The Climate Book

“It is now that we are determining whether we leave our children and their children a planet that will continue drifting toward less and less inhabitable states in the future.”

Rockström describes the tipping points and feedback loops found in nature: Tipping points trigger large changes that are further impacted by created feedback loops, and the events may not be visible for years, decades, or centuries. This means the most significant implications of modern climate change will impact future generations. Humans struggle to comprehend long-term consequences, which has resulted in general apathy toward climate change, as many people, particularly those in charge, are more concerned with maintaining the status quo and with prioritizing continued economic growth.

“This crisis will continue to get worse until we manage to halt the constant destruction of our life-supporting systems—until we prioritize people and the planet over profit and greed.”

In the text, capitalism emerges as the primary cause of climate change and environmental degradation and as the main obstacle preventing humanity from acting to prevent a climate crisis. This implies that capitalism is potentially more harmful than it is beneficial to humanity. The message also implies that society can change to prioritize sustainability over greed, which suggests that greed is a learned behavior rather than an inherent facet of humanity; thus, it can be unlearned.

“What this means is that the water we drink is the same stuff that quenched the dinosaurs’ thirst and nourished the first stirrings of life on the young world.”

Several of the authors, including Kate Marvel, acknowledge the unity of life on Earth. The idea that humans share the same water resources as dinosaurs and other earlier forms of life stresses the points that life is connected through time and that all life relies on the same resources. The concept of unity is used to enhance the persuasiveness of the text.

“We must address gross inequities in our water and energy system and reduce the disproportionate impacts that climate change will have on already marginalized and vulnerable communities.”

Gleick, along with the other authors, acknowledges that the communities that have contributed the least to climate change will suffer the severest consequences. This remark and others like it contribute to the development of Strategies and Ethical Implications for Mitigating Climate Change by declaring that mitigation strategies need to account for global inequality. From this emerges the idea that pre-industrial civilizations deserve access to modern necessities, which needs to be balanced with the attempts to reduce emissions.

“The consequences of this massive loss of forest will be irreversible and far-reaching, impacting human well-being in many ways: for instance, our food provision will be threatened by the reduced functioning of its critical ecosystem services, and it will no longer provide us with a ‘green barrier’ against the spread of infectious disease.”

Nobre, Arieira, and Nascimento support the concept that all life on Earth is interconnected and major disruptions impact everyone everywhere. By focusing on the idea that even those who do not live in the Amazon will be impacted by deforestation and the impacts of climate change, the authors imply that some humans are hesitant to act unless they are directly affected. Thus, the remark is intended to boost the persuasiveness of the text by making the content more relatable to those who may be physically and emotionally distanced from the topic.

“We do not understand anywhere near enough to be able to predict how much resilience is left in our depleted ecosystems, or how close we are to tipping points beyond which collapse becomes inevitable.”

Goulson and several other authors acknowledge that scientists are unable to predict the consequences of climate change and its various elements. Some people may, therefore, view climate change as less of a threat or as an inevitability since the implications cannot be known. Others may interpret the uncertainty as ominous and as a valid reason to fight as hard as possible against climate change. The latter interpretation is the one the authors of the text intend to evoke.

“But climate change is not something that is simple won or lost. It is a curve that we can keep bending towards a better world.”

Edwards presents the idea that climate change cannot be fought with an all-or-nothing approach. She argues that people should be taking whatever steps they can to reduce emissions and mitigate climate change. This message is intended to inspire people to act by helping them recognize that every action against climate change matters.

“Humankind has not created this crisis—it was created by those in power, and they knew exactly what priceless values they were sacrificing in order to make unimaginable amounts of money and to maintain a system that benefitted them.”

Thunberg targets social and financial class systems as the underlying cause of climate change. Thunberg uses a scornfully satirical tone to emphasize that prioritizing the economic gains of the minority elite is unethical, and she implies that prioritizing the good of everyone is a more ethical choice. Her position is considered controversial, particularly among those who value independence and capitalism.

“Protecting our planet is no longer only an environmental priority but has also become central to securing a liveable [sic] future for humanity.”

Preventing climate change has historically been discussed in terms of the environment, but new science is showing that the same factors that are causing climate change are negatively impacting human health. The idea that human survival is dependent on slowing climate change may encourage more individuals to make lifestyle changes that support climate change prevention and human health preservation.

“The fact that 3 billion people use less energy, on an annual per capita basis, than a standard American refrigerator gives you an idea of how far away from global equity and climate justice we currently are.”

Thunberg and the other authors stress the need for equitable mitigation of climate change. They argue that the Global North is more responsible for eliminating emissions and that developing nations deserve access to modern, clean, and renewable sources of energy, water, and other resources. Drawing a comparison to the energy uses of a refrigerator helps to elucidate the extent of global inequality.

“These were the manifestations of a centuries-old global capitalist system predicated on ruthlessly exploiting human beings and extracting natural resources—that is, a white-supremacist economy where there are winners and losers, with a consistent separation along lines of race, gender and nationhood clearly delineating who dominates and who is oppressed.”

Patterson harshly criticizes capitalism for its undertones of white supremacy. Capitalism values economic growth above all else, which has led to high levels of consumerism and environmental degradation. Capitalism also reinforces class systems by giving those at the top of the system more power. Patterson’s criticism of capitalism implies that humanity should adopt a different economic system that is based on equality and sustainability rather than productivity and profit.

“In countries where you have not yet come to terms with your history, you become blind to how it is repeated, how old colonialism just changes shape, finds fresh arguments, new forms.”

Labba stresses the importance of portraying history accurately, which continues Patterson’s discussion of the violence and white supremacy that colonialism propagates. Labba’s community lives in harmony with their environment, but other nations’ industrial activity nonetheless degrades their environment. That Sweden has plans to continue degrading Sápmi land, Labba claims, is a modern example of colonialism.

“When we high-emitting parents are pushing up the daisies, our own offspring and grandchildren will be battling with, and sometimes dying from, our explicit choice to take the easy route, to believe in technical utopias and to point the finger of blame at others.”

Anderson uses a scornful tone to portray that future generations will be subjected to more climate change consequences because high-emitting nations deliberately chose to prioritize their lifestyles and economic development over the health of the planet. His tone is intended to elicit guilt which, in turn, will potentially encourage personal actions in the fight against climate change.

“If you burn, say, a gallon of gas, which weighs about 8 pounds, you emit about 5.5 pounds of carbon; that combines with two oxygen atoms in the air to produce about 22 pounds of carbon dioxide.”

McKibben’s mathematical explanation demonstrates how one 8-pound gallon of gas is transformed into 22 pounds of carbon dioxide. Statistical information like this is intended to provide precise details about The Science of Climate Change.

“Either we safeguard living conditions for all future generations, or we let a few very fortunate people maintain their constant, destructive search to maximize immediate profits.”

Thunberg uses a satirical tone and an ultimatum to convey that humanity has a choice to either preserve the environment or to continue prioritizing capitalist economic development. Her tone is intended to garner support for action against climate change. It also serves to suggest that it is unreasonable to allow the profits of a few to trump the livability of Earth.

“Food systems are arguably the single largest driver of environmental degradation. They produce 30 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions, occupy 40 per cent of Earth’s land surface, use at least 70 per cent of Earth’s fresh water and are the leading driver of biodiversity loss and nutrient pollution.”

Clark discusses that food systems severely degrade the environment. The sentiment reflects the dilemma between needing agriculture to support humanity and needing to alter agriculture to preserve the climate, which was introduced in the previous chapter by Popp. Food systems extend beyond agriculture to include the production and distribution of processed foods as well as whole foods, which are often grown elsewhere and shipped around the world, particularly in the wealthy Global North where cultures have normalized eating non-local foods, like bananas and avocados.

“An American one-per-center accounts for ten times the greenhouse gas emissions of the average American; the average American is responsible for three times the emissions of the average person in France; the average French person accounts for ten times that of the typical person in Bangladesh.”

Lowrey analyzes who is most responsible for climate change by comparing average emission levels of different demographics. Americans, in general, are the most consumeristic, so they need to make the most drastic changes, she argues. By comparing the emissions of wealthy and average individuals from different countries, Lowrey shows why individuals in wealthy countries need to change their lifestyles, which may help some individuals accept the idea.

“Our so-called leaders still think they can bargain with physics and negotiate with the laws of nature. They speak to flowers and forests in the language of US dollars and short-term economics. They hold up their quarterly income reports to impress the wild animals. They read stock-market analysis to the waves of the ocean, like fools.”

Thunberg uses a mocking tone to portray the idea that nature does not care about capitalistic methods and goals. Her message is that focusing on economic solutions is an ineffective way to attempt to mitigate climate change. Economic plans are designed to avoid making significant lifestyle changes and to benefit the wealthy individuals who profit the most from capitalism. The use of “so-called” leaders in the first sentence is also a direct criticism of past and current world leaders; it implies that the individuals are not true leaders because they are not doing what is best for the majority or for the planet.

“Personal action to tackle climate change has the ability to spark wider transformations of the contexts that underpin our everyday choices, including by influencing business activity and shifting the sense of what represents a normal or desirable way of life.”

While many view individual actions as too small to make a significant difference, Capstick and Whitmarsh stress that individual actions can have a large impact. As social creatures, humans influence and are influenced by their community. There are studies supporting this claim, such as one that showed that people are more likely to transition to solar if someone else in the neighborhood has solar panels. This information may inspire some to make changes and to spread climate awareness.

“Change is often hardest just before you make it. We too easily focus on what we think we are losing, finding it so much harder to imagine what we might gain.”

Raworth’s remark implicitly addresses the idea that humans fear the unknown. People may be unwilling to make changes because they do not know what the effects will be. While the refusal to change is geared toward preventing negative outcomes, it also prevents positive outcomes. Raworth’s remark also implies the inspirational idea that, if people have the courage to change, they may experience additional unintended benefits.

“The deeper problem with silos is they keep us from seeing glaring connections between the various crises tearing apart our world, and they stop us from building the largest and most powerful movement possible.”

Naomi Klein defines silos as the compartmentalization of political issues. Compartmentalizing contrasts with the authors’ combined message that fighting climate change requires a holistic approach. While compartmentalizing makes complex topics easier to understand by isolating them, it also puts distance between interrelated issues, such as poverty and education or inequality and climate change.

“An equitable future must be a future free from exploitation. Developing countries must not be used as dumping grounds for unwanted products and waste; natural resources must be protected. Children must not be left to die from the effects of pollution or be forced to worry about the climate crisis.”

Nakabuye describes her vision of equality. She, like the other contributing authors, emphasizes a holistic approach to addressing climate change that simultaneously addresses global inequality and historic injustice caused by colonialism. Nakabuye’s remarks use subtle imagery and the concepts of guilt and responsibility to convey the importance of holistically mitigating climate change and global inequality.

“These are places, islands in a sea of loss, where the birdsong still rises and insects stitch together the fabric of the land, pawprints follow ancient trails, fish still guard the water as they were asked to do and where human people have not forgotten their gifts and their responsibilities.”

Kimmerer, an author and botanist, uses literary devices, including metaphor, imagery, and sensory language, to enrich the description of natural areas and their importance. With these literary techniques, she conveys the beauty and desirability of natural areas, inviting others to follow her example and create natural areas where they can.