“You should spread more good news, people love it.” Good climate news is a good niche. It calms the heart, it calms and works very well on social networks.
But let's remember the facts. When you follow climate and environmental news, the reality is that the vast majority of news is bad. Pretending or showing otherwise is either lying or cherry picking. It is true that a media can choose to highlight much of the good news, but we would then be very far from presenting a factual assessment of the situation, both in terms of mitigation policies and adaptation to climate change.
Who could have predicted a year like this?
Not surprisingly, the climate year 2023 was eventful. And this will likely continue to be the norm for decades to come. If you haven't had the time (or inclination) to follow the news this year, it's never too late to stay informed.
In March, the IPCC summary report reminded that every tenth of a degree of global warming counts and that we are not on the path to reducing emissions. Since the release of the first part of the 6th IPCC report in August 2021, there have been no big surprises or good news to grab the headlines. The year 2023 will also be the record year for CO2 emissions at around 40.9 billion tons and the hottest since the industrial age.
Some will find reason for satisfaction after COP28, where fossil fuels will finally be mentioned in a final text for the first time. But the reality is that you can pick out what many people like in this text, including the fact that fossil fuels continue to be produced. No commitment to reduce fossil fuel production and no guidance on financing a just and equitable transition. This is also factual information, as in this article.
Media reporting at eye level?
Has there been an improvement in the media's handling of global warming? Here too, a differentiated response is required. For a range of mainstream media, from public broadcasters to outlets such as TF1 or Les Echos, there is reason for satisfaction and some improvement. The weather and climate newspaper on France 2, for example, is a real success and the format has even inspired other channels such as M6.
Apart from trash media like CNews or Sud Radio, climate skeptics are extremely rare on the airwaves. Being a climate skeptic costs too much in both the media and politics. With the exception of a few conspiratorial politicians and media figures riding this wave, climate skepticism is not increasing.
Still, be careful. Firstly, because according to surveys, the proportion of French climate skeptics is still between 25 and 40% (ADEME 2023). And secondly, because the real enemies of the climate fight are now the climate insurers, these people who recognize the problem but tend to say that it is not that serious, that we are exaggerating, that humans have always adapted and that technological innovations will do this Allow us to solve everything. A majority trend across the political spectrum, from the center to the far right.
Cherry picking vs. orders of magnitude
If we have to insist on the need to qualify this media improvement, it is because we are still far, very far from what is necessary. In 2023 alone, you could very easily find hundreds of bad climate news stories, both about deadly events and policy decisions that run counter to climate goals. Doing the same exercise for good news would be much more difficult.
However, it is the happy story of a city or resident planting a hundred trees that will blow the algorithm and result in likes. “If we want, we can”. “But it’s easy.” However, these stories about planting trees and carbon offsetting, touted as a panacea on Linkedin and Instagram, are not true. On average, the area of forests burned by fires between 2001 and 2022 is eleven times larger than the area of forests planted by humans during that period. Did you say magnitude?
Other news has almost disappeared from the media trap. When a study told us that the Arctic could have sea ice-free summers as early as 2030, one of the worst climate news stories in five years, media coverage was extremely weak. Light years away from the reporting of some super-rich people who wanted to experience a little thrill by taking a closer look at the wreck of the Titanic. Good to know: The future of humanity is not important enough to let it live on BFM.
We could also question the “Western” approach to information. If an extreme event exacerbated by climate change killed ten people in Paris or New York, we would hear a lot more about it than about 10,000 deaths in Libya. But perhaps 10,000 lives matter less in Libya than elsewhere. Who knows.
But is there any good news?
Although good news is rare and not as good as what would be needed to slow the ongoing disasters, it does exist. Despite constant misinformation on the subject, electric car sales are increasing worldwide and in France. The global electricity mix has never been so carbon-free, especially thanks to ENR, which continues to grow at a historic pace. Although it is still too early to say that it was Lula's policies that have borne fruit, deforestation in Brazil is declining. A major challenge to avoid a tipping point in the Amazon.
Other weak signals of this kind are also to be welcomed, such as the -4.6% decrease in emissions on French territory in the first nine months of 2023. This is undoubtedly a good thing, the decrease in emissions is always a good thing message, be it for economic or structural reasons. Or the French football teams who will take the train for short trips… who could have predicted that three years ago?
The glass is half-full
News can be good, very good or bad, depending on how it is covered journalistically and what explanations are available.
The political reaction to the disastrous A69 motorway project could well be interpreted as good news. While scientists agree that this project is an ecological fallacy, the government continues to lie about the project using excuses that are all undermined by the facts. During an authorized and peaceful demonstration, the gendarmes attacked and interrupted a scientific conference where members of Atécopol had to flee tear gas shells.
If you still had doubts about the seriousness of Emmanuel Macron's ecological five-year term, they must now be dispelled. This government ignores scientists when studies don't match their expectations, ignores France's climate commitments and even goes so far as to award Patrick Pouyanné, CEO of TotalEnergies, with the Legion of Honor.
The observation on the biodiversity side is equally damning, where the national strategy “Biodiversity 2030” has no legal value. This SNB 2030 contains important goals, wishes, good intentions, general measures (“support”, “mobilize”), which are often already in place, but does not contain any binding information about what the state will do to curb the collapse of biodiversity. explains Arnaud Gossé, lawyer and associate professor at the University of Paris I. Environmental and energy law.
Yesterday the government published a “National Biodiversity Strategy 2030” whose “key objectives” are combating land use.
Today the government publishes three decrees that help to “relax” this goal and the means to achieve it. pic.twitter.com/aLnlVD7Ys2
– Arnaud Gosseur (@ArnaudGosseur) November 28, 2023
Multiply effects
While it is important to deliver good news, it is equally important to have a clear view of the current situation. Expecting a miracle from governments, a COP or a multinational company like TotalEnergies or BNP Paribas would be a big mistake. Year after year, explanation after explanation, the facts and magnitudes remind us that the levers lie and will be primarily elsewhere.
When companies and states engage in climate inaction, climate activists have more power than ever to use justice to bring them to justice. Two notable examples this year: BNP Paribas has been at the center of a lawsuit since February last year over its contribution to climate change, a world first. At the end of the year, Belgium was hit with legal sanctions for inadequate climate protection measures. “The Brussels Court of Appeal points out the existence of “errors” and orders the various authorities to take the necessary measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions, that is, a reduction of at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990.”
The remarkable progress in attribution science is also a real hope for the future:
If we advance the science of attribution further, as Robert Vautard suggests, it could help plaintiffs meet the legal requirements for establishing causality. If the complaints lead to a lawsuit for which those responsible have to pay, this scientific work could cost companies and states billions.
The latest IPCC report reminds us that we have our climate future in our hands. It is not “too late” to act, and it will never be too late. Navigating false promises and blatant greenwashing won't be an easy task, but if you want to avoid getting caught up in a whirlwind of environmental fear, we now know that taking action can be one of the best ways to avoid it .
Finally, if you lack arguments for fighting climate change, look for issues where consensus can be reached, such as health. Anything (or almost anything) that is good for the climate is good for your health. And what better reason could there be for us to combat global warming than to live healthier lives?