, 2014. Accessed 11/10/2015.

This is a local news story that demonstrates the devastating impacts of ACC on the QIN and its cultural heritage. The main community for the QIN within its reservation, Taholah will have to be moved inland in its entirety. The QIN has to figure out how to move 1,700 residents, numerous artifacts and cultural heritage to higher ground. It is yet another example in the litanty of marginalized groups paying the highest costs of ACC while having enjoyed little of the benefits.


Find my scholarly, peer-reviewed sources below:

Brandt, Patric, Abson, David J. Dellasalla, Dominick et al “Multifunctionality and biodiversity: Ecosystem services in temperate rainforests of the Pacific Northwest, USA”. Biological Conservation Vol. 169, 2014, 362-371.

This source describes the benefits and status of temperate rainforests. Pacific Northwest temperate rainforests provide myriad ecosystem services such as lumber, salmon, water regulation and recreation etc. They found high positive correlation between diverse ecosystem services and biodiversity. They argue that ecosystems must be managed for multifunction ecosystem services.

Eliot, Samuel A. “Conditions Among the Indians of the Northwest Coast”. Board of Indian Commissioners. (1915) 6-12.

Eliot was a member of the "Board of Indian Commissioners" which was tasked with implementing congressional mandates in the Allottment Act. This is a primary source that demonstrates the casual racism of the time, and the report openly admits that alloment cannot and will not work in QIN because the rainforest is too dense and ground too hilly and stony for productive agriculture.

Ernst, Alice Henson. The Wolf Ritual of the Northwest Coast. Eugene: University of Oregon, 1952. 1-6, 64-102.

The spiritual connection between QIN members and their coastal rainforest home is undeniable. The Quileute tribe's creation story involves the "Great Changer" creating the Quinault from wolves. This leads me to questions regarding large predators and the health of temperate rainforests.

Freundenburg, William R., Wilson, Lisa J., and O’Leary, Daniel J. “Forty Years of Spotted Owls? A Longitudinal Analysis of Logging Industry Job Losses”. Sociological Perspectives Vol. 41, No. 1 1998, 1-26 Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1389351

After 40 years of controversy over the spotted owl, there is no evidence that protection of the raptor directly contributed to losses in jobs in the timber industry. This source demonstrates that saving the ecological integrity of the rainforest and its biodiversity does not necessarily lead to job losses.

 Intertribal Cultural Advisory Committee, ed. Wray, Jacilee. Native Peoples of the Olympic Peninsula: Who We Are. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2002. 99-150.

Written by a group of representatives of Olympic indigenous peoples, it demonstrates the history of these coastal tribes from their own perspective. It has a section for every relevant nation I wish to examine. This fact makes this source invaluable because it is not simply how white people interpreting someone else's history, but native peoples telling their own story.

Menzies, Charles R. and Butler, Caroline F. “The Indigenous Foundation of the Economy of BC’s North Coast.” Labour Vol. 61, 2008, 131-149   http://www.jstor.org/stable/25149857.

In contrast to often idyllic, romantic portrayals of indigenous people, this article focuses on the modern, contemporary place of coastal indigenous people in northern British Columbia coast.  It focuses on the Ts’msyen and Gitxaała and how they have been fundamental in the development of capitalist industry in British Columbia, not just helpless victims who are acted upon by outside forces. The development of capitalism on the BC coast was dependent upon indigenous peoples, first as independent producers in the traditional economy, then as labor in the industrial economy. By the late 20th century, the Ts’msyen and Gitxaała peoples had simultaneously adopted capitalismwhile also working to manipulate it and protest its most negative consequences.

Naiman, Robert J., Bechtold, J. Scott, Beechie, Timothy J. et al. “A Process-Based View of Floodplain Forest Patterns in Coastal River Valleys of the Pacific Northwest”. Ecosystems, Vol. 13. No. 2 2010 1-31. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25622895.

The rich, biodiverse coastal temperate rainforests are the result of constantly eroding mountain slopes. These ecosystems are highly impacted by changes caused by agriculture and water flow manipulation. As a result, one of the most important facets of these ecosystems, andromous salmon, is in significant decline. This article focuses on the role of erosion in creating this ecosystem and how this process interacts with nutrients in the soil, including dead trees influence growth of trees and other vegetation biomass.

Olson, Ronald L. The Quinault Indians. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1967.

This ethnography was essential because it was the first exhaustive anthropological examination of the Quinault people. It was very useful because it covers multiple layers on the onion of indigenous culture that existed pre-Contact. As with all old sources (this was originally published in the 1930s) there are some places that demonstrate a lack of cultural relativism.

Powell, J. V., and Vickie Jensen. Quileute: An Introduction to the Indians of La Push. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1976.

This ethnography focuses specifically on the Quileute, the tribe most connected the wolf as a spiritual symbol. There are currently no wolves in the Olympic Peninsula but they were once so abundant they had an essential role in the Quileute mythology as the creatures humans were made from. 

Shanley, Colin S., Sanjay, Pyare, Michael I. Goldstein et al. "Climate Change Impications in Northern Coastal Temperate Rainforest of North America". Climatic Change, 2015, 155-70.

Temperate rainforests are vulnerable in the face of ACC, and changes to its ecosystems are now inevitable. Predicted changes are anticipated to cause a cascade of ecosystem-level effects such as: increased  flooding and rain-on-snow events; retreat of the snowline to higher elevations, reduced snowpack; changes in the timing and strength of stream-flow, freshwater and riverine nutrient exports; shrinking alpine habitats; altitudinal and latitudinal expansion of lowland and subalpine forest types; changes in suitable habitat boundaries for wildlife and plant communities; negative impacts on species with rare ecological niches or limited "dispersibility"; and shifts in salmon distribution and productivity.

Wilkinson, Charles F. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. New York: Norton, 2005. 170-173, 200-205.

This work focuses on the struggles of American Indians to retain treaty rights to hunting, fishing and other natural resources. Wilkinson examines the Quinault through the lens of fishing rights as their culture is reliant on salmon and other seafood. At the same time, there are also relevant court cases the author describes.

Sociopolitical Solutions: Carbon Tax, Cap and Trade, False Assumptions

The film, Carbon Hunters was a very well done demonstration of the possibilities of the cap and trade system and also shows some of the negative downsides of the system as well: poor rural women in India subsidizing excess carbon consumption by wealthy people in the global North could be seen as a kind of “carbon colonialism”. I sincerely disagree with the dismissal of the carbon tax out of hand in the film. I also take issue with Jessy’s hypothetical example when I brought this up in class: assuming a tax "in Minnesota" that made a gallon of gas $6, comparable to Europe.

There are a lot of problems with this scenario. First, a state gas tax like this would do little good because we don’t have a large enough population to impact ACC. People especially near border areas would simply drive to Wisconsin, Iowa, and the Dakotas to buy fuel - causing more carbon burning.  To be effective and have a chance of passing Congress, a carbon tax on retail consumers would have to be national and it would have to be small. Second, simply taxing retail gasoline would not relate to the most significant emitters of GHGs. Plus, we know that Americans are driving less already, so this is not a stable source of revenue.

Why is there an assumption that a carbon tax would be on consumers directly? This is a false assumption. Just like the assumption of the false dichotomy: carbon tax or cap and trade, we could do both! Sometimes we need to check our assumptions, as well as our ambitions.

Sure, maybe a small national carbon tax increase on gasoline is a good idea, but you slap significant carbon taxes on out of date coal plants and strip-mining coal operations (which do not employ as many people as they used to, anyway; eastern Kentucky and West Virginia are evidence of this), the Shells and Exxons of the world – or at least take their subsidies away! You go after polluters and carbon burners on the supply side. Yes, costs will filter down to the consumers, surely but it is far less heavy-handed than doubling the cost of gasoline. There will be pain, and unfortunately the poorest of the poor will bear the worst consequences - but this happens regardless of what climate policy we implement, the key for them is wage growth and a more robust welfare state, not holding back on climate policy.

It is better to be poor in the short term than dead from a famine or flooding in the long term.

But sometimes a little pain is a good thing. We need to price carbon and encourage less consumption other forms of energy consumption. The truth is that you cannot have your cake, and eat it too. You can’t have reductions in fossil fuel use unless it is painful to do so and there are more attractive opportunities.

Victory! TransCanada halts Keystone XL Pipeline!

Last night, the Associated Press reported here that the oil and gas corporation TransCanada  is withdrawing its application with the US federal government to build the controversial Keystone XL pipeline through western Plains states from Canadian tar sands in Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico. Contrary to popular rhetoric, the pipeline would’ve caused few and temporary jobs for Americans, Canadians would’ve seen most of the benefits. The profits generated by the pipeline would have gone to TransCanada, not American workers. This is a temporary victory for those who oppose increased greenhouse gas emissions.

If this seems strange to you that TransCanada is doing this, it shouldn’t. First of all, the prices of oil and gas are ridiculously low and not as profitable as previously so that combined with all the scrutiny and controversy perhaps made it no longer worth it for the bottom line. Also, it looks like in any event that President Obama will deny the application before he leaves office. Thus, TransCanada could also be hoping for a Republican president more amenable to increased fossil fuel burning.

This is a solid victory for climate activists and it produces good vibes/karma heading into Paris, but there is no time to rest on laurels. It reminds us that while international agreements are paramount to mitigating ACC, a lot of progress can be flushed down the toilet if – let’s be honest – a Republican in elected to the White House in 2016. You are not a climate activist if you do not vote. Not showing up the polls is like ceding a vote to the Republicans. If young people and ethnic minorities show up to the polls in 2016, there will not be a “climate skeptic” in the White House.

Divestment

On my more cynical days, I think that “sustainability” has largely become a meaningless buzzword, a marketing ploy to attract customers in the case of a corporation or potential students in the case of a university. This is because many companies, schools and individuals who espouse environmentally conscious beliefs while at the same time profiting from fossil fuel extraction due to investments. I do acknowledge that sometimes this is out of the individual’s control in some cases. However, at the end of the day it seems pretty dishonest for a school to claim the mantle of sustainability while they give money to and receive dividends from extractive fossil fuels industries. Therefore, I call upon CSB-SJU to divest itself from fossil fuel interests to become a more genuine partner in the global fight to stop the burning of fossil fuels as our primary form of energy. This will assuredly not happen unless students force the issue, the administrations will not change on their own.

In many ways, divestment (or reinvestment) is back end solution to ACC. I think a more front-end course of action would involve ensuring that companies profiting from the burning of carbon receive no public funded subsidies. This will decrease profitability (in an environment where prices are already decreasing) and therefore these companies will not be so attractive to investors because they will be competing on their own merits. I would propose taking at least some of that public subsidy and pushing it into subsidies for non-carbon-based forms of energy such as solar and wind.

How We Know What We Know - and Why it Matters

Both Jesse and Mahony's article were at the very core discussing epistemology. Epistemology is generally related to the study of philosophy and examines how we know what we know: or the process of creating knowledge. Despite Jessy’s hedging during class, I really appreciated her article that thought it necessary to the discussion. I’m not sure why students would not like it!

Jessy is an anthropologist of scientists, so her specialization is studying the cultural practices and norms of those engaging in climate science practice. Her examination of two hiccups in the scientific debate regarding ACC: 1.) a transpositional error that predicted the collapse of Himalayan glaciers by 2035 and 2.) the collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet not including the full extent of melting demonstrate the nitty-gritty details of the scientific debate. This also shows us the necessity of peer review and its weaknesses, Jessy suggests further auditing to mitigate this problem. They also show us potential strategies that ACC “skeptics” might use in order to discredit science they do not accept.

It is also important, I think, for scientists to admit what they do not know. A lot of the resentment that many undereducated people feel towards climate science has something to do with a “know-it-all” perception of scientists. So, rather than taking refuge in the Ivory Tower of academia, scientists must more thoroughly engage with the public.

A scientist may argue, “That’s not my job, I belong in the lab.” This is a cultural construct that plays on societal stereotypes of scientists as stuffy, awkward people with poor communication skills. Cultural constructs and societal outlooks, thankfully, are subject to change and scientists must make this change happen. There are several transparency measures such as peer review, but if these measures are not taken in a way that the public understands it matters little outside the academic-journal circuit. Not only that, but many workers in non-science fields are impacted by a shrinking world due to globalization, social media and increasingly democratic/bottom-up cultural practices and saying “that’s not my job” when it is clearly essential will result in that person losing their job. Academics are a little more insulated from this, and this could also be behind some popular resentment of scientists. Most importantly, scientists must descend from their Ivory Tower and engage in the vigorous debate Jessy and Mahony illustrate so well: what do we know, and how?

Lack of Climate Change Discussion at Carnivore Conference

From October 11-14, I was attending a wildlife policy conference in Washington DC. It was great to get out to DC and do some networking with like-minded people and there were some issues on which there was broad agreement and scientific consensus. Unfortunately, one of the issues that everyone agreed: climate change, while definitely a threat to large carnivore populations, especially in the long term, the conference was more focused on “immediate” threats to carnivore population: habitat loss and poaching. This was disappointing to say the least, as well as the apparent lack of ethnic and age diversity: boomers and older were highly represented whereas there were almost no students.

The argument that poaching and habitat loss are more “immediate” than the negative impacts on climate change is a very dubious one. First of all, polar bear habitat as well as that of their prey is already being reduced due to reductions in artic sea ice. Habitat loss most commonly thought of as the result of development, expanding suburbs and roads. However, habitat loss it is also occurring due to less visible human activities: emitting fossil fuels. This dubious argument also only makes sense if you exclude the wolverine. Already at perilously low numbers in the continental US, climate change is reducing alpine snowpack that wolverines rely on as their primary habitat. As snow recedes, according to Christine Eisenberg’s Carnivore Way (2014), wolverines are relegated to ever-shrinking mountain-top environments. Lack of attention to polar bear and wolverine challenges was probably the result of the Cougar Fund acting as one of the primary funders of the event. There was a disproportionate focus on cougars and wolves (probably due to wolf popularity/controversy).

There were some positive discussions that had little to do with climate change. Another consensus at this conference made up mostly of scientists was that more science will not change policy – anti-carnivore state or federal management agencies or policy commissions will simply ignore inconvenient science or use minority viewpoints that support convenient policies even that means following a graduate thesis instead of peer-reviewed science. What most speakers called for at the conference was a change in values, or at least government action that reflects a change in values – the general public now supports the existence of large carnivores. I think this is analogous to climate change: more science isn’t going to prove our point, those who deny the science of the last thirty years are probably stuck in their ways or have a vested interest in the status quo. What we need is a change in values, recognizing that the immediate, short term dollar – profitability and shareholder payouts for the next quarter – needs to become subordinate to taking care of our common home. Only reflection on our values, and sound public policy to match them will rise to the challenger of climate change.

Merchants of Doubt and the Supremacy of Emotive over Rational Reasoning

I had previously watched "Merchants of Doubt" (2014) before participating in this course, and found it very enlightening. There has been a disturbing trend among corporate America, driven by short term thinking and desire to deliver profits and dividends to shareholders at all costs, to forego honesty and public health concerns and hire public relations firms. Their charge is to create doubt relative to scientifically proven dangers of products manufactured by private interests. The most infamous example, brought forth by lawsuits, was a Phillip-Morris internal memo which indicated "doubt is our product". Similar tactics, including use of ideologically sympathetic "experts" and literally copying the layout of scientific reports to bolster pseudoscience that just happened to find industry blameless, have been used by the fossil fuels, flame retardants, and tobacco industries.

This trend is an expected result of relatively unbridled capitalist culture. Especially concerning the climate change and fossil fuels debate, the United States population has far higher levels of doubt than societies in Europe with comparable levels of education and similar, if not identical, liberal democracies. The difference comes down to capitalist culture, which is less restrained in the US. European liberal societies have market economies, whereas the US has a market society with liberal (and neoliberal) government structures. . In many ways, culture is elucidated through values, and the US greaty emphasizes free market, neoliberal and materialist-cosumerist values versus European commutarian values that yield stronger welfare states and greater scrutiny of the private sector to protect public health and economic equality.

I felt very vindicated by the cognitive discussion, "The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science". In my 9/22 blog post "Convincing Climate Change Deniers?", I argued that it is largely a waste of  time to try to convince invested, educated adult deniers of ACC, who usually have a political or economic interest in the debate that prevents them from coherently accepting ACC and/or the policy changes its logic requires. This article further supports my argument in that it shows that rational arguments do not change peoples' minds. In fact, emotive reasoning that involves being part of a team or tribe rallied against the "other" is far faster-acting than logical reasoning. Therefore, it is definitely a waste of time to attempt to persuade educated, invested ACC deniers. You only have a chance to convince them, as the article mentions but does not quantitatively demonstrate, when you associate ACC and responsible climate policy with conservative-friendly values.

Social, Environmental Justice and Theology

I must admit, I was wholly unsatisfied by  responses to my questions about social justice within the Catholic social teachings and Scripture, and how a much longer record of service to the poor and economic justice in these writings was hijacked in the minds of the faithful by sexual issues like abortion and gay marriage. Dr. Evans’ first response was that Catholics are not acquainted with the Catholic Social Teachings and therefore other issues took over the limelight; and referenced a preoccupation with salvation of individual souls. Unfortunately, there are some problems with this answer.

It ignores the long record in Scripture which calls for social and economic justice going back to the Old Testament. We cannot claim that this hijacking of the Catholic/Christian mind by issues such as gay marriage and abortion by claiming ignorance because if you are Christian, you should probably give the Bible a couple serious, if not critical, examinations. Even if you ignore Catholic Social Teaching, Scripture is full of references to the necessity of social and economic justice for a godly society.

The Pentateuch provides ample evidence: Yovel (jubilee) and Shmita (sabbatical) years were legal-spiritual codes that mandated at every 7 years, the debts of the impoverished would be forgiven and lands restored to them and slaves were freed from bondage (Leviticus 25: 8-13). From an anthropological perspective, this looks like a cultural practice intended to prevent cyclic poverty and perpetual inequality. The prophets even mention workers’ rights: Woe to him who builds his house on wrongdoing, his roof-chambers on injustice; who works his neighbors without pay, and gives them no wages (Jeremiah 22:13). Jesus is even more radical, claiming it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than the rich man into the kingdom (Matthew 19:24). He also tells myriad parables about the corrupting power of wealth such as that of Lazarus (Luke: 19-31).

This is but a small sample of the socio-economic justice in Scripture, and it far outnumbers prohibitions of homosexuality (mentioned in Leviticus and Deuteronomy) as well as abortions (not mentioned at all in Scripture). Therefore, based on the actual record, it is hard to argue that the Christian consciousness should be so focused on social-sexual issues when there is so much social and environmental injustice in the world. It seems that this would be a massive interpretation of Christianity itself. Small wonder then there has been a rise in the “nones”, those who do not practice formal religion. As practiced, particularly from this perspective of anti-homosexuality and anti-choice, Christianity seems very incoherent. Perhaps strong leaders in the Catholic Church and other denominations will reverse this troubling trend and misinterpretation of Christianity, but institutions move slowly and grudgingly accept change.

Convincing Climate Change Deniers?

One of the issues I have been mulling over in my mind since Troy’s discussions is the feasibility of convincing those who do not yet accept climate change. Much of Troy’s scientific presentation was review for me, and the basics of global climatic heating have been around for thirty years and more. Given all of this time that has been spent trying to convince recalcitrant climate change deniers, with denial still fairly strong in the United States, does it make sense to continually try to persuade these deniers?

My answer is no. At this point, from my perspective, climate change deniers have reasons that logical argument and scientific facts will not overcome. From where I stand, the two major reasons for continuing climate change denial are ideological and economic. Those with an ideological bias against recognizing ACC have a problem with the solutions, which include government intervention in energy and renewables markets, carbon taxes, etc. As they find any government intervention in economics abhorrent, they will deny up and down that there is any need for increased regulations. From the economic side, there are people whose incomes, some of them very high, are dependent on the fossil fuels industry. When it means literally taking food out of their mouths, even for the benefit of the many, or the greater good, it is exceedingly unlikely that these deniers will come around.

So, this means that continually investing in public education of adult ideological/economic climate change deniers is probably a waste of money and time. All of the preceding does not include children in schools, who may not have the ideological and economic biases that act as barriers to accepting science. In my view, it seems more effective to go directly to educated, responsible policymakers and lobby them for implementation of effective policies. These policies include carbon taxes, increased public investment in renewable energy, and changes in government subsidy structures to favor renewable energy industries instead of fossil fuels as well as increased individual tax incentives and subsidies to convert homes, businesses and the automobile fleet into renewable energy consumers.

Week 2: Oreskes and Conway's Collapse of Western Civilization

Oreskes and Conway's "The Collapse of Western Civilization: a View from the Future" is an interesting, compelling read. The book does well in terms of pointing out all the ACC ironies. My favorite was western civilization's brilliant scientific paradigm is able to document in detail the catastrophic climatic changes while larger society and its leaders sat on their hands as consequences spiral out of control of the most powerful civilizations the world has known. Oreskes and Conway place much of the blame at the feet of culture, especially the professional norms of scientists and climate experts. Specifically, much of the "uncertainty" that peddlers of doubt can point out derives from scientists' high "burden of proof" before accepting a claim, including many specific claims about the impacts of ACC.

Another salient irony is that doubt peddlers and fossil fuels representatives, in league with many political conservatives, have lambasted government intervention and maintained their cause for the sake of "freedom from government action". Meanwhile, their own actions are making said intervention in the future far larger by putting it off until a government response is necessary and very heavy-handed. If we continue on a path of false equivalence and denial constantly used to delay action in preventing further fossil fuel development, very strong, painful government intervention will be inevitable to meet an existential threat. I think this is something the general population needs to understand, and is our job as responsible global citizens to promote: humanity faces an existential threat. Massive temperature and climatic swings could mean our extinction.

Perhaps I am America-centric, but the authors do somewhat gloss over the impacts the collapse of the West would have on everyone else, including China. While China would almost certainly survive, as it has endured thousands of years, it functions in a global economy. Relative to the collapse of Rome, the world is more interdependent. All states, dependent on Western consumption, financing, trade, and capital aka technology (almost all of them, maybe North Korea could be an exception, but not really) would also suffer greatly if Western civilization collapsed.

Week 1: Klein, McKibben, and Dove

What is clear, even without reading Klein or McKibben’s articles, is that people around the world would be foolish to trust leaders to make the right decisions necessary to offset anthropogenic climate change (ACC), left to his or her own devices. The fight to mitigate ACC must be a grassroots movement in which the public strongly pressures leaders and delegates to Paris (Klein), but institutions such as Ivy League universities can make a huge difference in divesting from recalcitrant oil and gas companies (McKibben) which are desperate to squeeze whatever profits they can from fossil fuels regardless of common sense and scientific evidence.

Another interesting concept brought forth in the articles was Klein’s “looking away” idea. That is, almost all of us look away from ACC. There are outright climate change deniers, but also those who acknowledge the problem but claim “too busy” when it comes to action. Even those who recognize the problem, but are convinced only individual action is worthwhile. The bottom line is, fossil fuel use is systematic, ACC is a systematic problem, and therefore these problems require systematic, not merely individual solutions. This is an important lesson for everyone: public policy matters, and combating the fossil fuel interests in the halls of power will not happen if nobody stands up to speak truth to power.

Dove’s article was also enlightening, his basic argument is that humans’ significant relationship with climate and the environment has changed over time, and this dialog matters in the current “debate” over ACC. Two fundamental ideas in his chapter were: 1.) history traditionally separated humans from the environment, something which is now changing as our impacts on the climate and environment become apparent (Climate Cultures, 27) and 2.) wild landscapes once represented danger, lack of civilization and its comforts but now are becoming appreciated as teachers or laboratories for understanding the world in a new way (Climate Cultures, 42). This “historic reversal in geographic pedagogy” was very valuable to my thinking on this issue.

Bio

My name is John, I am a senior at SJU with a major in Political Science and minor in Philosophy. Unfortunately, I will not be joining classmates in Paris for what will be an amazing experience, good luck to all of you! My interests in this course lie at the nexus of ACC and its impacts on indigenous peoples, and wildlife. My term paper for the course will probably involve ACC and its effects on wildlife and wild spaces, and therefore the culture of indigenous peoples.

I work for Stearns County Environmental Services as well as Wyoming Wildlife Advocates as a legal and policy researcher. I love the outdoors, and hiking in wild spaces is one of my favorite pastimes. Other passions include reading/writing, politics, social and environmental justice.