http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/08/america-drought-politica
l-will-climate-change

America's drought of political will on climate change


With US politics paralysed by the partisan divide on climate change, public
concern about extreme weather cannot bear fruit

 wolf
<http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/1/21/1232529
816221/wolf.jpg> 

Naomi Wolf <http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/naomiwolf>  

guardian.co.uk <http://www.guardian.co.uk/> , Wednesday 8 August 2012
 
 Indiana, drought, corn
<http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/audio/video/2012/7/19/1342
732249149/Indiana-drought-corn-008.jpg> 
  
A field of corn drying up in a drought-stricken field near Vincennes,
Indiana, July 2012. Photograph: Scott Olson/Getty Images

As the US faces record drought
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/drought>  and an Old Testament-level
pestilential heatwave in the midwest, American
<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/science/earth/americans-link-global-warmi
ng-to-extreme-weather-poll-says.html> environmental denialism may be
starting to change. The question is: is it too late?

America has led the world in climate change
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-change>  denial, a phenomenon
noted with amazement by Europeans, not to mention thinking people around the
world. Year after year, the US has failed to sign global treaties or curb
emissions, even as our status as a source of a third of the world's carbon
emissions goes unchanged.

It is fairly well-known what has been behind that climate change denial in
America: vast sums pumped into an ignorance industry by the oil and gas
lobbies. Entire thinktanks to obfuscate manmade climate change have been
funded by these interests, as have individual congressmen and women.
Entirely typical, for instance, is Louisiana Representative John Fleming,
whose campaigns, according
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/08/Indeed,%20this%20sadly%
20hilarious%20blogpost%20by%20a%20constituent%20who%20actually%20tried%20to%
20educate> to blogger John Henry, accept about $200,000 a year from oil and
gas lobbyists, and who uses his social media pages to deny global warming.

It is weird to live inside that US denial about climate change. Last year,
for example, as tropical storm Irene approached New York, we duly boarded up
windows, put in emergency supplies, and heard endless alarming bulletins
from the mayor's office about which neighborhoods were likely to be
submerged if the tides surged - without ever hearing from local officials or
the media a word connecting rising sea levels with manmade global warming.
All the more weird because New Yorkers weren't writing off portions of their
downtown neighborhoods to overflowing seawater a century ago.

It is weird, too, to watch the leaves turn red earlier and earlier in the
fall in the American northeast and have absolutely everyone say, "the
weather is strange" - yet never see mainstream media reflect any interest in
the connection between human industrial activity and that strangeness. And
this weather map shows <http://www.wunderground.com/severe.asp>  how
widespread and extensive that extreme weather is in the US. 

But could our denial be cracking, this summer, as, in the heartland - that
most iconic of American landscapes - broiling temperatures injure humans and
cook fish in the water? This summer a crisis has occurred (though one that,
again, is seldom reported on in terms of our outsize contribution to the
disaster), as midwestern farmers lost vast swaths of their corn crop to
scalding heat and drought. In the American unconscious of wishful ignorance,
this
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/05/midwest-heat-wave-2012_n_1744504.h
tml?utm_hp_ref=green> disaster and loss was to be borne, as usual, by other
people far away.

But we face some serious problems in rising out of our torpor. In "Shifting
<http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/climate-change/shifting-
public-opinion-empirical-assessment-influencing-concern-u-s/> Public Opinion
on Climate Change: An Empirical Assessment of Factors Influencing Concern
over Climate Change in the US, 2002-2010", John Wihbey shows that Gallup
surveys reveal Americans' level of concern varying widely:

"In 2004, 26% of respondents said they worried "a great deal" about the
issue; in 2007 that number rose to 41%; by 2010, it had fallen to 28%. This
variation comes despite consensus among scientists about the
<http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/climate-change/studies/e
nvironment/climate-change/un-report-managing-climate-change/> underlying
data patterns and virtual unanimity
<http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/climate-change/studies/e
nvironment/climate-change/structure-scientific-opinion-climate-change/> of
scientific opinion."

Wihbey and colleagues' study found that this fluctuation was caused by,
among other factors, political polarization. In other words, when one party
says global warming is a crisis and the other says all that is nonsense, and
there is no cooperation between political elites at both ends of the
spectrum, the net result is apathy.

"The two strongest effects on public concern are Democratic congressional
action statements and Republican roll-call votes, which increase and
diminish public concern, respectively. This finding points to the effect of
[a] polarized political elite that is emitting contrary cues, with resulting
(seemingly) contrary levels of public concern."

They found, ominously, that the level and quality of good information in the
general media at large had little effect on people's levels of concern -
indeed, weather events themselves had little bearing on people's levels of
climate-related anxiety or interest. Only the combination of media coverage
and expressed alarm from political leaders bumped up public concern.

With the oil and gas lobbies pumping money into Congress to blunt any
professed concern among the political class, that motivating union of
genuine concern and honest messaging can scarcely be relied on. The authors
conclude, dispiritedly:

"Given the vested economic interests reflected in this polarization, it
seems doubtful that any communication process focused on persuading
individuals will have much impact."

I spent part of this summer looking at glaciers
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/glaciers>  in Alaska
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/alaska> ; in Juneau, in Tongass National
Forest <http://www.fs.fed.us/r10/tongass/> , park rangers expect that a
glacier there will withdraw, from effects of anticipated climate change, in
50 years. So, the federal government is planning for the effects of manmade
climate change, even as the White House and US Congress
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/congress>  remain paralysed from doing
anything to arrest the warming: the very definition of denial. If we don't
snap out of this stasis of stupidity, nothing can change for good.

  _____  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2196 / Virus Database: 2437/5197 - Release Date: 08/13/12



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to