Search Climate Insights Directory

The author contends that the media's ability to define reality is evident in its exhaustive coverage of COVID-19, contrasting this with the historically lower priority given to the climate crisis. The text argues that the perceived immediacy of the pandemic versus the perceived abstraction of climate change is a faulty distinction, as climate-related disasters are already impacting millions. It suggests that newsrooms should apply the same 'all-hands-on-deck' approach to climate reporting, focusing on 'flattening the curve' of greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, the document highlights how overlapping crises—such as floods in the American Midwest occurring alongside the pandemic—and the shared origins of climate and COVID-19 misinformation further underscore the need for urgent, high-profile climate journalism.

The author asserts that a just transition is impossible without 'radical collaboration' across sectors, highlighting the need to bridge the gap between climate action and social justice. The text emphasizes that while many governments have committed to a just transition, policy and investment are lagging. It advocates for partnerships between employers, unions, and governments to create decent green jobs that respect labor rights, noting that businesses must act on their accountability to all stakeholders to avoid worsening conditions for workers and communities during the shift to net-zero.

In remarks delivered at the Covering Climate Now conference, Bill Moyers critiques the failure of major US news networks to adequately cover global warming and calls for a new era of courageous, connected reporting. He highlights a historical missed opportunity in 1965 when the US government first officially recognized the threat of CO2, and urges current journalists to act as a moral authority to shift public opinion and drive the 'acceptance of responsibility' needed to implement available climate solutions.

The author asserts that energy efficiency is a critical, underutilized tool for reducing global CO2 emissions and enhancing the reliability of renewable energy. By utilizing existing technologies such as thermal storage and district heating, the global energy system can become more flexible and cost-effective, as the cheapest energy is that which is not consumed.

The document responds to a commentary by David Roberts, arguing that while the social science of climate change communication contains uncertainties, it offers core principles and evidence-based building blocks that are superior to intuitive campaigning. It advocates for a stronger bridge between academics and practitioners and calls for more adventurous, applied research to move beyond limited lab-based studies toward systematic design and evaluation of real-world climate campaigns.

The author argues that corporate organizations must take the lead in climate action because a small number of companies are responsible for a significant portion of global emissions. The text posits that investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency is beneficial for both the environment and corporate bottom lines, and that corporate action can help governments exceed their INDC declarations for COP 21.

The authors argue that the historical deadlock between governments and the private sector regarding climate action is ending, as nearly 40 countries have submitted national contributions and major corporations are integrating climate goals into their strategies. They highlight that green growth is a source of profit, noting that climate-conscious businesses see 18% higher returns on investment, while global inaction could cost $28 trillion by 2050. The text calls for business leaders to support ambitious policies and set concrete targets, such as 100% renewable energy use, to complement state-led measures ahead of COP21.

The statement asserts that climate change exacerbates poverty, resource scarcity, and instability, which in turn increases the risk of violence against women. It also notes that women leading environmental protests against projects like fracking and mega-dams face persecution and harassment.

The author highlights the devastating floods in the Balkans and the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet as evidence of the urgent need for global societal and economic restructuring. Despite the solidarity shown during disasters, the author criticizes Balkan governments for continuing to build coal-fired power plants for export. The text calls for the elimination of fossil fuels, a reduction in energy consumption, and a move away from the current consumption-based economic model to ensure survival and sustainability.

The document highlights a significant disconnect between the scientific community and the American public regarding the consensus on human-caused climate change. While nearly all climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is occurring, approximately half of Americans are either unaware of or do not believe in this consensus. The author asserts that this lack of understanding is critical and calls for climate science societies and individual scientists to take action to correct the record.

The document argues against the perceived dichotomy between the climate change movement and traditional environmentalism, stating that human well-being is inextricably linked to the health of natural systems.

The document highlights the accelerating loss of Arctic sea ice and the resulting threats to indigenous communities and global populations as evidence of the climate crisis. It argues that while law alone cannot solve climate change, international law is a vital instrument for achieving justice and protecting the rights of those most vulnerable to environmental degradation. The text frames the mission of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) as using transformative legal approaches to hold powerful entities accountable and protect human health and the environment on a global scale.

The author contends that Africa must embrace biotechnology and genetic modification to combat climate-change induced droughts and famines. The text criticizes African nations for adopting overly stringent regulations under the Cartagena Protocol, often influenced by European Union consumer concerns, which may conflict with World Trade Organization rules and hinder the delivery of food relief. It recommends that SADC countries emulate the pro-biotechnology regulatory models of nations like Brazil, India, and South Africa to maximize agricultural yields and reduce dependence on humanitarian aid.

The authors critique 'the new botany' of genetic engineering, contrasting it with traditional botany and evolutionary biology. They argue that transgenic crops are developed for patentability and profit rather than productivity or subsistence, leading to ecological hazards such as 'superweeds' and the disruption of species barriers. The text compares the trajectory of transgenic technology to that of nuclear fission, suggesting it follows a pattern of overreach and eventual failure, and advocates for a biologically informed agriculture focused on fair food distribution.

The document asserts that Africa is vulnerable to the dual pressures of climate change and population growth due to its deep dependency on natural resources, entrenched poverty, and a history of agricultural failure during droughts. It calls for collaborative efforts to address deforestation, urban management, and food security.