The best way to save the planet isn’t necessarily recycling – it’s stepping into a voting booth. Bill Nye speaking at the Aspen Ideas Festival
I’m frequently asked about the reality of climate change I share on this blog and what can be done to soften the severe consequences if we don’t immediately reduce emissions. Sometimes I am nonplussed about how to answer the question, some commenters are sincere in the question, while others ask to taunt, and I honestly have no idea how to respond. We are in unbelievable danger and answers are not easy to come by. I’ve always said voting. It’s all I have at this point. We are beyond individual actions to slow this runaway train down. It must be a global effort.
Not only is the scope of the crisis overwhelming, but implementing a green economy during geopolitical malfeasance haunts our ability to act even more overwhelming. I don’t believe in magical thinking, such as the trumpeting of new carbon capture as a technology that will save us. Even if we have the technology we don’t, it will take decades to implement at a scale that would make a difference. We don’t have decades to develop the technology. We don’t have decades to save the Amazon, the Congo, or the tropical forests in Asia unless the human population has an epiphany about the destruction of these rainforests. To me, the loss of these carbon sinks is the easiest of the components of the climate crisis that we can implement; stop cutting them down. Problem solved.
Some ask, so what now, doomer? Do we eat and drink our way until judgment day? No. I won’t be doing that; I am doing what I can individually. But I will vote along with educating people on the crisis; that’s the only way at this point, IMO.
Our inaction throughout the decades has locked in an apocalyptic future. There is no going back; how bad it gets is still up to us. Emissions have only increased even with green energy coming online. The existing world order is not addressing the scale of this problem, it must be replaced.
How many molecules we prevent entering the atmosphere from now on might save some of what is left. Even preventing tenths of degrees of temperature rise will be lost if we can’t eliminate the power of deniers, their enablers in the media, and politicians that crave power and money above all else.
Bill Nye is particularly keen on getting the kids involved by urging their parents to vote green. Young kids, I was active when I was around eleven; I even got green speakers to visit and make a case for the environment in our school auditorium. In those days, I asked, and my school administration said right on. I was proud of myself. From my late teens until my late thirties, I discovered sex, drugs, and rock and roll. My activism stopped then until I was much older. Bill McKibben wants to activate the retired generation and Bill Nye the school kids. Fingers crossed.
Nye spoke just hours after the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a new landmark ruling that limits the Environmental Protection Agency’s power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power plants. President Biden called the ruling, which is expected to make it more difficult for the U.S. to cut its carbon emissions, a “devastating decision.”
Nye called the predominantly conservative Supreme Court “a controversial bunch,” and described the ruling as an act of “human negligence.” He noted that the ruling places a greater burden on the U.S. Congress and state legislatures to pass stronger laws aimed at protecting the environment — though, in some cases, enforcing those laws can be complicated.
“What we’ve got to do is pass better laws,” Nye said. “The Supreme Court does what the law says, so we just have to pass laws that are more direct, more specific, more in everybody’s best interest.”
“
Humans are now the stewards of the whole thing. So we have to take the entire planet into account the whole time.” Bill Nye
“What you would do is reduce greenhouse gas emissions, so the world doesn’t get warm as fast as it’s getting warm,” he said. “The problem is the ocean is getting warm and then all of this energy that’s being stored in the ocean leads to [increased convection] and these big hurricanes.”
Nye also cited research showing that offshore wind turbines can actually slow down hurricanes — similar to a speed bump, though more financially costly. “You take the energy out of the wind and put it into electricity. It’d be cool, but it would be an enormous investment ... It’s a fascinating idea,” he said.