By Patricia Houser
For Nature’s Sake
Patricia Houser
In light of events this past summer and early fall that yet again illustrated the dangers of climate change, it seems a good time to consider what it would take to get more people to act to prevent the worst outcomes of global warming.
Climate change is caused by air pollution that began more than 150 years ago – the result of industrialization – leading to an ongoing accumulation of heat trapping gases in the Earth’s atmosphere. It’s as if the Earth is sweltering under a pile of blankets, say scientists, and the pile gets bigger every time we emit more heat trapping (greenhouse) gases.
A leading source of this kind of heat-trapping pollution is fossil fuels. Every time we burn coal, oil and gas we are spewing carbon dioxide (and more) into the atmosphere, adding a new layer of warmth to the already ailing planet. In that sense, fossil fuels are an enemy to planetary health.
That leaves us in the uncomfortable position of colluding with the enemy. Every time we drive a gas-powered car or use the clothes dryer or even turn on the computer at work, we make a new deposit of excess CO2 into the atmosphere. We’ve inherited energy and transportation systems that currently depend upon fossil fuels. So what can we do, as individuals, other than shrug off our role in “the greatest challenge humanity has ever faced” as the Guardian news outlet has called it, and wait for electric cars and windmills and other options to become more accessible?
Would we be doing more individually to limit fossil fuels if people realized how imminent and close-to-home this is? Imagine what you would do, for instance, faced with an environmental risk inside your house. What lengths would you go to avoid exposing family members to a toxic chemical like formaldehyde after realizing the health impacts of indoor pollution from certain items of furniture, cleaning products, smoke or clothing?
With a little research one can learn that formaldehyde affects the respiratory system, causes skin sensitivity and is also a known carcinogen. After learning that many clothing manufacturers still coat fabrics with formaldehyde (that’s the “new clothes” smell) before packaging to reduce wrinkles, would you wash new clothes before wearing them? Would you avoid formaldehyde in cleaning products and laundry detergents by checking the Environmental Working Group database before shopping?
When you learn that laminate flooring and kitchen cabinets often are constructed with urea formaldehyde in the wood glues and can send toxic chemicals into the air, outgassing for years, would you choose products with less outgassing? You might even become the person who knows about upcoming legislation to eliminate use of formaldehyde in consumer products and organize your peers to support it.
While this example may seem a thinly veiled excuse to add a cautionary note on formaldehyde in consumer products, it is also meant to prompt thinking on why, given the scale and implications of harm caused by excess CO2, more of us wouldn’t expend comparable energy tracking our carbon emissions. Compared to a single, pervasive source of household pollution, the problem of fossil fuel emissions has the capacity to destroy life in the ocean and on land at a level that has been called “the sixth extinction.” United Nations Secretary General Antonio Gutierrez, after reading the August 2021 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said the scientific certainty and evidence in the report amounted to “a code red for humanity. The alarm bells are deafening.”
A month after the IPCC update and the “code red” announcement, Connecticut released its annual greenhouse gas inventory, showing the state was not on track to meet its own – and international – goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In a press release, state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Commissioner Katie Dykes said, “This report demonstrates that there is urgent work to be done for Connecticut to reduce our share of the greenhouse gas emissions that are accelerating climate change.”
That brings us back to dilemma of individuals hitched to a carbon-dependent lifestyle in a state that has fallen behind on emissions goals.
Essential initiatives for addressing climate change must come from governments and corporations that shape these patterns of energy use on a large scale. Still, experts say, individuals also make a difference by acting ethically (lowering their individual carbon footprints) and joining with others to support climate initiatives at every scale from the local to the national to the international.
There are many sources of ideas for individuals and small groups to combat climate change. Those actions could include avoiding unnecessary car trips and turning off car engines rather than idling at places like schools and drive-through windows (the subject of a previous column); supporting the conservation of landscapes in our state that actually remove CO2 from the atmosphere, including coastal wetlands and forests; checking out the website for the non-partisan Connecticut League of Conservation Voters and reaching out to legislators to support good climate policy; and starting climate conversations in our circles of family and friends.
As the biologist James McClintock says, “If we can’t even talk about climate change, we certainly will never be able to fix it.”
Patricia Houser, PhD, AICP, shares her exploration of local and regional environmental issues in this column as a member of the nonpartisan Milford Environmental Concerns Coalition.