Thread by @perryworldhouse

We're starting off live coverage of our event with @MichaelEMann with an intro to his new book, 'The New Climate War.' "The old climate war was conservative media outlets & politicians undermining public understanding of science on climate change, preventing anything being done."

"Now, we can see the impacts of climate change in real time. It’s impacting us in our daily lives with extreme weather events, droughts, it’s no longer theoretical. Because of that, the forces of inaction can't claim there isn't a problem, but they haven't given up either."

"Fossil fuel companies have trillions of dollars of fuel to extract and sell, and they want to delay the transition to renewable energy. So they’re deflecting from systemic change and putting focus on individual lifestyle choices, or suggesting false solutions like natural gas."

"We must reduce emissions urgently to avoid devastating global temperature rise. But there's still time to solve the problem. We must recognize insidious new tactics putting obstacles in our way. We’re so close to necessary action we can smell it, and we can’t let it be stopped."

"What needs to happen in the next decade or two for us to reach goal of reducing global temperature rise?" asks @weisbergm.

We don’t need a miracle. We have the tech needed to decarbonize human civilization, we have solutions we can implement now. We need to change the incentive structures to accelerate the transition that’s already underway. We need to invest in scaling up existing technology."

"We can't focus on tech like geoengineering - relying on as yet nonexistent or unproven tech is an excuse to not do necessary work of transition off fossil fuels now. We can do it, what we need is political will. It’s a socio-political problem at this point."

"If I were John Kerry or Gina McCarthy, I’d do what they’re doing now – I’m very heartened by their cross-government approach and efforts to address intersections of racial and climate justice. Even some Biden supporters have been surprised by how bold the agenda is."

Professor Mann talks about a range of different groups in his new book - deniers, doomists, and those focused on future technical solutions. "The forces of inaction don’t care about which of these paths you take, they just want you disengaged."

"On denial, I talk about deflection from systemic solution to individual behavior. First it takes pressure off policymakers to pass policies incentivizing decarbonization; then it leads to us infighting and blaming and shaming each other, a great way to divide climate advocates."

"We can all do things to reduce our carbon footprint, but it’s counteractive to progress to shame people over behaviors rather than providing resources. That just makes people even more ingrained in their behavior because they feel attacked. We need incentives."

What about climate doomists? "Some people believe it really is too late. These are some of the folks who care a lot about this issue and would be on the front lines demanding policy action, but they’ve become disengaged, and that’s really destructive to the overall effort."

“There are potential tipping points, but we won't just tip off a climate cliff. It's more like a minefield we're navigating. My criticism of doomist narratives is almost invariably, they're premised on bad science about one specific tipping point, like release of Arctic methane."

We're now moving on to audience questions. "Successful environmental campaigns often focus on individual action, like single use plastic. Why don't they look at bigger issues?"

“It’s individual action instead of systemic change. In the book I write about an ad with a ‘crying Indian’, actually played by an Italian-American actor, which did inspire audiences. But it was hatched by Coca-Cola to deflect from bottle bills that would have brought regulation."

What more can the Democrats do to push a Green New Deal? "Democrats are working to get some climate policy passed in Congress, and we’ve seen how challenging this can be with recent stimulus package. A Green New Deal is difficult to see getting through Congress in next 2 years."

How can the US take meaningful action internationally "Showing that the US is back in global climate leadership sends a powerful signal to intransigent nations, like petrostates in the Middle East, and Russia."

Could geoengineering technologies be a plan B if things get really bad? "Solar radiation management is a genius marketing term, but we’re actually talking about massive sulphur pollution into the atmosphere, and that could cause huge problems."

"When it comes to geoengineering, I try to distinguish between things like that and direct air capture, which is potentially less harmful. The problem is that’s being used as an excuse not to decarbonize as we are right now. Let’s keep studying it, but let’s move onto policy."

How do we manage uncertainty on climate change? "The cost of not taking action is much worse. Many of the extreme weather events we’re experiencing now are happening sooner than expected. The possibility uncertainties will go against us like that is why we need action."

How do you approach decarbonizing the economy? "There are areas like plane travel where there isn’t an obvious solution. But aviation is 3% of global carbon emissions, so if we decarbonize everything else, it would be in a range where changes like reforestation could offset it."

"There's no one magic bullet. We have to decarbonize every element that we can. That's why I like the current government's approach of embedding climate change across all government agencies, because it does impact them all."

What about international action? "We need a coalition of the willing. If there are some intransigent actors but the rest of us implement these strategies, we can get most of the way there. We can focus on that low-hanging fruit while we bring stragglers along."

Thanks for following our coverage of today's event on climate action! Learn more about Professor Mann's book, 'The New Climate War', here: publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/michael…