Individual action - not sufficient, but necessary

-

A kind stranger asked me recently, "What can I do to help?". I don't get this question a lot when I talk of climate change, so it's always encouraging. It is also confusing though, because two things are simultaneously true about individual efforts: that they will not be enough, and that they must not stop. To put it in a more precise manner, individual action is necessary but not sufficient to fight the climate crisis. So at what cost and to what benefit do we consider engaging 一 and asking others to engage 一 in climate solutions?

A drop in the ocean

"There are ~7.9 billion people on this planet. What difference can I make?"

I'll see you and raise you. The world is currently emitting about 36 billion tons of CO2 each year. And an "average" person is emitting only about 4.8 tons of it. If you're feeling underwhelmed by the scope of change you can possibly make (even if you decided to make this your sole focus in life), it gets worse. Any reduction you make to your carbon footprint isn't just dwarfed by the climate-indifference of thousands of individuals around you, but it also gets eclipsed by the lifestyles of individuals who emit more annually than what you could offset in a thousand years.


All of this can make individual action seem quite futile, but it isn't so.

The road to collective action

I advocate individual action for three reasons:

i) It is necessary. Even if we kept aside the prickly concept of inequalities aside for a moment and talked only of the hypothetical "average" human, the current average per capita emission needs to go down from 4.9 ton of CO2 to 2.1 ton of CO2 by 2030 一 if we are to reach the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 ℃. It isn't just billionaires who need to cut down on their emissions, it's the "average" person too.

ii) It gets people involved. It is one thing to read and talk about climate change, it is yet another to get personally involved. Nothing strikes home the scale of this crisis as trying to gauge one's own impact, which is why I don't discourage people from estimating their carbon footprint despite the messy and deceitful origin of this term (a must-read). Recognizing one's own place in the problem is the first step to transitioning towards the solutions. I also find that getting personally involved makes prevalent inequalities more apparent and hard-hitting. You don't know how you truly feel about Roman Abramovich's yacht-time till you've tried to make a dent in your own carbon footprint. And you don't know how you truly feel about a system that allows Roman (or his equivalent in your country) to eclipse your climate-efforts.

iii) It leads to collective action. Lastly, individual action may not solve everything, but it is the precursor to something that truly could 一 collective action. When people start giving real thought to climate change and start looking for ways they could make positive changes, they often discover numerous others who are looking to do the same. Finding a community (even if online) is encouraging and informative. It can also lead to the formation of local or regional groups who can leverage their numbers to influence policymakers to make more climate-friendly policies. Eventually, the goal is to find the strength in unity, but you can not unite without getting involved first. The butterfly effect needs the first flutter.

My top picks

When someone asks me "What can I do to help?", I thank them for even considering getting involved. Every helping hand is most welcome. I then usually offer my favourite picks : less flying, less fossil-fuel guzzling cars and more vegan choices 一 but all depending on one's personal situation. The reader can find a more elaborate and better answer here. I discourage any disruptive and unsustainable sacrifices.

Finally, the one universal recommendation I can offer to everyone is to vote for candidates who prioritize climate solutions and form scientifically-informed policies.

Recommended reading

If you interested in reading more about the inequality in carbon emissions, this thread by Steve Westlake was quite something!

 
And then to feel a tad bit better, top it up with his article: "Climate change: yes, your individual action does make a difference".

一一一一一一一一

If you like such posts, you may subscribe here.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Darwin's Lost World - Part II

-
<< Previous page So what do we (did Darwin) know by now (then) ? That living creatures from the very very ancient past (we're talking in terms of millions of years) were often found preserved in the rock record. That we could make out some things about the past environments from these fossils. Fossils showed specific associations: you saw only certain types and groups of fossils in certain suites of rocks (belonging to different periods of geological time). There came a dead end at the base of the Cambrian. Scientists like to call this the Cambrian Explosion today, but back then, many of them were more inclined to dismiss this either as a figment of the imagination of relatively smaller body of researchers, or simply, incomplete/inaccurate science. That the Creator had made us all, was the popular view. 3 theories emerged to explain why we see the Cambrian Explosion (if it even is a real thing!): Charles Lyell Interestingly, it is said that Lyell was...
Read more

On Darwin's Lost World

-
Image
Martin Brasier was a prolific paleontologist. And from what little I know of him, he must have been a pretty cool guy. I recently read his book "Darwin's Lost World" and it was definitely one of the better decisions of my life. On Darwin Thankfully, even the most plebeian of science curricula finds it worthwhile to describe Charles Darwin's scientific accomplishments. To me, all through childhood, Darwin represented my superiority to the apes. When someone said Darwin, I would get a mental picture of an ape gradually turning human. That's an overly simplistic picture, but then again, there is so much to learn about everything  that one doesn't quite know where to start. Source The rock record is the only thing that can give us a picture of the ancient Earth. Most other branches of science can tell you what the Earth is like, and why it is the way it is. But it was Geology that first told us what the Earth was  like, and bits of why it w...
Read more

What is ENSO? Page 2 - SSTs and trade winds

-
Image
  This is Page 2 of the sub-series "What is ENSO?". If you haven't already, please read Page 1 first. For convenience, keep that page open in a different tab. = = = What is ENSO? In the previous post , we learnt to identify ENSO phases from the perspective of sea surface temperature anomalies . In this post, I'm going to answer a question that no one really asked ―  What if I wanted to identify ENSO phases from the perspective of sea surface temperatures (SSTs) instead? What if, for no good reason but because I felt like it, I wanted to do away with the "anomalies" bit? Looking at SSTs instead of SST anomalies makes matters unnecessarily complicated, but we're going to do it anyway because it also teaches us a lot. In the image below, I've plotted SSTs from the HadISST dataset. These are mean SSTs for the months of December, January and February (DJF) over all years from 1872-2009. Why did we select the months of DJF? Because ENSO events can be seen...
Read more