What do you instantly think of when someone mentions climate change? Melting ice caps and stranded polar bears? Cracked, dried up riverbeds? Hurricanes and intense weather? I think of something a little different when someone mentions climate change....
I think of this guy. Al Gore.
Al Gore and climate change go together like peanut butter and jelly. Thinking of one makes me think of the other. Al Gore and "An Inconvenient Truth" must have came out at a very influential time for me. It was 2006, and I was a sophomore in high school. I was just starting to figure out what I wanted to do with my life . I purchased "An Inconvenient Truth" on DVD. I have watched it more than once, and tried to get my friends to watch it with no success. I guess you could say Al Gore convinced me to go to SPEA. Oh Al. I even sported this "Friends of Al" bag as my backpack in high school to show my support.
![]() |
| Yes, I still have and use this bag. |
![]() |
| My autographed copy of "Our Choice" |
If "An Inconvenient Truth" does not scare you into doing something about climate change, below is something else that can. I did tweet this video earlier, but I feel it is relevant to these readings. It creates a visual for Pacala and Socolow's conclusion that, "in confronting the problem of greenhouse warming, the choice today is between action and delay" (180).
Even more relavent is the video below done by National Geographic. It profiles what will happen with each degree of warming. One degree may not seem like a lot, but man it sure is. And 6 degrees? We do not want to go there. Both videos were ones we watched while I TAed for E162 Environment and People.
Breaking Climate Change Down
![]() |
| Pacala and Socolow Stabilization Wedges 2004 |
A perfect example of breaking it down is Pacala and Socolow's Stabilization Wedges. I first read about these in the Human Behavior and Energy Consumption (HBEC) course last semester. Each wedge of the triangle becomes a task on our list of things to do. Each wedge represents an activity that reduces emissions into the atmosphere (175). Some examples of the wedges are CO2 capture and storage, renewable electricity and fuels, efficiency and conservation, fuel-switching, nuclear fission, forests and soil. Once we cut carbon emissions by one-fourth in buildings and appliances projected for 2054, we can cross that off our list. For those of you who are list-oriented like me, it feels really good to finally cross something off once you have accomplished it. So one wedge down, 6 more to go. It is equally important that we keep our list at 7 wedges. We do not want to add more things to our to-do list, we want to finish what we have first. As Pacala and Socolow state, if carbon emissions were to grow 2% per year, then we would need 10 wedges. If carbon emissions were to grow 3%, then we would need 18 wedges (175).
![]() |
| National Geographic |
We learned in HBEC that CO2 in the atmosphere can be compared to filling up a bathtub with water. For CO2 atmospheric to level off, "stabilization at any level requires that net emissions do not simply remain constant, but eventually drop to zero," (175). Just like a bathtub is going to keep filling with water unless the water is shut off.
Breaking it Down Even More
While the Stabilization Wedges are large, emcompassing tasks, we can always break them down even further to the mitigation and adaptive strategies Roseland mentions in Chapter 13. Mitigation strategies focus on reduction, while adaptive strategies respond and adapt to the changes that are expected. While the Stabilization Wedges are something that might be handled at a national and global level, mitigation and adaptive strategies can also be applied at a local and personal level. The study by Bulkeley et al. (2009) found that municipal programs seek to adapt and mitigate through changes to the built environment, transportation, and public services.
Mitigation and adaptive strategies reminded me of Gardner and Stern's, "The Short List" of tasks Americans can do to reduce their energy consumption. They address the fact that U.S. households account for 38% of national carbon emissions through their direct actions. And best of all, they break each task down by how much energy is saved. There are two types of tasks they present: curtailment and increased efficiency:
Mitigation and adaptive strategies reminded me of Gardner and Stern's, "The Short List" of tasks Americans can do to reduce their energy consumption. They address the fact that U.S. households account for 38% of national carbon emissions through their direct actions. And best of all, they break each task down by how much energy is saved. There are two types of tasks they present: curtailment and increased efficiency:
- Curtailment
- Curtailment means using less of the existing energy equipment. This is an everyday behavior that costs you time. Additionally, this behavior is not necessarily visible. An example is turning off the lights or your electronics.
- Energy Efficiency
- Increased efficiency involves more energy efficient equipment and installation at a higher initial one-time cost. It costs money instead of time. This type of behavior is more visible, such as purchasing a Toyota Prius.
![]() |
| Gardner and Stern 2008 |
As you can tell from the table, sure you can turn down your thermostat and save 2.8% of energy every day for the rest of your life. Or you can increase your efficiency by installing attic insulation and ventilation one time and save 5.0%. Overall, in the long run, you will save more energy and reduce more carbon emissions by focusing on efficiency-improving actions.
So I end today's blog with a quote from Gardner and Stern, reminding you that you too can reduce climate change.
"Research on public attitudes and opinion on climate change and energy conservation indicates that a near-majority or majority of Americans believe that climate change is real, that it is caused by human action, that reduced energy use is part of the solution, and that personal actions can contribute to reducing climate change."
-Gardner and Stern "The Short List"






The Pacala and Socolow stabilization wedges, in addition to the short list, are a great (and classical) example of how individuals can reduce their energy consumption and how that can relate to a bigger picture the wedges show. It's frightening to know that if emissions grow by 2% annually, then 10 wedges would be necessary. The world can't even (not even close) handle the 7 current wedges; image how 10 wedges would change the 'hope' value of curbing climate change.
ReplyDeleteAlternatively,some nations won't even care about the number. Small island nations are disappearing (and will disappear) with increasing temps and at this point, 7 wedges, 10 wedges- it's all the same. They're simply sinking and long term projections just aren't going to cut it.
It's been a while since I've seen the bathtub model, glad you included it. It really is one of the most effective ways to relate GHG emissions to those who are not familiar with the problem. I also enjoyed the Action/Delay video, I had not seen that before. Great way to break down a complex problem into easier to understand concepts.
ReplyDeleteI really liked your post on different effective methods of educating the public about climate change. Funny that you should have "allowed" Al Gore to spur on your conservation efforts. When I was a high school senior, I wrote a term paper about the benefits and costs of environmental policies, and referred frequently to Gore's 1988 "Earth in the Balance." Somehow, I managed to miss out on environmental economics and policy courses in college, but when I applied to graduate school, I thought about my interests in high school as well as college. (I also reflected on who should have won the 2000 election.) So Gore played some role in getting me to SPEA as well....Your closing quote, from Gardner and Stern, really gets to the heart of the issue with climate change, which is whether American citizens can learn about policies from the right sources and in a thoughtful way. Just watching the television ads about energy sources here in Indiana, and seeing "clean coal" and "environmentally friendly natural gas" being described, I see our future as a race between the momentum of fossil fuels and the ability of schools and media (and not advertisements) to clearly explain climate change--not just for us at IU, but for people with less consistent access to enlightened sources of learning.
ReplyDeleteI really like the chart from Gardner and Stern that describes which actions can save the most energy. One of the most important things I learned from HBEC is that it's critical to not just influence people to reduce their energy consumption in general, but to specify actions that will save the most energy. This chart really exemplifies this concept.
ReplyDeleteI also liked the video on how we should be deciding whether to take action or not rather than debating if climate change will happen. I've never seen that video before either, but it does make sense. Interesting blog!
Essentially in order to prevent our downfall, we need to reduce our carbon missions by a given percentage. This percentage has been broken up into smaller, easier targets. I agree with you in that breaking things down for individuals can be appealing by making things seem less daunting, thereby by (theoretically) reducing public resistance. The problem is that although this information is available, people either aren't seeking it out, or it hasn't been presented in a meaningful way. How do you overcome public resistance in order to get one of these wedges accomplished? I guess that's the point of this class.
ReplyDeleteA lot of my friends who know about climate change, have heard it from Al Gore in the Inconvenient Truth. I agree with you, I think the movie is very influential.
ReplyDelete1 degree is a lot, especially when it adds up. When I was in Jamaica over summer, the roads to the airport were being elevated as the water levels were rising. A big concern for the island is that even a few degrees of increase over the years could result in land masses being under water.