During the Australian heat wave and dust storms last year,advocates of action on global warming were quick to link the weather to the longer-term climate changes. But when theres a cold snap or snowstorm,the sceptics have a field day,even if the climate scientists protest that its all part of the extreme weather patterns of global warming. A question is: how do these experiences with weather affect peoples view of global warming and the environmental decisions they make? Cultural Cognition David Ropeik,an instructor at the Harvard Extension School and a consultant in risk communication. There are four basic tribes in this climate war. One group prefers a society that is more hierarchical,a rigid world of order,of structure,of class and authority and elites,where things dont change much. Another group prefers a society without those constraints,where everybody has a chance at everything. A third tribe is more individualist,people who want a society that will protect them when the lion attacks,but otherwise pretty much leaves them alone. The fourth is a group of community-minded people who think were all in it together,24 We are all some combination of these underlying worldviews. So consider people in that first group,the people comfortable with the economic status quo that gets all the blame for climate change? To them,belief in climate change threatens the society they support,so they will find the facts,and weather conditions,that fit a denialist attitude. The people in the second group,who dont like class hierarchies and blame social elites and the status quo for climate change,will choose the weather conditions that make the threat sound worse. Individualists in the third tribe deny climate change because acknowledging it means accepting social solutions and government intervention. But thats music to the cultural ears of the communitarians in the fourth group,so they cherry-pick the stormy weather facts that support a strong belief in the threat. So its really not about whether its cold,or whether there are heat waves and droughts. The facts are only tools for a much deeper cultural argument. Bridging those gaps is where the solutions will be found. Ways Around the Impasse Jonathan Rose, is a board member of the environmental action group Natural Resources Defense Council in the US The Earth is warming,which is changing weather patterns and often causing localised weather volatility as opposed to localised warming. Extreme storms,droughts,intense rains,unusual amounts of snow or lack of snow are all signs of global warming. People know the weather is getting less predictable. They call it weird weather. Meanwhile,there is something significant we can do now to fight global warming,whatever the weather and while we resolve the debate over the economic costs and even before regulatory and market solutions kick in: change our behaviour. If enough of us turned off lights and air conditioning when not in use,kept tires inflated,carpooled kids,and made other simple changes,we could save up to a gigaton (one billion tonnes) of greenhouse gas emissions. Such behaviour change doesnt require regulation,reduce quality of life,or cost money. In fact,it saves money. But it could give us a gigaton of greenhouse gas savingsknown as a climate reduction wedge. These are actions that all sides of the issue can endorse because they save money and increase national security. Other wedges include investing in major renewable energy strategies,building energy efficiency and smart growth. But these will take time and money to achieve at scale. The behavioural wedge is free and available immediately. Scaling it up is a matter of choiceone which makes a lot of cents.
