Climate Projections and Anticipatory Grief

Media aren't free to report on it honestly, and politicians won't act on it. How can we possibly remain optimistic?

Matthew Todd wrote about the possibility that the Gulf Stream could collapse in the next few years based on an study in Science Advances:

"The day has come when the Daily Mail is reporting climate change more accurately (on one story) than the BBC who have not even reported this story, despite it being real, and being the number one lead story on CNN on Friday. The BBC seems absolutely unwilling to tell its viewers the full magnitude of the threat we face - because of a mixture of political interference and a lack of editorial interest and understanding. For the still stupid: This is how the richest people on Earth conned you. Facts: NASA, Oxford, Met Office, Margaret Thatcher, and Stephen Hawking. Then the oil PR campaign against the facts. Same story from The Guardian." 

It looks like our reality has finally hit a high enough level of clickbait outrageousness to be carried by tabloids, but now it's too far gone for mainstream news.

The Narwhal wrote about how much climate change is hitting food production in Ontario. Their projections are a good 25 years off with a loss of some apple varieties in the 2050s and two months of extreme heat every year by 2080, which could kill livestock, fish, and crops, along with damage airport runways and other infrastructure. This seems like an extremely conservative projection when we've all seen graphs like this:

But then they clarify how much government tampered with the report. 

"Right now, a mild winter is disrupting ecosystems and ways of life--Great Lakes ice cover is at record low levels and northern First Nations have been unable to build ice roads. . . . It's a call to action for everyone in the province, especially the government. This assessment tells us to be more aware of how present-day decisions lock us into pathways to climate risk. . . . In some instances, [officials] asked the authors to soften language used to describe the  impacts of climate change, including requests to minimize the use of the phrase 'irreversible harm' and remove references to specific government policies. The report writers were also asked to emphasize the costs and limitations of adapting to global heating. . . . The report suggests all levels of government seem unwilling to enact policies that could help Ontario prepare for the worst impacts of climate change, pointing to a lack of dedicated funding as evidence. . . . government has failed to put many of the report's recommendations in place--and made moves that could even worsen the effects it warns of. . . . Its report finds ' the impacts of climate change have the potential to affect built and natural systems through water shortages, forest fires, powr outages, outbreaks of disease and more.' . . . Farmers are facing 'declinging productivity, crop failure and livestock fatalities. . . . For every 10 days the temperature hits 30 C, there could be a 10 per cent loss in the supply of cauliflower, cabbage and rutabaga. . . . 

As watersheds heat up, more than half the population could be at risk of extinction by the 2080s. . . . The ministry 'suggested caution' when using the word 'priorities,' saying that was a 'value judgment.' . . . it is going to be costly for business and government to adapt. . . . Douglas explained that it was a challenge to 'balance a sense of urgency' with the 'optimism that we can do things' . . . . To start, the government could 'factor climate change in everything.' . . . . developing and practicing climate event (emergency) response plans and valuing and protecting natural assets such as wetlands.' But the government hasn't done much on this list, yet. . . . . Ontario is desperate to build more houses, but if that happens without climate resilience in mind, homes could need expensive retrofits fairly soon, or even fail to withstand bouts of extreme weather. . . . . The report asks the government to 'protect and strengthen' conservation authorities, environmental assessment laws and the provincial policy statement, a guiding document for development across Ontario that protects farmland. All three have been weakened during Ford's term. . . . The most significant hole is a lack of clear data on wildfire frequency and spread." 

The balance between the urgency and optimism is clearly tipping for climate scientists. We're not doing most of the innovative things we could be doing. Some provinces in Canada are blocking wind and solar development. There might be optimism for possibilities, but that means jack shit when we're watching them override those options in favour of promoting the oil industry. 

It's so brutal to watch! 

Panu Pihkala published a study last month on ecological grief. 

"Those who have especially close emotional ties with more-than-human environments have long observed ecological grief, well before there were special names for theses feelings. . . . Anticipatory grief/mourning also has an ethical function. Broadly, this is linked to a classic theme in environmentalism: warnings of future losses in an effort to spark preventive acton now. . . . Grieving allows people to continue to care. . . . Learning grieving skills and practices also prepares people to encounter the even more severe ecological losses that are predicted to happen."

I've been grieving for a while about it all. Every fire, every flood, every creature dead from our garbage left behind. We are such parasites here, and we appear to have too much of a carry on attitude to change things.