Is it too late?
“It’s too late to stop climate change. We should focus on preparing for the worst,” is something I often hear…it’s something I ask myself even more.
And now Canada’s most famous environmentalist, Dr. David Suzuki, recently said the scariest part out loud. In an interview with iPolitics, he acknowledged that humanity is losing its battle against climate change.
"We're in deep trouble," Suzuki said. "I've never said this before to the media, but it's too late. We’re on our way to more than a three-degree temperature rise by the end of this century, and scientists agree we shouldn’t rise above one and half degrees.”
I’ve worked in the climate space for quite a few years now, and sometimes I joke that we’re 95 per cent doomed but I work in those few remaining percentage points. Maybe it’s less of a joke and more of a cognitive dissonance management mechanism.
The scope of the climate problem is complicated and overwhelming, and we have to deal with the “what I do is a mere drop in a very large bucket, so why bother?” question. I ask that one a lot too.
One coping/hoping strategy I use is to “shrink the bucket”— your drops have a bigger impact in a smaller container. We need to recognize those moments that we can take action on (the energy efficiency of our homes, changing our driving habits, etc.). Suzuki is taking a similar approach. He hasn’t entirely given up but says that instead of just trying to force change through legal, political, and economic systems, we now need to focus on community action. And that action includes preparing for the worst.
Climate adaptation helps societies, economies, and ecosystems become more resilient to the inevitable impacts of climate change: from extreme weather to new disease patterns.
“For me, what we’ve got to do now is hunker down,” Suzuki says. “The units of survival are going to be local communities, so I’m urging local communities to get together.”
You may or may not agree with this perspective, but at the end of the day we do live in communities, not in issues or abstract concepts.
Another way I’m now approaching my work is to talk a bit less about actual climate change, and more about the “co-benefits” of climate solutions. These are the beneficial, lateral outcomes of reducing our carbon footprint. They include cleaner air, green job creation, public health benefits from active travel, and more green spaces. There’s also the coolness factor of (some) tech: from EVs to solar panels to hyper-efficient homes. And deep energy efficiency at home not only saves money, it also means healthier indoor air quality, a cozier home in winter, and a cooler one in summer.
Talking about climate action co-benefits emphasizes the positive impacts beyond simply reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This can broaden the appeal of those policies, making them more attractive and politically feasible, and hopefully encourage faster adoption.
By stressing multiple rewards — reductions in air pollution and the resulting lower healthcare costs, increased economic opportunities, and better community resilience — it’s a bit easier to justify investments and overcome objections. And if these efforts aren’t enough for the long-term, well, they’ve helped people in the short-term. Co-benefits help frame climate solutions as win-win scenarios rather than costly sacrifices while we continue to work in the margins of possibility.
