What Can We Do About Climate Change

The goal of this blog is to create a list of what I call super facts. Important facts that we know to be true and yet they are surprising, shocking or disputed among non-experts. Super facts are important facts that people get wrong. However, I also create posts that are not super facts but other interesting information, such as this book review and book recommendation.

Saving Us: A Climate Scientist’s Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World

Saving Us: A Climate Scientist’s Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World by Katharine Hayhoe is a book about human caused Climate Change, how bad it is, and what we can do about it. The good news is that we are not all going to destroy ourselves. It is still bad, but we can do a lot to avoid making it really bad. However, there are a lot misunderstandings regarding what really makes a difference. This book examines these issues with a good dose of realistic optimism and science. I read the hardback version (and my review on Amazon is currently the top review).

  • Hardcover –  Publisher : Atria/One Signal Publishers (September 21, 2021), ISBN-10 : 1982143835, ISBN-13 : 978-1982143831, 320 pages, item weight : 1.05 pounds, dimensions : ‎6 x 1 x 9 inches, it costs $19.14 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
  • Paperback –  Publisher : Atria/One Signal Publishers (September 20, 2022), ISBN-10 : 1982143843, ISBN-13 : 978-1982143848, 320 pages, item weight : 8.8 ounces, dimensions : 5.5 x 0.7 x 8.38 inches, it costs $17.22 on Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
  • Kindle –  Published : Atria/One Signal Publishers (September 21, 2021), ASIN : B08BZW2BQG, 318 pages, it costs $14.99 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
  • Audiobook –  Published : September 21, 2021, ASIN : B08D4RGYM8, Listening Length : 8 hours and 7 minutes, it costs $16.40 on US Amazon. Click here to order it from Amazon.com.
Front cover of Saving Us. Click on the image to go to the Amazon page for the hardcover version of the book.

Amazon’s description of the book

“An optimistic view on why collective action is still possible—and how it can be realized.” —The New York Times

“As far as heroic characters go, I’m not sure you could do better than Katharine Hayhoe.” —Scientific American

“It’s not an exaggeration to say that Saving Us is one of the more important books about climate change to have been written.” —The Guardian

United Nations Champion of the Earth, climate scientist, and evangelical Christian Katharine Hayhoe changes the debate on how we can save our future.

Called “one of the nation’s most effective communicators on climate change” by The New York Times, Katharine Hayhoe knows how to navigate all sides of the conversation on our changing planet. A Canadian climate scientist living in Texas, she negotiates distrust of data, indifference to imminent threats, and resistance to proposed solutions with ease. Over the past fifteen years Hayhoe has found that the most important thing we can do to address climate change is talk about it—and she wants to teach you how.

In Saving Us, Hayhoe argues that when it comes to changing hearts and minds, facts are only one part of the equation. We need to find shared values in order to connect our unique identities to collective action. This is not another doomsday narrative about a planet on fire. It is a multilayered look at science, faith, and human psychology, from an icon in her field—recently named chief scientist at The Nature Conservancy.

Drawing on interdisciplinary research and personal stories, Hayhoe shows that small conversations can have astonishing results. Saving Us leaves us with the tools to open a dialogue with your loved ones about how we all can play a role in pushing forward for change.

This is my five-star review for Saving Us

Climate Change; what can we do? Talk about it!

This is an extremely well written, informative, and hopeful book on climate communication. A decade ago I was doubtful that human caused climate change was anything to worry about even though it physically made sense that it was happening. I thought environmentalists were exaggerating and distorting the facts. In general I did not trust or respect environmentalists whom I thought were driven by leftist agendas.

I studied the topic on my own by reading books and scientific articles on the topic, and I learned what climate scientists, not opinionated bloggers, said about the topic. I was especially impressed by a book by James Hansen.

I came to realize that human caused global warming definitely was real and a serious problem. I think I was able to change my mind so easily because I never had a strong affiliation with a political tribe, I respected scientific expertise and my encounter with science deniers in other fields had inoculated me against their kind of rhetoric (it’s fairly universal). I’m an abstract thinker who loves pro-con-lists, and I prefer going in deep and I am not afraid of math, but I don’t think that’s typical.

The backside of that is that it made me a pretty crappy and easily frustrated climate change communicator once I came around. I felt I needed to take action so I joined Citizens Climate Lobby (CCL), a bipartisan volunteer organization with good solutions and good practices. From CCL I learned how to communicate better. In this book Katherine Hayhoe praises CCL and use it as a model for how to approach climate change with respect to solutions and communication.

In addition to climate change communication she gives a high level overview of why we know that global warming is happening (there are 26,500 lines of independent evidence for climate change), how fast it is happening (10 times faster than the last ice age warming), and how we know it isn’t natural. It’s a simple overview, not a deep dive. I thought her analogy about driving while looking in the rearview mirror as you hit a curve to be genius.

She also discusses our cognitive biases, and why not to engage with the 7% who are dismissives, the abuse she’s been a victim of, and so called zombie arguments. Zombie arguments are dismissive arguments that have been thoroughly debunked over and over but won’t die because they fulfill an emotional need for those who are dismissive of climate change. She discusses the political divided in the US, the “blame and shame the consumer” tactic and the misguided “population control solution” and solutions aversion in general.

She describes our situation lucidly. That there is no particular known limit that will doom us all. It is like smoking; you don’t get lung cancer after a certain amount of cigarettes, it’s just better to stop as soon as you can. She discusses solutions and the economy, including cap and trade and a price on carbon, and she states we don’t have to harm the economy to solve climate change, and a lot is already being done the world over. It is a mostly hopeful view.

I was surprised to learn that if you take into account, production subsidies, tax breaks, land leases on public lands below market rates, and the cost of pollution, the IMF estimates that fossil fuel subsidies in the US top $600 billion per year, twenty times clean energy subsidies. That’s about $2,000.00 per person and year, or $8,000.00 per family per year. That’s a lot of money.

Because of my experience with CCL I recognized a lot of what Katherine Hayhoe was saying in this book, but I still had a lot to learn, and besides the book is hopeful, and intelligently written and therefore a pleasure to read. She stresses that the most important thing we can do to solve climate change is to talk about it. I love this book and I highly recommend this book.

Back cover of Saving Us. Click on the image to go to the Amazon page for the kindle version of the book.

To see the Super Facts click here


Electrification

This is not one of the super fact posts. It is just a post related to an interest of mine that is informational. I volunteer for an organization called Citizens Climate Lobby, or CCL. CCL is a bipartisan organization that works with both Democrats and Republicans to create the political will for climate solutions. During the month of August CCL is promoting what is called electrification. Clean energy is taking the world with storm, but energy / electric power is not the only source of carbon emissions / greenhouse gases.

Take for example, transportation. Most cars still use gasoline and to move towards a fossil fuel free future we must move towards using transportation that uses less fossil fuels such as EV cars. We need to electrify transportation. Another aspect of electrification is replacing gas stoves with induction stoves, installing solar panels, as well as lowering the energy use of your house.

Lowering the energy consumption of your house lowers your emissions. Photo by Frans van Heerden on Pexels.com

EV Cars

At least here in Texas it is quite common to believe that EV cars do not reduce emissions. After all EV cars use electricity from the dirty grid, right? Often this is said to environmentalists and people who care about fossil fuels emissions as if they don’t understand that the electricity for EV cars typically comes from the dirty grid. However, they do know that. In fact, they know a little bit more. EV cars are much more efficient than Internal Combustion Engine cars , or ICE, and therefore the emissions caused by EVs via the electrical grid, even a coal powered grid, is significantly less per mile. In fact, replacing gasoline-powered cars with EVs saves energy, regardless of the energy source used to recharge the EVs. For an ICE 16-25% of the original energy goes to the wheels whereas for an EV 87-91% of the original energy goes to the wheels.

16-25% of original energy goes to the wheels. Data from FuelEconomy.gov, Image by Karin Kirk for Yale Connections.
87-91% of original energy goes to the wheels. Data from FuelEconomy.gov, Image by Karin Kirk for Yale Connections.

On the other hand, it takes more energy to manufacture an EV battery for an EV car than it does to produce a combustion engine. So, the production of an electric vehicle does emit more carbon than a petrol car. However, the lower emissions resulting from driving an EV means that an electric car quickly pays back its debt, so to speak. It is typically paid back within two years.

According to Hannah Richie at Our World in Data the statistics show that switching from an average ICE to an equally sized EV will save 1.2 tons of carbon emissions per person and year. That is a lot considering that the average carbon footprint per year is 4 tons worldwide and 14.4 tons per year for an American. Hannah Richie at Our World in Data also states that other environmental damages related to EVs such as mining for minerals are less than mining and extraction for fossil fuel cars, and she claims that the price of lithium-ion batteries has fallen by 98% over the last three decades.

Photo by Andersen EV on Pexels.com

EVs are becoming increasingly common. According to Our World in Data in 2022, 88% of all cars sold in Norway were EVs and 54% of all cars in Sweden were EVs. The United States is lagging a bit at 7.5% but there is a tax credit $7,000.00 for new EVs and a $4,000.00 tax credit for buying used EVs. I should add that we have not yet bought an EV because after I took early retirement, I did not need a car. We just share my wife’s hybrid, which we hardly ever drive.

Induction Stoves

We bought an electric stove, an induction stove, a couple of years ago when our previous stove stopped working. They come with an $840.00 rebate. I’ve read that professional chefs prefer gas stoves. However, our induction stove provides everything we need for our cooking needs and my beer brewing needs and it is easier to clean. If you are a professional chef you may want to be able switch the high heat on and off quicker, but we are not professional chefs even though the food we cook is delicious.

Another downside of an induction stove is that if the power goes out you can’t cook, but that has not been a problem for us. Considering that we get our electricity from a power company, Green Mountain Energy, that utilizes renewable energy, wind and solar, you can claim that our stove is 100% fossil fuel free.

Our induction stove with the lights in the kitchen turned off.

Heat Pumps

Air source heat pumps, which are the most common type of heat pumps, are a great, energy efficient choice for heating your home and water and as well as being low maintenance, they can help to cut your heating costs and lower your carbon footprint. An air source heat pump absorbs heat from the air outside a building and releases it inside. It uses the same vapor-compression refrigeration process and much the same equipment as an air conditioner, but in the opposite direction.

Air-to-air heat pumps provide hot or cold air directly to rooms. Heat pumps are the main way to phase furnaces but are also typically more efficient than other types of heaters and air conditioners and thus they reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There is an up to $8,000.00 upfront discount for heat pumps and a 30% tax credit up to $2,000.00. I should say we do not have a heat pump.

Air heat pump installed on the exterior facade of the old house. Sustainable heating solutions for old construction. Stock Photo ID: 2349325553 by Snapshot freddy.

Rooftop solar

Another great thing that we have been thinking about but do not have yet is rooftop solar. Rooftop solar power system, or rooftop photo voltaic systems, consist of electricity-generating solar panels mounted on the rooftop of a residential or commercial building or structure. Residential rooftop solar power systems typically feature a capacity of about 5–20 kilowatts.

The average American household uses 1.2 kilowatts on average. Most rooftop solar systems are connected to the grid and can feed the extra power into the grid for compensation. I should add this is not entirely without difficulty. There are also hybrid systems which include any combination of wind turbines, diesel generators, and batteries for electricity on demand. There is a 30% tax credit for rooftop solar.

Photo by Kindel Media on Pexels.com

Miscellaneous Energy Savings

Saving energy is not exactly the same thing as electrification but it is a related topic. If you electrify your home and also reduce your energy needs, you are reducing emissions.

A few years ago, we changed the insulation in our house to reduce our energy needs and our electric bill. It made a difference. We also did weatherstripping, installed three pane windows and high security doors, that were well-insulated and reduced heat-loss. We received significant tax credits for doing this. I don’t remember how much, but it was several thousand dollars. I can add that you get a $150 tax credit for a home energy audit.

What do you think about electrification and energy savings?

Do you have additional ideas for electrification and energy savings?


To see the Super Facts click here