Do we really want to stop climate change?

NOTE: This article was originally published in spanish and can be found here.

In the past weeks climate change has come back to the palaestra of the media. Events such as the heat wave we endured in Spain, the Pope's statements on sustainability or studies on whether society really sees climate change as a threat, have contributed to this role.

Global warming is a recurring theme that usually doesn’t bring us good news but quite the opposite. Although we usually put the outcry when the bad news appear, little or nothing seems to be done to change the situation with determination. Moreover, it is a subject that generates much debate as to whether it has natural causes or is caused by human activity, which makes it harder to be taken seriously by some sectors.

Assuming that I believe we are living a climate change caused by human activity and that, given the space and purpose of this article, is not the time to discuss that fact, I think appropriate to discuss whether we are still in time to avoid their most devastating consequences and if all actors in society are willing.

However, for the most skeptical and as a summary, I invite you to know the graphical results of a study of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) NASA, in which we can see the theoretical global warming that would be motivated by natural causes compared to the warming that is really happening.

Are we still in time to stop climate change?

Unfortunately, no. We can only, for now, try not to complicate the situation to a limit that endangers our life on Earth.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was created in 1988 to provide comprehensive assessments of the state of scientific, technical and socioeconomic information on climate change. According to its latest Assessment Report 2014, taking into account all possible emissions scenarios the land surface temperature will increase during XXI century, heat waves will be longer and more frequent, extreme precipitation will be more intense and frequent in many regions and the oceans will continue to warm and acidify and their water level will be higher. Many of these effects would occur even if all emissions of greenhouse gases were stopped today, and without greater efforts in mitigation warming later this century will have severe and irreversible impacts globally.

Are we aware and willing to make efforts in mitigation or actually we do not care?

We are now on a somewhat complicated terrain, because to take action for or against something we are supposed to have a minimum prior knowledge of the subject and the situation that allows us to have a more or less clear opinion, and based on that opinion and our awareness, we take action or not.

Why do I say this? Because although there are studies (eg Pew Research Center and the Real Instituto Elcano) in which seemingly climate change is one of the most threatening global issues to society, little action is done to mitigate it compared to the action that is really necessary, both from the point of view of governments as in the case of individuals. There are other studies showing that 40% of the world's adult population has never heard about climate change. As we see, there are studies for every taste and with different results according to geographical location.

Some questions come to my mind about the above, for example, are the results of these studies and surveys like that because people simply have to choose from a list of closed issues and not give rise to think of other answers? Do they answer "climate change" because it is something that is "fashionable" and then do not take action because there is no perception and real knowledge by the society of what climate change is, its causes and its risks?

The latest study Response of the spanish society to climate change conducted in 2013 by the Mapfre Foundation, indicates that most spaniards feel poorly informed about the different aspects of climate change, that the reduction (compared to previous reports) in the use of the car and the plane seems to be due more to a temporary situation rather than to an environmentally motivated decission of reducing emissions, and that cost savings is confirmed as the main reason for lower energy consumption. The study also indicates that in Spain 11.6% of people are "disconnected" of the problem, 22.6% are "cautious", 35.0% are "worried" and 30.8 % are "alarmed". As we see, only two thirds of the spanish society feel a concern for the problem, whether or not they take mitigation measures to a greater or lesser degree.

Why not sufficient measures are taken to mitigate climate change?

Leaving aside that in practice we can not change the current energy sources from one day or a decade to another even if that decision was globally taken, there are other causes for many measures not be applied or not to the necessary extent. I would highlight two: the own feelings and behavior of human beings against this problem that we have never suffered before, and the existence of various political, sectoral and industrial interests unwilling to change the situation and also making defense of the denial of climate change.

There are psychological and social barriers on climate change that hamper to decide to take action. Among them we can count:

• Many people are unaware how their daily actions impact on the environment, and if we see that our neighbor does nothing we also tend to do nothing.
• Climate change is seen as something that evolves slowly or even that is uncertain, which results in the belief that there will be enough time to act later in the worst case.
• Sometimes the information on climate change is perceived as exaggerated, sensationalized or biased, so we do not just believe it.
• It is hoped that future technology will solve the problem and it is believed to be an issue of the organizations and the governments.

As for climate change deniers, it is clear that they have much more influence than individuals in non-performing mitigation measures. Political, energy and industrial lobbies with large economic interests and power, are much stronger in the global decision making about the problem, and also have power to influence the portion of society that is still skeptical and can still be because they don’t trust any of the messages they receive or, in the worst case, they can believe the deniers. These lobbies spread their message, among other ways, through a subsidized "scientific" minority that is dedicated to trying to blow up the global consensus on the issue. For those interested in the subject of the denial of climate change, I invite you to consult the answers to the most common skeptical arguments about global warming.

What can we expect?

In the Mainau Statement in early July, thirty six Nobel prizes have made a call to the nations of the world to seize the opportunity of the forthcoming United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Paris to take decisive action to limit future global emissions. Let’s hope, for the sake of all of us and for those who have yet to come into this world, that the Paris conference will mark a real turning point in the fight against climate change.

Is our responsibility as a society to ensure that the impacts of this problem caused mainly by human hands (and that will grow with the increase of world population) are not the worst possible, both through individual actions and through organizations and governments.

We should "get our act together" at all levels. Unfortunately, we're out of time.