Saving the World

Written by Naomi Bisley

As I walked up Queen St, in anticipation of attending a chaired conversation between leading experts on climate change, I was disturbed every few seconds by signs demanding I stop and shop, insisting that whatever it was, I needed it.  I texted my sister in disdain; “I just read a sign in the window of Jay Jays: “If it makes you happy, buy it.”"

This frustrating experience and final admonishment to buy set an apt scene for Saving The World, an Auckland Writers & Readers festival event, chaired by Sean Plunket, addressing questions about climate change that few but a handful of frank scientists are willing to answer: Naomi Oreskes, science historian, economic geologist and the author of Merchants of Doubt, a book making tobacco companies squirm as it exposes the manipulation of scientific facts to advance political and economic agendas; Paul Gilding, former global head of Greenpeace, environmentalist and the author of The Great Disruption: How the Climate Crisis Will Transform the Global Economy; Fred Allendorf, Professor in Biology, author of Conservation and the Genetics of Population; and Grant Redvers, environmental biologist whose book Tara Arctic: A New Zealander’s Epic Voyage, follows his experience as leader of the Tara Arctic Expedition from 2006 to 2008.

Oreskes is quick to make the point that “The planet doesn’t need saving, the planet will continue without us. What we’re trying to save is our own skins.  We have created the situation that has led us to the state the world is in, and we have the capacity to change it”. However Allendorf adds “we need to recognise our connection to the earth. It isn’t us or the planet; we have to save the planet to save ourselves.”

Over the years, global climatic extremities have increased radically and yet ‘climate change’ in the USA has lost its relevance, with environmentalists stigmatised as green terrorists and conspiracy theorists. The USA is helping lead the way to catastrophic climate change through denial of the facts that would otherwise require us to question our beliefs and change our behaviour.  ”Only 40% of Americans believe that humans evolved” Allendorf informs us.  Thus, to suggest humans have the power to influence the future of the world is to suggest God is not in control.

We are living in a state of perpetual denial, and the denial is becoming more deeply entrenched as the evidence grows stronger.

This poses the question: If the biggest super power in the world cannot lead this change, who will? According to Oreskes, “forget about politicians, the real change will come from the market. The corporate sector is the head of change - we need green intervention.”  Yet corporations are dependent on the consumer, at this grassroots level, we  need to demand green.   Redvers is the first of the group to mention irresponsible consumption; he had also wandered down Queen St and observed “We are shopping MAD! Buying shit we don’t need, that will supposedly make us happier.” Gilding continues on the same theme; “we are digging for oil to better our economy, so more people can buy shit made in China that destroys the planet even more. This is about individuals changing their attitudes.” Change will come through cultural evolution, where, as we demand less, the paradigm of consumerism and subsequently the market, will shift. This, in turn, will support new leadership. Oreskes talks about leaders in history being considered ‘extremists’ of their time;  Susan B Anthony; Martin Luther King Jr., people who are now considered heroes.

Climate change is the biggest challenge the human race has been confronted with and there certainly isn’t one answer. However, realistic change will come from the bottom up.

It takes a panel of scientists, who have dedicated their lives to saving the planet, to eliminate any doubt I had that today’s generations must actively decide where their priorities stand: to buy, or not to buy; to change or face extinction.