In 2018, hurricanes, floods, fires, and droughts wreaked a level of destruction on the planet that, according to scientists, is just a taste of what is to come. In October, the International Panel on Climate Change issued a report stating that we have about 12 years to avoid catastrophic climate change. Meanwhile, global greenhouse gas emissions reached a record high in 2018. So is it still reasonable to hope that we can wean ourselves off fossil fuels in time to avert global calamity?
As David Roberts of Vox points out, that’s the wrong question. Climate change is happening now, and lots of change for the worse is already locked into place. But, as Roberts puts it, “we have some choice in how screwed we are.” Climate change isn’t a binary—safe or unsafe, screwed or not screwed—but rather a spectrum. That will remain true no matter how we respond to the task of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, or how severe the weather gets. “Yes, it’s going to get worse,” Roberts writes, “but nobody gets to give up hope or stop fighting.” Exactly right. Here, then, are 10 glimmers of hope that humanity will opt for less screwed over more screwed in 2019.
1. The Divestment Movement Keeps Growing
In 2012, Unity College, a small liberal arts school in Maine, announced that its trustees had voted to sell their shares in coal, oil, and gas companies. Six years later, more than 1,000 institutions have sold their investments in fossil fuels, bringing the total size of portfolios and endowments in the fossil fuel divestment campaign to nearly $8 trillion. At the start of 2018, New York City took the first steps to divest its $189 billion pension fund from fossil fuels. In July, Ireland became the first nation to do so. The fossil fuel industry is feeling the impact. In 2014, Peabody, the world’s largest coal company, warned investors that divestment could factor into declining profits; the company filed for bankruptcy in 2016. Earlier this year, Shell called divestment a material risk to its business. The divestment movement is forcing the fossil fuel industry to grapple with the real possibility of a future in which its stocks become stranded assets.
2. The Paris Agreement Holds Steady
Coming on the heels of President Drumpf’s announcement that the US intended to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, 2017’s UN Climate Talks (COP23) were full of defiance, as country after country reaffirmed their commitment to keeping the planet from warming more than 1.5°C (2.7°F). A year later, this global resolve has faltered but not failed. As countries met in Poland in November for COP24, delegates had to contend with the power vacuum left by a recalcitrant United States and its blatant support of the fossil fuel industry. Even worse, the US government’s climate denialism has emboldened backsliding from other countries, most notably Brazil. Nevertheless, the Paris Agreement still stands. Delegates at COP24 managed to negotiate a rulebook for how to measure the progress each country makes in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, ultimately reaffirming international cooperation in the effort to combat climate change.
3. The Rule of Law Still Rules
The Drumpf administration came into office intent on undoing decades of environmental protections and upending the Obama’s administration’s efforts to tackle climate change. There’s no denying that two years in, these policy goals are being realized. According to a recent New York Times report, as of December 2018, the Drumpf administration has eliminated, or is in the process of eliminating, a total of 78 environmental rules. But the administration has often fumbled in its attempts to unravel environmental legislation. It has failed to provide a credible legal argument for proposed changes or has skipped steps in the rule-making process, and the courts have ruled accordingly. For example, in July, a judge rescinded permits for the 300-mile-long Mountain Valley gas pipeline, declaring that federal officials had neglected to fully vet possible impacts on Jefferson National Forest. In November, a judge blocked the long-contested Keystone pipeline, ruling that the administration had “simply discarded prior factual findings related to climate change.” And federal courts have knocked back the administration’s efforts to rewrite regulations around the leakage of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. In short, judges are insisting that if the Drumpf administration wants to pulverize the planet, it has to at least be able to provide legal justification... (continues)
