The Motion to Mitigate Climate Change through Emotional Stories

by Annette Wong

As the environmental advisor to the British Government, and a co-organizer of the UN climate change summit, Alex Evans has a unique theory on why the Paris environmental summit far exceeded the success of the Copenhagen summit. Evans suggests that environmentalists and green activists in the Danish summit attempted to present climate change issues with “pie­charts, acronyms and statistics”, what he thought was a boring and unengaging approach. When the Paris summit begun, it seemed that environmentalists understood that the most effective way to promote the urgency of climate change was through narrating personal stories in hopes of evoking emotion. Continue reading

Business Journals Lack Climate Change Discussion

by Jordan Aronowitz

Businesses are responsible for much of the greenhouse gas causing climate and are the ones likely to be adversely affected by it. Nevertheless, Goodall (2008) found that even though there is talk about businesses going greener to protect their own futures, there is little written about climate change in business and management journals. Goodall noted that climate change is a science issue, and a typical business journal would not focus on the sciences, but the discussion about climate change started decades ago. Thirty years later, she thinks that these journals should have begun to include conversation about climate change. Continue reading

What Has Worked to Slow Global Warming

by Emil Morhardt

Last week, in anticipation of the United Nations climate conference in New York, The Economist concluded that the single most important action to slow global warming so far has been enactment of the Montreal protocol. Say what? This isn’t on most environmentalists’ radar as an important factor. The Montreal protocol is the 1987 international agreement to save the ozone layer by phasing out Freon and other chlorofluorocarbons used in refrigeration. But these substances are powerful greenhouse gases as well as destroyers of stratospheric ozone, and the protocol caused millions of tonnes of them not to be released into the atmosphere. The article concludes that this avoided release of the greenhouse gas equivalent of 5.6 billion tonnes (bt) of CO2. This is about twice as much avoided CO2 as the next two most effective actions, global use of nuclear power (2.8 bt) and hydroelectricity (2.2 bt), and four times that of the fourth most effective action, China’s one-child policy (1.3 bt). I’m guessing that most of the 300,000 demonstrators in New York last week are not proposing an expansion of these latter three items, but their past effectiveness does make one think. The most effective actions taken specifically to reduce energy usage and CO2 emissions have been worldwide adoption of renewables (0.6 bt), US vehicle emissions standards (0.5 bt), and Brazil forest preservation (0.4 bt). The remaining 11 items on The Economist’s list are small potatoes, totaling less than 1 bt collectively. Continue reading