# data[].attributes.body
WATCH AND REACT !
appuyer l’effet de l’homme sur le réchauffement climatique et appuis sur l’importance d’éradiquer le climate skepticism  + l'importance de mobiliser la sphere politique et l'opignon publique

How could we raise public opinion ?

Trace écrite par les élèves

# data[].attributes.body
Grammar corner

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Climate change - or global warming - is a term we are all familiar with. The warming of the Earth's atmosphere due to the consumption of fossil fuels by human activity was predicted in the 19th century. It can be seen in the increase in global temperature from the industrial revolution onwards, and has been a central political issue for decades.

Climate scientists who moonlight as communicators tend to bombard their audiences with facts and figures - to convince them how rapidly our planet is warming - and scientific evidence demonstrating why we are to blame. A classic example is Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, and its sequel, which are loaded with graphs and statistics. However, it is becoming ever clearer that these methods don't work as well as we'd like. In fact, more often than not, we are preaching to the converted, and can further polarise those who accept the science from those who don't.

One way of potentially tapping into previously unreached audiences is via cli-fi, or climate-fiction. Cli-fi explores how the world may look in the process or aftermath of dealing with climate change, and not just that caused by burning fossil fuels.

Read more: Explainer: 'solarpunk', or how to be an optimistic radical

Recently, I participated as a scientist in a forum with Screen Australia, looking at how cli-fi might communicate the issues around climate change in new ways. I'm a heatwave scientist and I'd love to see a cli-fi story bringing the experience of heatwaves to light. After the forum, Screen Australia put out a call for proposals for TV series and telemovies in the cli-fi genre.

We absolutely need and should rely on peer-reviewed scientific findings for public policy, and planning to stop climate change and adapt to it. But climate scientists should not expect everyone to be as concerned as they are when they show a plot of increasing global temperatures.

Cli-fi has the potential to work in the exact opposite way, through compelling storylines, dramatic visuals, and characters. By making people care about and individually connect to climate change, it can motivate them to seek out the scientific evidence for themselves.

Imagined worlds

The term "cli-fi" was coined at the turn of the millennium, but the genre has existed for much longer. One of the earliest examples is Jules Verne's The Purchase of the North Pole, where the tilt of the Earth's axis is altered by human endeavours (of the astronaut, not industrial kind), bringing an end to seasonal variability.

More modern examples of cli-fi take their prose from real-life contemporary issues, imagining the effects of human-caused climate change. Some pieces of cli-fi are perhaps closer to the truth than others

Could the thermohaline circulation (which carries heat around our oceans) shut down, bringing a sudden global freeze, as The Day After Tomorrow suggests? There is evidence that it will, but perhaps not as quickly as the film imagines.

Is it possible that fertility rates will be affected by climate change? The television-adapted version of Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale blames pollution and environmental change for a world-wide plummet in fertility, thus giving a cli-fi undertone to the whole dystopian series. While there is no scientific evidence to currently back this scenario, as a new parent, it struck a chord with me personally. The thought of a world where virtually every couple is unable to experience the joys of parenthood, particularly due to climate change, is quite distressing.

Cli-fi also underpins the highly acclaimed Mad Max movie series. In a dystopian near-future, fossil fuel resources have depleted and the social and environmental impacts are vast. Australia has become a desolate wasteland and our society has all but collapsed.

Although such a scenario will be unlikely to occur in the next couple of decades, it is not completely unrealistic. We are burning fossil fuels far faster than they are forming, with some predictions that accessible sources will run out in the next century. And some of our famous ecosystems are already very sick thanks to climate change.

And then there is Waterworld. Yet another dystopia, where there is no ice left on Earth and sea levels have risen 7.5km above current levels. Civilisations exists only in small settlements, where inhabitants dream of the mythical "dry land". While the movie overestimates exactly how much water is locked away in ice (sea levels can only rise by up to 60-70 metres), many major global cities would be inundated and no longer exist. And while it will take thousands, not hundreds of years for complete melting to take place, sea level rise is already posing a problem for some coastal settlements and small islands. Moreover, Arctic ice is predicted to completely melt away well before the end of this century.

Sure, the scientific evidence underpinning these storylines is embellished to say the least, But they are certainly worth deliberating over if they ignite conversations with people that mainstream science fails to reach.

The power of fiction

In the long run, cli-fi might encourage audiences to modify their everyday lives (and maybe even who they vote for) to reduce their own carbon footprint.

From personal experience, some audiences tend to disengage from climate change because of how overwhelming the issue may seem. Global temperatures are rising at a rate not seen for millions of years, and we are currently not doing enough to avoid dangerous climate change. Understandably, the scale and weight of climate change likely encourages many to bury their heads firmly in the sand.

To this audience, cli-fi also has an important message to deliver - that of hope. That it is not, or will it be ever, too late to combat human-caused climate change.

Imagining a future where green energy is accessible to everyone, where global politicians work tirelessly to rapidly reduce emissions, or where new technologies are discovered that safely and permanently remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere are absolutely worth air time. Cli-fi can act as prose for science. And on the topic of mitigating climate change, there is no such thing as too much prose.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Can 'cli-fi' actually make a difference? A climate scientist's perspective

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Climate change - or global warming - is a term we are all familiar with. The warming of the Earth's atmosphere due to the consumption of fossil fuels by human activity was predicted in the 19th century. It can be seen in the increase in global temperature from the industrial revolution onwards, and has been a central political issue for decades.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Une " carte carbone " est un dispositif volontaire de paiement, intégrant une dimension " carbone ". Face aux fortes réticences d'une partie du monde industriel, bancaire et politique vis-à-vis des écotaxes, les dispositifs de type " carte-carbone " visent à contribuer à la diminution des émissions de gaz à effet de serre des individus, en orientant le choix des consommateurs vers des objets ou services ayant une moindre empreinte écologique et/ou énergétique.

Depuis 2020, pour aider les citoyens de la Convention citoyenne pour le climat en France, apparaît un principe d'allocation de quota individuel annuel échangeable et rétrécissant (moins 6% chaque année) : il suppose une mise en œuvre égalitaire pour l'ensemble d'un pays et il bénéficie de l'amélioration permanente des informations de contenu carbone par le fait que le commerçant impute des points carbone en répartissant à tous ses clients le carbone qui lui a été nécessaire à ses achats et consommations, il peut réduire sa consommation pour générer un avantage concurrentiel. Chaque entreprise ou structure doit rester neutre en carbone puisque l'ensemble des émissions directes et indirectes sont imputées seulement aux citoyens.

En réalité il existe différents types de cartes carbone basées sur des logiques différentes, ciblant pour certaines les émissions personnelles de gaz à effet de serre (GES) ( ou équivalent CO₂), avec ou sans logique caritative et/ou de compensation alors que la plupart des " cartes vertes " (appellation faisant référence à la carte bleue) sont plus " généralistes " proposant à leur utilisateur de verser un peu d'argent à une ONG environnementale œuvrant à une meilleure soutenabilité du développement. La logique de décroissance durable est généralement absente de ces approches, et nombre des " cartes vertes " ou " cartes environnementales " n'intègrent pas spécifiquement un objectif spécifique et quantifié de diminution des émissions de GES.

Ces cartes sont le plus souvent conjointement proposée aujourd'hui par une ONG (ou parfois des sociétés de conseil, impliquées dans la consommation éthique) associée à une banque, qui fournit la carte, mais il existe quelques cas d'institutions et même une ville ( Belfast) proposant une telle carte. Certaines de ces cartes (Greencard par exemple) compensent le carbone sans coût supplémentaire pour leur porteur qui peut par ailleurs chaque mois choisir dans quel domaine sa compensation carbone sera effectuée (sylviculture, efficacité énergétique, capture et stockage du carbone, projets locaux dans le cas de la Greencard). En l'absence de source de crédit carbone pour les individus, des fonds indépendants et à but non lucratif ont été créés à partir de dispositifs mis en place dans le cadre du protocole de Kyoto pour permettre aux systèmes expérimentaux de démarrer (exemples : The Climate Compensation Fund, Sustainable Travel International, Native Energy...)

Définition et contexte

Le principe est que des crédits carbone sont attribués aux entités économiques et aux individus sur leur compte-carbone. Ces crédits seraient échangeables : ceux qui émettent plus de GES que leur quota autorisé doivent payer pour obtenir le droit d'émettre plus de ou équivalent-, alors que ceux qui n'utilisent pas tout leur quota peuvent vendre leur excédent de crédits carbone. les crédits non dépensés par les particuliers seraient échangés entre banques spécialisées pour le compte des particuliers, ou directement de particulier à particulier (par exemple sur un marché national ou international, avec une chambre de compensation gouvernementale ou une plate-forme virtuelle de vente aux enchères. Une autre possibilité est que quand un compte carbone est épuisé, des crédits supplémentaires soient achetés par le commerçant qui intégreraient ainsi leur prix dans le prix d'achat du bien ou service acheté ou loué, ce qui équivaut à introduire dans le marché une écotaxe sur les émissions excédentaires de (cette dernière option dite " pay as you go " pouvant aussi concerner un visiteur étranger ou quelqu'un ayant oublié ou perdu sa carte. Une question se pose pour les moins de 16 ou 18 ans qui n'auraient pas de cartes personnelles ; qui doit payer leur contribution au système ?.

Le contexte est celui des quotas cadrant un marché naissant d'achat de " droits à polluer " qui peuvent être achetés à des acteurs au comportement vertueux n'ayant pas épuisé leur quota. Ce marché s'est développé depuis les années 1990, en s'inspirant des mécanismes " classiques " de l'économie de marché. Des programmes de " cartes individuelles " sont à l'étude ou testés localement, consistant à mesurer l'impact environnemental des individus, pour les inciter à l'atténuer ou à le réduire totalement (pour ce qui est du bilan global) via des mesures compensatoires. Ces cartes visent généralement à comptabiliser (quantitativement et éventuellement qualitativement les émissions personnelles, pour inciter l'individu, par des outils financière (récompense, bonus, malus à hauteur de la part des émissions de Gaz à effet de serre dans l' empreinte écologique individuelle. En 2009 plusieurs dizaines de cartes de crédit permettent un suivi plus détaillé des émissions, avec donations volontaires compensatoires à des ONG, des compensations volontaires, des dons soutenant une consommation et des comportements plus durables, voire une allocation de crédits carbone, un sous-objectif affiché étant toujours d'aider les porteurs de carte à diminuer leur impact écologique individuel.

Les chercheurs britanniques David Fleming et Mayer Hillman font émerger la notion de carte carbone dans les années 1990. David Fleming propose une version de la carte carbone sous le nom de Tradable Energy Quotas. Leurs propositions suscitent l'intérêt des universitaires, puis " une attention politique soutenue au cours des années 2000 ". Selon Audrey Berry, ingénieure-économiste, " une majorité des travaux ont été produits sur le sol britannique du fait de sa position pionnière ".

Audrey Berry indique que le Royaume-Uni est " l'unique pays ayant à ce jour envisagé l'instauration d'une carte carbone à l'échelle politique ". Une première proposition de loi en ce sens est rejetée en 2004 au Parlement britannique, puis David Miliband, secrétaire d'État à l'Environnement du , commande des études de pré-faisabilité, mais son changement de ministère affaiblit le projet et en 2008, un rapport de synthèse du département de l'Environnement, de l'Alimentation et des Affaires rurales (DEFRA) conduit à l'arrêt du financement des travaux le concernant et à son abandon par le gouvernement Brown,. Dans la foulée du rapport du DEFRA, l' Environmental Audit Select Committee publie un rapport de contre-expertise et demande au gouvernement de revenir sur sa décision. Alors que la méthodologie et les résultats du rapport sont contestés au sein de la communauté des chercheurs et think tanks, le gouvernement Brown répond aux critiques jusqu'en 2009 en maintenant sa position. Selon l'universitaire Mathilde Szuba, cet épisode a " contribué à déradicaliser la carte carbone. L'étude de pré-faisabilité de 2008 est particulièrement révélatrice de la distance qui s'est creusée entre le cadre cognitif des inventeurs de la carte carbone, profondément structuré par la finitude écologique, et celui de l'administration du DEFRA, à la recherche d'un instrument de politique publique bon marché permettant d'inciter les consommateurs à faire des économies de gaz à effet de serre indolores ".

Audrey Berry décrit ainsi ce que ce projet prévoyait : " Chaque personne reçoit en début d'année un quota carbone individuel, stocké sous forme de points carbone sur une carte électronique. La carte électronique doit être présentée lors de chaque achat d'énergie domestique (gaz, fioul, électricité), de carburant pour ses déplacements privés, ou de billets d'avion afin de déduire le nombre de points carbone correspondant aux émissions de gaz à effet de serre associées. Chaque année, un budget carbone global est constitué par le gouvernement et indique la quantité maximale d'émissions de gaz à effet de serre que le pays s'autorise à émettre. Ce budget carbone suit une trajectoire qui diminue au cours du temps en accord avec les engagements climatiques nationaux. Il est divisé en parts égales entre les habitants pour constituer les points carbone individuels ".

La carte carbone fait partie du programme du Parti vert de l'Angleterre et du pays de Galles, et compte des soutiens parmi les parlementaires, ONG et think tanks britanniques.

Selon Mathilde Szuba, " ce n'est pas un hasard si le projet de carte carbone s'est d'abord développé au Royaume-Uni. La culture britannique entretient vis-à-vis de son passé des années 1940-1950 un rapport bien différent du nôtre. Cette période, connue sous le nom de " Austerity Britain ", est aujourd'hui évoquée comme un épisode difficile, mais aussi comme un moment de cohésion sociale face à l'adversité, et le " n'hésitent pas à présenter leur proposition comme une politique de rationnement, ni à faire des rapprochements avec la période de la rationnement fait partie de ce récit ". Ainsi, tandis que les partisans français de la carte carbone évitent généralement d'utiliser le terme de rationnement, ses défenseurs britanniques Seconde Guerre mondiale ".

En 2009 est proposé le principe de quotas individuels échangeables par Pierre Calame dans son "essai pour l'oeconomie" en page 276. Il propose un système européen de quanta qui soit vendable et réduit d'année en année. Michel Rocard a beaucoup appuyé cette proposition jusqu'à l'article de 2015 dans le Monde avec Michel Aglietta. En 2018 Pierre Calame affine sa proposition dans le "petit traité d'oeconomie" en spécifiant que les émissions de gaz à effet de serre (dont le gaz carbonique majoritaire, l'ensemble étant spécifié en équivalent-CO2) proviennent aussi du béton, de l'acier, du plastique, du transport. Il intègre l'énergie grise importée, en effet depuis 2000 les pays occidentaux délocalisent en Asie les fabrications très énergivores, qui représentent par l'import près de 40% des GES dont la France est responsable : 480 millions de tonnes CO2 émises par la France, 270 contenues dans nos importations. Ce travail donne lieu en 2020 à la description détaillée d'un dispositif décrit comme Compte Carbone : il suppose la création d'une agence carbone (ou Bercy du carbone) qui attribue un quota à chaque citoyen par son foyer fiscal un quota démarrant à 10t CO2 la première année (dont moitié pour les enfants de moins de 18 ans à l'image des demi-parts fiscales) à réduire à 9,5t la seconde année puis 9t la 3eme année etc pour atteindre 6t en 2030 et 3t en 2050.

Perspectives européennes

Depuis les années 2000, l'Europe évoque le besoin d'un outil économique plus efficace pour modifier les comportements individuels. Le Parlement européen a demandé en 2005 à la Commission européenne d'étudier un système de quotas individuels négociables d'émission et son intérêt du point de vue de l'écocitoyenneté et de la modification des habitudes individuelles de consommation, et en 2006, Struan Stevenson a proposé un " système communautaire de quotas domestiques échangeables " portant sur toute l'économie lors des discussions sur le Livre Vert de la Commission européenne sur le développement d'une politique commune de l'énergie. Günter Verheugen, alors vice-président de la Commission européenne chargé des entreprises et de l'industrie, a proposé d'inclure clairement dans ce dispositif les conducteurs de voitures, tout en évitant la multiplication des systèmes ce qui selon lui implique d'étendre le Système communautaire d'échange de quotas d'émission (en anglais, European Union Emission Trading Scheme ou EU ETS). La proposition d'inclure les conducteurs automobiles en priorité (pour les individus) est retenue par un document de travail qui accompagne la proposition de directive visant à améliorer et étendre le système communautaire d'échange de quotas d'émission, dans le Paquet énergie climat adopté en par l'Europe (UE-27). Deux possibilités sont considérées : faire payer le client à la pompe selon ses quotas, ou taxer plus en amont le distributeur de carburant (qui devrait alors détenir des quotas pour les émissions correspondant au tonnage de carburant qu'il veut vendre --ce qui n'est pas prévu par l'EU ETS).

Quelques aspects d'un système de quotas individuels associés à la consommation de carburants ont été testés par un programme anglais dit " CarbonLimited " par la RSA (Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures & Commerce) de 2006 à 2008, puis par le LGiU (ou Local Government Information Unit) qui est un think tank visant à améliorer la gouvernance dans les administrations locales.

Début 2009, les dispositifs testés sont tous encore basés sur l'échange de droits d'émission entre particuliers sur un marché virtuel, avec calcul par carte des émissions de associées.

Carbon Trading Yorkshire est une des expériences du Carbon Action Yorkshire, qui associe une cinquantaine de partenaires volontaires pour anticiper la mise en œuvre du Carbon Reduction Commitment, notamment en participant à une simulation d'échange de droits d'émission de janvier à . Cette expérience pourrait préfigurer un cadre légal pour l'échange de droits d'émission et la compensation au Royaume-Uni.
Dans ce cas, le calcul des budgets carbone, l'achat de quotas aux enchères et les échanges seront réels, mais sans transfert d'argent.

Des expériences similaires mais portant sur des quotas ou échanges individuels sont en cours depuis 2005 avec une trentaine de groupes du réseau anglais CRAG (Carbon Rationing Action Group). Dans ce cas, des volontaires décident collaborativement de réduire leur impact carbone dans une démarche à la fois collective et individuelle, se fixant un objectif annuel de réduction de leurs émissions personnelles.
L'originalité du dispositif réside dans un calcul des principales émissions (basé sur la consommation d'énergie pour l'habitat et le transport personnel (voiture et avion), une pénalité à payer (taux déterminé par le groupe par kg d'équivalent-CO ₂ émis) joue le rôle d'une écotaxe qui alimente un fonds carbone utilisé selon des priorités décidées par le groupe (il y avait une trentaine de ces groupes actifs en 2008 au Royaume-Uni).

Même si des collectivités s'impliquent ou montrent leur intérêt (le Carbon Action Yorkshire est par exemple un programme qui vise à créer une économie sobre en carbone dans le Yorkshire et Humber), des freins à une extension au pays ou à l'Europe sont notamment :

le manque de précision ou de transparence des méthodes de calcul (par exemple, les fonctions de puits de carbone des mers ou forêts dégradées par les activités humaines sont majeures, mais mal prises en compte). Les impacts de l'aviation et du transport maritime, ou de modes de déplacements tels que les deux roues motorisés sont mal évalués. Le méthane est bien moins pris en compte que le CO₂ alors que l'urgence de sa prise en compte est critique pour les dérèglements climatiques.

une double comptabilité des émissions (à ce jour, faute d'outils et de cadastres précis des émissions de GES, prenant en compte les impacts différés dans le temps et dans l'espace, y compris donc ceux de la délocalisation de la production des biens : la Chine est devenue en 2008 le premier émetteur de GES, mais essentiellement en raison du fait qu'elle produit (à bas prix) des biens de consommation pour les pays riches) ;

le scepticisme ou manque de confiance de l'opinion face aux solutions par le marché, ou au sujet de l'équité du dispositif (les riches ont en quelque sorte un droit à polluer plus) ;

un intérêt mitigé de la part des banques.

Les cartes carbones restent donc des dispositifs de participation volontaire, qui semblent cependant intéresser un nombre croissant de chercheurs, mais aussi d'ONG, d'entreprises, de collectivités locales (dans le cadre de leurs Agenda 21 ou Plan climat...

Un système de quotas individuels d'émission de CO ₂ a aussi été étudié en Suède par le Stockholm Environment Institute

On peut distinguer deux objectifs qui se rejoignent plus ou moins :

celui du consommateur éco-citoyen volontaire (à ce jour ces cartes sont toutes basées sur le volontariat)

l'objectif éthique, plus ou moins affiché selon la carte : cet objectif est celui de contribuer à la sensibilisation, l'éducation et la formation de tous et chacun, avec l'objectif d'un comportement énergétiquement plus sobre et plus rationnel, moins nuisant à l'égard de la planète et des ressources pas, peu, difficilement, coûteusement ou lentement renouvelables, ainsi éventuellement que de proposer des moyens concrets de réduire ou compenser ces impacts.

l'objectif du fournisseur de la carte (Banque, institution financière, ville..) ; des enjeux d'image et des intérêts commerciaux et publicitaires peuvent exister, mais les objectifs affichés sont généralement de contribuer à développer des outils et comportements permettant de respecter les objectifs du Protocole de Kyoto ou dans certains cas et toujours au niveau individuel, de les dépasser en visant la neutralité carbone.

Le cadre global est celui d'une approche économique visant à donner une valeur à la " tonne de carbone non émise " et un coût à la tonne émise. Pour ce qui est des objectifs quantitatifs et spatiaux-temporels, le contexte a d'abord été celui d'une moindre contribution des pays les plus producteurs de GES (Protocole de Kyoto), certains étant plus ambitieux et visant une neutralité carbone (par exemple sur la base d'une proposition du Costa Rica reprise par le Programme des Nations unies pour l'environnement, le 21 février 2008, cinq pays - Costa Rica, Islande, Monaco, Norvège et Nouvelle-Zélande - se sont engagés à orienter leur économie vers une neutralité carbone en réduisant fortement leurs rejets de CO ₂ pour devenir " climatiquement neutre " d'ici 2021.

L' écoéligibilité et les subventions, l'obligation ou les systèmes volontaires de mesures compensatoires, restauratoires ou mesure conservatoires, éventuellement fondées sur des systèmes écotaxes sont des outils plus ou moins développés dans les années 1990 à 2005. Les approches varient : donation, compensation carbone volontaire, soutien à la consommation et aux comportements durables, allocation de crédits carbone (système de quotas).

La carte carbone est généralement basée sur la valeur (plus ou moins consensuelle) du carbone non-émis.. Une telle carte figurait parmi les nombreuses propositions faites en France lors du Grenelle de l'environnement, notamment par Dominique Perben, ministre des transports alors en poste, qui a retenu que " tous les grands projets publics devraient être arbitrés en intégrant leur coût pour le climat, leur coût en carbone ". Un Centre d'analyse stratégique a été chargé de calculer " la valeur tutélaire du carbone ". En 2001, l'économiste Marcel Boiteux avait fixé à 27 euros le prix de la tonne de CO ₂ et le voyait évoluer au même rythme que l'inflation, soit 58 euros à l'horizon 2030. En 2008, les modèles de calcul s'étant affinés et les objectifs de réduction s'étant durcis, la valeur d'une tonne de CO ₂ a été estimée à 32 euros pour 2010, 56 euros pour 2020, 100 euros pour 2030 et 200 euros pour 2050. La carte carbone vise à décliner ce mécanisme à l'échelle d'individus volontaires.

Certaines cartes sont basées sur le principe d'un versement, en quelque sorte " compensatoire " à une ONG qui contribue à aider des acteurs à diminuer leurs émissions de gaz à effet de serre, à restaurer ou protéger des puits ou stock de carbone ( biomasse des forêts tropicales, tourbières, récifs coralliens, etc. Le principe est en quelque sorte celui d'une écotaxe volontaire. Ces cartes permettent aussi à l'individu d'évaluer grossièrement ses impacts via le suivi de ses achats par carte bancaire. En réalité ces cartes ne sont pas de véritables cartes carbone et elles sont aujourd'hui souvent considérées comme des opérations de communication (voire d'un " verdissement de façade ") qui n'aident que peu les ONG environnementales à travailler et qui n'ont pas fait la preuve d'un bilan global environnementalement positif.

Carte Visa Agir (Crédit coopératif, France) (intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

RSPB Card (Co-operative Bank, Royaume-Uni)(intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Breathe Credit Card (Barclaycard, Royaume-Uni)

Sierra Club Platinum Plus, Visa, Nature Conservancy Platinum Plus Visa (Bank of America, USA)(intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Nature Conservancy Platinum Plus Visa (Bank of America) (intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

WWF Visa, Audubon Nature Institute Visa) (JP Morgan Chase, USA) (intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Platinum Visa Union (Bank of California)(intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

American Express Rewards (American Express)(intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Eco Rewards Visa Card (UMB Bank)(intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Wells Fargo Rewards Programs (Wells Fargo)(intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Ecosmart MasterCard (HSBC USA)(intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Green credit card (HSBC, HongKong)(intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

D'autres cartes sont plus directement basées sur une compensation carbone

Dans cette même catégorie, en 2008, seules trois cartes offraient un suivi plus détaillé et précis de la contribution des achats aux émissions de GES et/ou en matière d'objectif de neutralité carbone. Ces cartes calculent la quantité d'émissions de GES à compenser en fonction des achats faits (carburant, voyages..) :

D'autres cartes encore étaient (fin 2008) présentées comme visant spécifiquement à soutenir et développer une consommation et un comportement plus durable

Citi ThankYou Points reward card Citibank USA (intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Wachovia Possibilities Rewards program Wachovia USA (intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Defenders of Wildlife Worldpoints Platinum Plus Visa, National Wildlife Federation Rewards (American Express Bank of America USA)

CarbonCred Card (CarbonCred UK) (intègre un objectif carbone, mais non quantifiable)

Dans cette même catégorie, en 2008, trois cartes offraient un suivi plus détaillé et précis de la contribution des achats aux émissions de GES et/ou en matière de consommation soutenable :

De e-portemonnee (Bond BeterLeefmilieu - Limburg.net Belgique)

Ice Card (The Ice Organisation UK)

City Carbon Card (Ville de Belfast Europe) (Carte proposée par une ville)

Carte du consommateur citoyen (Mouvement vraiment durable)

Quelques cartes, non conçues par des banques, intègrent(fin 2008) un système plus précis d'allocation de crédits carbone (quotas).

Personal Carbon Trading (Organismes recherche et institutions politiques UK)

Carbon Limited (RSA - LGiU UK)

Quotas personnels de carbone (organismes de recherche France)

Personal Carbon Trading (Stockholm Environment Institute Suède)

Personal Carbon Trading (Institutions communautaires Europe)

Une carte a été proposée par un groupe incluant un fabricant automobile (pour la Smart) ; De 2006 à 2008, Smart a testé une sorte de carte carbone ( Mastercard associant DaimlerChrysler Financial Services et HBos Card Services) avec comme partenaire environnemental le Woodland Trust pour l'application d'une compensation carbone activée par les utilisations de la carte de crédit (cinq arbres plantés à l'activation de la carte, supposés compenser l'équivalent de 6 000 miles parcourus en Smart fortwo coupé (1 091 kg de CO ₂), hors émissions liées à la construction et entretien de la voiture et des infrastructures routières).

En Suède, un système de carte de bancaire, développé par la start-up Doconomy, indique les émissions attachées à chaque produit acheté et alerte son porteur lorsque celui-ci dépasse son quota carbone individuel.

Il faut traduire les émissions induites par chaque source d'énergie en équivalent d'une unité commune. Il est généralement proposé de le faire à partir du " potentiel de réchauffement global " (PRG) de cette source (en équivalent GES ou équivalent CO ₂ produits par la production et la combustion des carburants).

À titre d'exemple, si 1 kg d'équivalent 1 unité de carbone, on obtient par exemple les ratios suivant :

Gaz naturel 0,2 par kWh consommé

Essence 2,3 par litre d'essence brûlé

Gazole 2,4 par litre de fuel brûlé

charbon 2,9 par kg de charbon brûlé

Électricité du réseau public 0,6 par kWh consommé la nuit, et 0,7 par kWh consommé le jour.

En théorie, les systèmes de codes-barres et un étiquetage intégrant l'empreinte énergétique et écologique d'un produit sont possibles. Divers calculateurs d'émissions d'équivalent ou de carbone sont proposés sur l'Internet ou par de grandes entreprises (SNCF en France), mais le calcul fin de la contribution de chacun en ce qui concerne l'émission reste difficile.

Plusieurs limites sont intrinsèquement liées au système :

Le système de comptabilité économique et d'étiquetage ne permet pas encore une analyse fine des impacts climatique des achats.

La prise en compte d'impacts globaux, tels que ceux des infrastructures collectives, de certains services publics et collectifs payés via les impôts, la TVA, etc. reste difficile (par exemple le bilan global de la voiture électrique n'est pas encore clair, surtout si l'on intègre qu'elle utilise le même réseau routier, dont les impacts en carbone ou les impacts indirects en matière de fragmentation écologique, d'albédo et de micro-climat ne sont sans doute pas négligeables).

La prise en compte des impacts-carbone de biens ou logements partagés ou loués n'est pas encore facile.

Une telle carte peut, via des calculs établis sur la base de ratios, informer sur l'impact d'un achat (véhicule par exemple) puis sur l'impact des achats de carburants, mais non sur les émissions qui seront liées à la fin de vie du véhicule. Elle vise à encourager l'achat de véhicules moins polluants mais ne donne cependant pas d'information sur les émissions liées à la construction et à l'entretien des réseaux de transport (route, aéroports, canaux, voies ferrées..)
Des progrès sont faits pour ce type de prise en compte : Par exemple en France en 1998, la formule de calcul de la puissance fiscale d'un véhicule avait été modifiée afin de prendre en compte les émissions de CO₂. puis une surtaxe CO₂ sur les véhicules d'occasion et un bonus/malus écologique à l'achat de véhicules neufs sont en place. Mais l'impact de l'électricité d'origine nucléaire sur les émissions de CO₂ (amont et aval de la filière) ou sur le réchauffement des milieux en aval des systèmes de refroidissement n'est pas pris en compte, comme d'ailleurs l'électricité nucléaire dans le calcul de l'empreinte écologique.

il faudrait aussi que les vendeurs proposent des produits ayant fait l'objet d'un bilan carbone approfondi, crédible et transparent. L'écoconception, de même que les écolabels et l'écocertification assortie doivent aussi être crédibles pour le consommateur.

Les grandes banques qui s'associent à de tels projets, peuvent aussi par ailleurs continuer à encourager une consommation non durable.

Sans un mode de calcul généralisé à tous les produits, cette approche restera limitée à quelques contributions, et sous-estimera la contribution individuelle globale. Une application plus large nécessiterait une collaboration des États qui, pour l'instant, se limitent à quelques autres dispositifs, encore en développement. Ainsi, en France, le Bonus-malus écologique ou la nouvelle étiquette énergie ont des objectifs proches.

L'acceptabilité du dispositif est rendue difficile par les risques de dérive mafieuse du marché et/ou d'atteinte aux libertés individuelles (crainte d'un 'Big Brother') si de très solides garanties en matière de protection et de sécurité des données personnelles ne sont pas réunies. De plus les crises financières et le rôle des agences de notification ont entamé la confiance du public et de certains élus dans le système bancaire. Des approches plus locales et citoyennes pourraient ainsi être favorisées.

Comment prendre en compte le pouvoir d'achat des enfants dans le système.

Notes et références

1. État des lieux international des programmes de 'carte carbone' pour les particuliers (Europe et États-Unis) - Étude faite par Sandrine Rousseaux (CNRS, Présidente de CLIMATER, spécialiste du Droit et du Changement Social, UMR 3128) pour le compte de l'ADEME et du Ministère de l'Écologie français, mars 2009, 69 pages [PDF].

2. Audrey Berry, " La carte carbone, limiter les émissions individuelles pour respecter notre budget carbone ", dans Aline Aurias, Roland Lehoucq, Daniel Suchet et Jérôme Vincent (dir.), Nos futurs : imaginer les possibles du changement climatique, ActuSF, , p. 255-256 .

3. Mathilde Szuba, " Quotas individuels (carbone) ", dans Dominique Bourg et Alain Papaux (dir.), Dictionnaire de la pensée écologique, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, (lire en ligne) .

4. https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2015/07/08/une-nouvelle-monnaie-pour-le-climat_4675915_3232.html

5. 'Facing the truth : EU energy policy in the age of shortage of supply'

6. Le Système communautaire d'échange de quotas d'émission (EU ETS pour European Union Emission Trading Scheme) a été adopté en 2005 via la directive 2003/87/CE, et il s'applique aux entreprises, en commençant par les plus émettrices d'équivalent CO₂.

7. Page relative à l'étude d'un système de quotas individuels d'émission de CO₂ par le Stockholm Environment Institute, 2008

8. Le manifeste de L'Express pour préserver la planète

9. Audrey Berry, " La carte carbone, limiter les émissions individuelles pour respecter notre budget carbone ", dans Aline Aurias, Roland Lehoucq, Daniel Suchet et Jérôme Vincent (dir.), Nos futurs : imaginer les possibles du changement climatique, ActuSF, , p. 267 .

10. (en) Fleming, Energy and the Common purpose. Descending the energy staircase with tradable energy quotas, The lean economy connection, édition ; Londres, 2007

L. Owen, L. Edgar, S. Prince, C. Doble, Personal carbon trading: Public acceptability. A report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Opinion Leader & Enviros Consulting, Londres, 2008

Y. Parag, The effect of carbon 'budget' on demand reduction: Personal Carbon Allowances, labelling and information, International Energy Agency Workshop, Paris, 2008

S. Roberts et J. Thumim, A rough guide to individual carbon trading. The ideas, the issues and the next steps, Report to Defra, 2006

O. Rousse, Should the regulator allow citizens to participate in tradable permits markets?, Cahiers de recherche CREDEN, 08.03.75, 2008

RSA Carbon Limited, Personal Carbon Trading: The idea, its development and design, Interim Recommendations, 2007

J. Thumim et V. White, Distributional impacts of personal carbon trading: A report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Centre for Sustainable Energy, 2008

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Une " carte carbone " est un dispositif volontaire de paiement, intégrant une dimension " carbone ". Face aux fortes réticences d'une partie du monde industriel, bancaire et politique vis-à-vis des écotaxes, les dispositifs de type " carte-carbone " visent à contribuer à la diminution des émissions de gaz à effet de serre des individus, en orientant le choix des consommateurs vers des objets ou services ayant une moindre empreinte écologique et/ou énergétique.

# data[].attributes.body
correction, enrichissement et a copier à la maison

# data[].attributes.body
This is an artwork,
describe it, where it is ?
what is its goal ?

# data[].attributes.headline
ANTICIPATION Lets talk about climate change

# data[].attributes.subject
ANTICIPATION Lets talk about climate change

# data[].attributes.body
rebrassage lexical et culturel
mind map sur le climate change
!! difference entre le climate change et le global warming !!

# data[].attributes.body
3 QUOTES GROUP WORK
Explain these quotes to the class in your own words

(rapport stefen king last permet de faire le lien avec le titre)

# data[].attributes.headline
Titre de la séquence, CAN CLI FI SAVE THE WORD

# data[].attributes.subject
Titre de la séquence, CAN CLI FI SAVE THE WORD

# data[].attributes.body
do you know any book ? art ? film talking about that ?

# data[].attributes.headline
Objectif : donner une définition de CLI FI

# data[].attributes.subject
Objectif : donner une définition de CLI FI

# data[].attributes.body
In groups (4)
observe the covers and describes them in groups (buildings natural éléments, buildings)
!!! Possibilité padlet avec un rendu en salle info pour le travail participatif !!!

# data[].attributes.body
Activité 2
Read your group's text and pick out information about the following elements if they are mentionned
-Natural Elements
-weather
-characters
-means of transport
-natural disasters
-time
-location

# data[].attributes.body
find the book cover corresponding to your text

# data[].attributes.body
In groups, Explain the story in tour own words and share it with the class == besoin d'un speaker

# data[].attributes.body
Listen to the audio and check

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stephanie LeMenager | What is Cli-Fi? || Radcliffe Institute

# data[].attributes.body
activité 2 fin
3
4 trace écrite

# data[].attributes.headline
Unit 2 Things Do Not Change, We Change (Henry David Thoreau)

# data[].attributes.subject
Unit 2 Things Do Not Change, We Change (Henry David Thoreau)

# data[].attributes.body
Observe this Quote, how would you compare it with the Anthropocene definition ?

(objectif : rebrassage de connaissance et de lexique

# data[].attributes.body
rediger une micro biographie de Thoreau

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Before the Flood - Trailer | National Geographic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump says California wildfires have not changed his mind on climate change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
‘This is not an elitist issue’: AOC on Republican inaction on climate change –video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The strikers who are changing the fate of the planet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump mocks global warming because of cold weather

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Trump used the recent cold weather in the United States to mock climate change on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Oscars 2016 Leonardo DiCaprio Wins best Actor - Speech 2016 VOSTFR [HD] QUALITY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leonardo DiCaprio discovers how our diet is effecting climate change | Before The Flood Documentry

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leonardo DiCaprio: Denying Climate Change is Denying ‘Facts’ | NowThis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Every adult in Britain should be forced to carry 'carbon ration cards', say MPs

Every adult should be forced to use a 'carbon ration card' when they pay for petrol, airline tickets or household energy, MPs say.

The influential Environmental Audit Committee says a personal carbon trading scheme is the best and fairest way of cutting Britain's CO2 emissions without penalising the poor.

Under the scheme, everyone would be given an annual carbon allowance to use when buying oil, gas, electricity and flights.

Anyone who exceeds their entitlement would have to buy top-up credits from individuals who haven't used up their allowance. The amount paid would be driven by market forces and the deal done through a specialist company.

MPs, led by Tory Tim Yeo, say the scheme could be more effective at cutting greenhouse gas emissions than green taxes.

But critics say the idea is costly, bureaucratic, intrusive and unworkable.

The Government says it supports the scheme in principle, but warns it is 'ahead of its time'.

The idea of personal carbon trading is increasingly being promoted by environmentalists. In theory it could be used to cover all purchases - from petrol to food.

For the scheme to work, the Government would need to give out 45million carbon cards - each one linked to a personal carbon account. Every year, the account would be credited with a notional amount of CO2 in kilograms.

Every time someone makes a purchase of petrol, energy or airline tickets, they would use up credits. A return flight from London to Rome would, for instance, use up 900kg of CO2 credits, while 10 litres of petrol would use up 23kg.

Mr Yeo, chairman of the committee said personal carbon trading rewarded those with a low carbon footprint with cash.

'We found that personal carbon trading has real potential to engage the population in the fight against climate change and to achieve significant emissions reductions in a progressive way,' he said.

'The idea is a radical one. As such it inevitably faces some significant challenges in its development. It is important to meet these challenges.

'What we are asking the Government to do is to seize the reins on this, leading the debate and coordinating research.'

The Government is committed to cutting CO2 emissions to 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2010.

The Climate Change Bill going through Parliament aims to cut emissions by 60 per cent by 2050. The Government has said it backs the idea in principle, but it is currently too expensive and bureaucratic.

Environment Minister Hilary Benn said: 'It's got potential but, in essence, it's ahead of its time. There are a lot of practical problems to overcome.'

A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs report into the scheme found it would cost between £700million and £2billion to set up and up to another £2billion a year to run.

Tory environment spokesman Peter Ainsworth added: 'Although it does have potential we should proceed with care. We don't want to alienate people and we want everyone to be on board.'

But critics say the idea is deeply flawed. The scheme would penalise those living in the countryside who were dependent on their cars, as well as the elderly or housebound who need to heat their homes in the day.

Large families would suffer, as would those working at nights when little public transport is available.

It would need to take into account the size of families, and their ages. There is huge potential for fraud.

Matthew Elliott of the Taxpayers' Alliance said the cards would be hugely unpopular. 'The Government has shown itself incapable of managing any huge, complex IT system.' he said.

HOW THE SCHEME WOULD WORK

Every adult in the UK would be given an annual carbon dioxide allowance in kgs and a special carbon card.

The scheme would cover road fuel, flights and energy bills.

Every time someone paid for road fuel, flights or energy, their carbon account would be docked.

A litre of petrol would use up 2.3kg in carbon, while every 1.3 miles of airline flight would use another 1kg.

When paying for petrol, the card would need to swiped at the till. It would be a legal offence to buy petrol without using a card.

When paying online, or by direct debit, the carbon account would be debited directly.

Anyone who doesn't use up their credits in a year can sell them to someone who wants more credits. Trading would be done through specialist companies.

{"status":"error","code":"499","payload":"Asset id not found: readcomments comments with assetId=1021983, assetTypeId=1"}

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Every adult in Britain should be forced to carry 'carbon ration cards', say MPs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Every adult should be forced to use a 'carbon ration card' when they pay for petrol, airline tickets or household energy, MPs say. The influential Environmental Audit Committee says a personal carbon trading scheme is the best and fairest way of cutting Britain's CO2 emissions without penalising the poor.

# data[].attributes.body
classes inversées et TF note complémentaire

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dear Future Generations,
I think I speak for the rest of us when I say
Sorry, sorry we left you with our mess of a planet
Sorry that we were too caught up in our own doings to do something
Sorry we listened to people who made excuses
To do nothing
I hope you forgive us
We just didn't realize how special the earth was
Like a marriage going wrong
We didn't know what we had until it was gone

For example
I'm guessing you probably know what is the Amazon Desert, right?
Well believe it or not
It was once called once called the Amazon Rain Forest
And there were billions of trees there
And all of them gorgeous and just um..
Oh, you don't know much about trees, do you?
Well let me tell you that trees are amazing
And I mean, we literally breath the air
They are creating, and they clean up our pollution
Our carbon, they store and purify water,
Give us medicine that cures ours diseases , food that feeds us
Which is why I am so sorry, to tell you that
We burned them down
Cut them down with brutal machines, horrific
At a rate of 40 football fields every minute
That's 50% of all the trees in the world all gone
In the last 100 years
Why? .

And that wouldn't make me so sad
If there weren't so many pictures of leaves on it
You know when I was a child
I read how the Native Americans had such consideration
For the planet that they felt responsible
For how they left the land for the next 7 generations
Which brings me great sorrow, because most of us today
Don't even care about tomorrow
So I'm sorry, I'm sorry that we put profit above people
Greed over need, the rule of gold above the golden rule
I'm sorry we used nature as a credit card with no spending limit
Over drafting animals to extinction
Stealing your chance to ever see their uniqueness
Or become friends with them
Sorry we poison the oceans so much that you can't even swim in them
But most of all, i'm sorry about our mindset
'cause we had the nerve to call this destruction
"Progress"

Hey Fox News, if you don't think climate change is a threat
I dare you to interview the thousands of homeless people in Bangladesh
See, while you was in your penthouse nestled
Their homes were literally washed away
Beneath their feet due to the rising sea levels
And Sara Palin, you said that you love the smell of fossil fuels
Well I urge you to talk to the kids of Beijing
Who are forced to wear pollution masks just to go to school
See, you can ignore this, but the thing about truth is
It can be denied, not avoided
So I'm sorry future generation
I'm sorry that our footprints became a sinkhole and not a garden
I'm sorry that we paid so much attention to ISIS
And very little how fast the ice is melting in the arctic
I'm sorry we doomed you
And I'm sorry we didn't find another planet in time to move to
I am s...

You know what, cut the beat, I'm not sorry
This future I do not accept it
Because an error does not become a mistake
Until you refuse to correct it
We can redirect this, how?
Let me suggest that if a farmer sees a tree that is unhealthy
They don't look at the branches to diagnosis it
They look at the root, so like that farmer
We must look at the root
And not to the branches of the government
Not to the politicians run by corporations
We are the root, we are the foundation, this generation
It is up to us to take care of this planet
It is our only home, we must globally warm our hearts
And change the climate of our souls
And realize that we are not apart from nature
We are a part of nature
And to betray nature is to betray us
To save nature, is to save us
Because whatever you're fighting for:
Racism, Poverty, Feminism, Gay Rights
Or any type of Equality
It won't matter in the least
Because if we don't all work together to save the environment
We will be equally extinct

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Prince Ea - Dear Future Generations: Sorry

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dear Future Generations, / I think I speak for the rest of us when I say / Sorry, sorry we left you with our mess of a planet / Sorry that we were too caught up in our own doings

# data[].attributes.headline
dresser un tableau "what is fiction, what are facts ?"

# data[].attributes.subject
dresser un tableau "what is fiction, what are facts ?"

# data[].attributes.body
génerer du vocabulaire et dresser le portrait d'une fiction
que doit contenir une roman de climate fiction ?
que doitcontenir une 4e de couverture
= prépa TF

definition de suspence et cliff hanger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Easily create beautiful interactive video lessons for your students you can integrate right into your LMS. Track students' progress with hassle-free analytics as you flip your classroom!

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqhyGKPbHLU
REALISER UNE CO AVEC UNE TRACE ECRITE SUR L'UTILITÉ DE LA CLI FI
FAIRE UNE LISTE DES FILMS CITÉ DANS LA VID

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Day After Tomorrow: Why Cli-Fi Matters

# data[].attributes.body
les élèves savent la définition d'une utopie en FR, demander à traduire la définition et donner une definition pour une distopie

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Princess Mononoke - Teaching Environmentalism to Children | Renegade Cut

# data[].attributes.body
travaux de groupe sur différentes images et articles

# data[].attributes.body
Observe the image. If it was to describe the word ANTHROPOCENE what would be the definition N

# data[].attributes.body
What are the reasons for the polar bear to be so skinny ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Image Of Emaciated Polar Bear Sheds Light On Climate Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Image of emaciated polar bear sheds light on climate issues - The photographer provides some very important insight in our interview.

# data[].attributes.body
Explain the different changement of color of the moths

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"We have seen these moths making a big swing back to their original colour," said Richard Fox, project manager of Moths Count.

"It has been happening for decades as air pollution is cleaned up and with the demise of heavy industry in the big cities.

"The moths have been responding to this and the numbers of black and white moths will vary across the county.

"In Dorset it is very rare to see the moth in its dark form, but in industrial cities 150 years ago they were almost all black and that's where we will notice the greatest changes now."

He said they were also hoping to discover why the moth has been declining so dramatically since the 1960's.

"It's an iconic moth, the one that everyone learns about at school because it is such an amazing example of natural selection," he said.

"But it has actually undergone a major decline of 61 per cent since the 1960's and we don't know why.

"We will be fascinated to see where people are finding the two different forms of the moth and whether in fact people are finding it in their gardens at all."

Moth experts are also asking the public to look out for the beautiful day-flying Scarlet Tiger, which until recently was rarely seen outside South West England and South Wales.

In recent years the moth has spread to further parts of Britain as a result of climate change.

Scientists want to access how far they have flown to access the impact of climate change on our wildlife.

Garden Moths Count is part of the national Moths Count project, established after research indicated massive declines in moth numbers, especially in the southern half of Britain.

Some people are put off moths by the myth that they all eat clothes.

But in reality only half a dozen of Britain's 2,500 moth species do this - and they prefer dirty items that are hidden away in the dark in places where they are not disturbed.

Mr Fox added: "Moths are important indicators and observing them can tell us a lot.

"They are an essential food source for many birds and they are important pollinators in the garden.

"Some are very beautiful and, despite their recent decline, there are still very colourful moths to be seen in all of our gardens."

Sightings of moths seen by day or at night can be logged at the Garden Moths Count website www.mothscount.org .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Moth turns from black to white as Britain's polluted skies change colour

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"We have seen these moths making a big swing back to their original colour," said Richard Fox, project manager of Moths Count. "It has been happening for decades as air pollution is cleaned up and with the demise of heavy industry in the big cities.

# data[].attributes.body
explain in your own words what climate skepticism is ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Climate change skeptics are those who doubt or disbelieve some aspect of the mainstream scientific view of global climate change or, in some cases, discount that view entirely. The mainstream or consensus view is that Earth is getting warmer; that human-released (anthropogenic) greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, are the main cause of today's warming; that global warming's consequences will be mostly negative; and that the future course of climate change can be influenced by human actions, such as burning less fossil fuel.

In science, skepticism is the principle that one should proportion one's belief in any claim to the available evidence-the weaker the evidence, the weaker the belief. In this sense, all scientists consider themselves skeptics, only some disagree about exactly what the evidence is and how it should be weighed. In this positive sense, some scientists are skeptical of certain aspects of the mainstream view of climate change. These scientific skeptics are a minority of the scientific community, but the work of dissidents or skeptics is often an essential part of the scientific process.

A much larger group of climate change skeptics consists of individuals with little or no scientific expertise. These persons, who have decided that global warming is a hoax, exaggeration, or delusion, tend to be interested only in those fragments of scientific literature that appear, in isolation, to support their predetermined views. These persons are often termed deniers rather than skeptics, as they tend to ignore or deny scientific knowledge.

Historical Background and Scientific Foundations

Scientific disputes about changing climate have gone on since the 1970s, when theories of a new ice age (global cooling) were competing with theories of global warming. In the 1980s, scientific opinion solidified around the concept of global warming. By the early 1990s, warming was considered a present fact or future

possibility by most climate and weather scientists. By the late 1990s, the great majority of scientists with relevant qualifications agreed that global climate change is real, is caused primarily by human activity, and might be mitigated (made less serious) by reducing emissions of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide.

Disbelief or doubt about climate change occurs on a spectrum, from authentic scientific doubt to irrational denial or misuse of scientific evidence. Today, a small minority of scientists with expertise in climate or weather science maintain that global warming is not happening or that the observed warming is not human-caused. Many scientists disagree about climate-science details such as the range of uncertainty that should be assigned to predictions of future sea-level rise. A large number of nonscientific voices can be found on the Internet, in opinion columns, on radio and television, and in political circles who claim that climate change is a hoax, fantasy, or scare tactic invented by environmentalists. These nonscientific voices have had almost no influence on the scientific world, but have been successful in confusing public perceptions of global-warming science.

Climate-Change Skepticism and Denial among Non-Scientists

Public Opinion. Climate change was not widely discussed by nonscientists until the early 1970s, when the environmental movement was raising general concern about global harm caused by technology (pollution, extinction, etc.). The public was confused later in the 1970s by scientific debate over whether Earth might, in fact, be entering a new ice age rather than facing global warming. The ice-age theory received significant media coverage, but by the end of the decade had been rejected by scientists in favor of global warming. By the 1990s, polls found that about half of Americans thought that global warming was already happening or would soon happen; only about one in eight thought it would never happen. Levels of climate-change concern actually dipped in the early 2000s, with only about one-third of polled Americans saying they worried "a great deal" about climate change.

WORDS TO KNOW

ANTHROPOGENIC: Made by people or resulting from human activities. Usually used in the context of emissions that are produced as a result of human activities.

FOSSIL FUEL: Fuel formed by biological processes and transformed into solid or fluid minerals over geological time. Fossil fuels include coal, petroleum, and natural gas. Fossil fuels are non-renewable on the timescale of human civilization, because their natural replenishment would take many millions of years.

GREENHOUSE GASES: Gases that cause Earth to retain more thermal energy by absorbing infrared light emitted by Earth's surface. The most important greenhouse gases are water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and various artificial chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons. All but the latter are naturally occurring, but human activity over the last several centuries has significantly increased the amounts of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in Earth's atmosphere, causing global warming and global climate change.

HOCKEY STICK CONTROVERSY: Controversy from 1998 to approximately 2006 over the validity of the hockey-stick graph, a chart of global average air temperatures indicating that recent climate warming is unprecedented for at least the last 1,100 years or so. Critics argued the graph was flawed and misleading, but in 2006, after a careful review of the evidence, the National Academy of Sciences affirmed that the graph is essentially accurate, though its shape is less certain for earlier dates.

ICE AGE: Period of glacial advance.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE (IPCC): Panel of scientists established by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in 1988 to assess the science, technology, and socioeconomic information needed to understand the risk of human-induced climate change.

SKEPTICISM: Doubt about the truth of a claim. Skepticism, as opposed to denialism, may have a reasonable basis: in fact, skepticism is essential to the scientific process of discovering new knowledge, in which claims are carefully tested before being accepted as correct.

URBAN HEAT ISLAND: Area of warm weather in and immediately around a built-up area. Pavement and buildings absorb solar energy while being little cooled by evaporation compared to vegetation-covered ground. Skeptics of global climate change at one time argued that the expansion of urban heat islands near and around weather stations has caused an illusion of global warming by biasing temperature measurements. Although urban heat islands do exist, the argument that they produce an illusion of global warming has been discredited.

After 2004, concern rose again. Concern about global warming appears to be associated with political beliefs, with political conservatives being less likely to credit mainstream scientific views. In 2007, a Gallup poll found that about 59% of independents were worried about global warming, 75% of Democrats, and 34% of Republicans. European public opinion generally matched U.S. opinion until the late 1990s, but since then there has been an increase of belief in climate change outside the United States. A 2003 survey of 19 non-U.S. countries by the Pew Research Center found 81% of respondents very concerned about global climate change.

Nonscientist Commentators. Statements that global warming is unreal, is not caused by humans, or is not dangerous even if it is real are often made by nonscientists on radio, television, and the Internet or in print. The most common misuse of science by such commentators is selective citation of studies that appear to support the speaker's predetermined opinion, coupled with silence about the much greater quantities of data supporting mainstream scientific views. Definitely incorrect claims are also sometimes made, such as the statement that computerized climate models ignore water vapor. This claim was made, for example, by columnist Alexander Cockburn in The Nation on May 14, 2007: "Water is exactly that component of the Earth's heat balance that the global warming computer models fail to account for." Because of the access to public attention that some of these speakers enjoy, their opinions often reach a larger public than do views expressed by qualified scientists.

Claims that global warming is a hoax, plot, or illusion come from voices across the political spectrum. Alexander Cockburn, the left-wing journalist already mentioned, states: "There is still zero empirical evidence that anthropogenic production of carbon dioxide is making any measurable contribution to the world's present warming trend. The greenhouse fearmongers rely on unverified, crudely oversimplified models to finger mankind's sinful contribution." In reality, there is mounting evidence from many different sources that anthropogenic climate change is occurring. This evidence is described in detail in the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s report Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Also, computer climate models are not "unverified, [and] crudely oversimplified" but increasingly accurate and constantly tested against real-world data.

The majority of anti-climate-change political commentators are political conservatives. The list of prominent climate skeptics or deniers who self-identify as conservative includes, for example, William Buckley, George Will, and Anne Coulter. Will has recalled media excitement over the possibility of global cooling in the 1970s and mocked recent scientific work showing wild-life species ranges are being shifted by global warming ( Washington Post, December 22, 2004; April 2, 2006). Often, such commentators will claim that mainstream scientific opinion is actually on their side. Coulter claimed in 2007 that "[t]here are more reputable scientists defending astrology than defending 'global warming'" ( Human Events, February 28, 2007). Similarly, Bonner Cohen, senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research, stated on C-SPAN in 2006 that "if you go to climate scientists, climatologists, the people who look at this, as opposed to the scientific community at large, you will find absolutely no consensus.... The vast majority of them are somewhat agnostic on the whole thing" (video and transcript at ThinkProgress.org; see Bibliography).

There is, contrary to these statements, a strong consensus among climate scientists in favor of the reality and human-caused nature of climate change. An article by Naomi Oreskes in the December 3, 2004 issue of Science noted that every major scientific body in the United States whose members' specialization is relevant to climate change, such as the American Meteorological Association, has issued a statement affirming the consensus scientific view. Oreskes also surveyed 928 articles discussing climate change published from 1993 to 2003-all those in the Institute for Scientific Information database mentioning "climate change" in their abstracts. Seventy-five percent of these articles explicitly or implicitly accepted the consensus position and not one disagreed with it. Other surveys of scientific opinion have also found large majorities in support of the consensus position.

Another prominent conservative opponent of climate change is Rush Limbaugh, a syndicated radio, television, and print columnist with a weekly radio audience of more than 10 million listeners. Limbaugh denies that human activity has damaged the ozone layer and that present-day climate change is human-caused. For example, he has written that a "fact you never hear the environmentalist wacko crowd acknowledge is that 96 percent of the so-called 'greenhouse' gases are not created by man, but by nature" (Limbaugh, 1993). Yet the IPCC's regular reports on climate change since 1990, along with scores of other books and articles about climate change, do make it clear that most of the carbon dioxide, water vapor, methane, and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are natural in origin-indeed, essential to keeping Earth warm enough to support human life. The issue has never been whether human beings are responsible for most of the greenhouse gases put into the atmosphere, but whether they are adding enough to cause significant change in the global climate. Most climate and weather scientists agree that they are.

Fiction writer Michael Crichton has also reached a wide public with his anti-climate change message. In Crichton's bestselling 2004 novel State of Fear, evil environmentalists conspire to create apparently natural disasters and other evidence to cause panic over global warming. Crichton's book, which claimed to be based on science, was heavily criticized by climate scientists, but did receive a journalism award from the American Society of Petroleum Geologists, the only scientific society in the world to have adopted an official statement in denial of anthropogenic global climate change. Most of the society's members are employed by the oil industry, which has opposed the scientific consensus view of climate change.

Industry Funding of Climate Change Denial. Corporations seeking to influence public opinion against climate change have funded nonscientific groups that deny climate change. In 2006, the United Kingdom's national scientific academy, the Royal Society (the equivalent of the National Academy of Sciences) announced that the oil company ExxonMobil had distributed several million dollars to 36 groups in the United States alone. These groups, the society said in a letter to ExxonMobil, "have been misinforming the public about the science of climate change." The Union of Concerned Scientists reported in 2007 that ExxonMobil had spent a total of $16 million to fund denial groups and create public confusion about climate change.

As a result of this negative publicity, ExxonMobil softened its anti-climate change stance in 2007. In February, the company's vice president for public affairs, Kenneth P. Cohen, said ExxonMobil had never denied climate change, that "the global ecosystem is showing signs of warming, particularly in polar areas," and that "the appropriate debate isn't on whether the climate is changing but rather should be on what we should be doing about it." The company reportedly cut off funding in 2006 to at least one denial group, the American Enterprise Institute, which received over $1.8 million from ExxonMobil from 1998 to 2006. In early 2007, the American Enterprise Institute offered $10,000 to any scientist who would produce a paper undermining the IPCC's report Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. It was not yet known, as of late 2007, if there would be any takers.

Climate-Change Skepticism from Scientists

A few scientists have disputed the reality or anthropogenic nature of global climate change. Such skeptics, including economist Ross McKitrick and minerals consultant Steven McIntyre, have raised a number of arguments against global warming. For example, they have argued that the famous "hockey stick" graph showing that recent global temperatures are much greater than those for the last 1,000 years, which featured prominently in Al Gore's hit documentary An Inconvenient Truth, is flawed. They have also pointed to disagreement between surface measurements of Earth's temperature and satellite measurements, which seemed to show that Earth's atmosphere had actually cooled. Some have argued that changes in the sun's heat output, not anthropogenic greenhouse gases, are responsible for global warming, and that warming measurements have been exaggerated because they are made in the vicinity of hot spots created by the pavement and buildings of large cities, "urban heat islands."

In the early 2000s, however, most of these scientific uncertainties collapsed under the weight of new scientific evidence. The U.S. Congress charged the U.S. National Research Council with investigating the merits of the hockey stick graph, which had also appeared in expert testimony to Congress. In 2006, the council affirmed the basic validity of the famous graph. Although the statistical mathematical methods used in producing the graph were found to be inadequate, replacing them with correct methods did not change the graph's shape. The data show that today's global warming is unprecedented in the last 1,000 years.

A 2005 study commissioned specifically to look into the puzzle of the satellite data found that the data had originally been analyzed incorrectly. When the analytical errors were fixed, the apparent contradiction disappeared. Again, it was verified that Earth is indeed warming. Urban heat islands and solar variation have also both been ruled out as explanations of global warming by peer-reviewed scientific studies conducted in recent years.

Some scientists continue to disagree with estimates of the magnitude of future climate change. John Christy, a climatologist at the University of Alabama, said in 2007, "don't sign me up for that catastrophic view of climate change" (quoted in Nature, February 8, 2007). Another example is Christopher Landsea, a meteorolo-gist at the U.S. National Hurricane Center, who announced in 2005 that he was withdrawing from the IPCC on the grounds that he had "come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized." In particular, he claimed that fellow lead author Kevin Trenberth used his IPCC position to "promulgate to the media and general public his own opinion that the busy 2004 hurricane season was caused by global warming, which is in direct opposition to research written in the field and is counter to conclusions" in the IPCC's 2001 Assessment Report. Landsea has argued that global warming has not yet affected hurricane activity detectably and that "studies that any impact in the future from global warming upon hurricane[s] will likely be quite small."

The 2007 IPCC report did not, ultimately, assert that anthropogenic global warming is definitely responsible for increased hurricane frequency or severity. Since the report came out, however, scientists have published data showing that hurricane intensity and frequency may indeed have increased over the last century as a result of anthropogenic ocean warming. The relationship between hurricanes and global warming is a point on which authentic scientific disagreement continues.

Impacts and Issues

Studies have been conducted to resolve questions raised by scientific skeptics of climate change-a direct benefit to the scientific process. Many disputes have now been resolved in favor of the mainstream or consensus scientific view of climate change. As of 2007, scientific skepticism about the main elements of the climate-change consensus appeared to be decreasing. Some critics were shifting their focus from arguing that climate change is not real to arguing that it would be too expensive to take action to mitigate it. However, with the release of the third part of the IPCC's latest climate report Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change, these critics again found themselves on the outside of a widely supported scientific consensus. The IPCC report contends that greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere could be stabilized at low cost or possibly even at a profit.

Internet-based attacks on the consensus scientific view continued unabated even after the release of the 2007 IPCC report, as did mockery by nonscientific commentators, such as Cockburn, Coulter, and Limbaugh. The response of public opinion to the climate-change issue will depend on the quality of media and educational coverage of mainstream science and on how apparent the effects of climate change are to people in daily life.

Primary Source Connection

An overwhelming majority of the scientific community accepts global climate change theories. The following article notes that while researchers continue to debate- typically within a consensus range-about smaller aspects of climate change theory, scientific skepticism of human-influenced climate change is increasingly rare.

ERRORS CITED IN ASSESSING CLIMATE DATA

Some scientists who question whether human-caused global warming poses a threat have long pointed to records that showed the atmosphere's lowest layer, the troposphere, had not warmed over the last two decades and had cooled in the tropics.

Now two independent studies have found errors in the complicated calculations used to generate the old temperature records, which involved stitching together data from thousands of weather balloons lofted around the world and a series of short-lived weather satellites.

A third study shows that when the errors are taken into account, the troposphere actually got warmer. Moreover, that warming trend largely agrees with the warmer surface temperatures that have been recorded and conforms to predictions in recent computer models.

The three papers were published yesterday in the online edition of the journal Science.

The scientists who developed the original troposphere temperature records from satellite data, John R. Christy and Roy W. Spencer of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, conceded yesterday that they had made a mistake but said that their revised calculations still produced a warming rate too small to be a concern.

"Our view hasn't changed," Dr. Christy said. "We still have this modest warming."

IN CONTEXT: FACING THE FACTS

According to the National Academy of Sciences: "The fact is that Earth's climate is always changing. A key question is how much of the observed warming is due to human activities and how much is due to natural variability in the climate. In the judgment of most climate scientists, Earth's warming in recent decades has been caused primarily by human activities that have increased the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere [figure omitted]. Greenhouse gases have increased significantly since the Industrial Revolution, mostly from the burning of fossil fuels for energy, industrial processes, and transportation. Greenhouse gases are at their highest levels in at least 400,000 years and continue to rise."

"Global warming could bring good news for some parts of the world, such as longer growing seasons and milder winters. Unfortunately, it could bring bad news for a much higher percentage of the world's people. Those in coastal communities, many in developing nations, will likely experience increased flooding due to sea-level rise and more severe storms and surges. In the Arctic regions, where temperatures have increased almost twice as much as the global average, the landscape and ecosystems are rapidly changing."

"Although the potential effects of climate change are widely acknowledged, there is still legitimate debate regarding how large, how fast, and where these effects will be. Climate science is just beginning to project how climate change might affect regional weather. Estimating climate change impacts also requires projecting society's future actions, particularly in the areas of population growth, economic growth, and energy use."

SOURCE: Staudt, Amanda, Nancy Huddleston, and Sandi Rudenstein. Understanding and Responding to Climate Change. National Academy of Sciences, 2006.

Other climate experts, however, said that the new studies were very significant, effectively resolving a puzzle that had been used by opponents of curbs on heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

"These papers should lay to rest once and for all the claims by John Christy and other global warming skeptics that a disagreement between tropospheric and surface temperature trends means that there are problems with surface temperature records or with climate models," said Alan Robock, a meteorologist at Rutgers University.

The findings will be featured in a report on temperature trends in the lower atmosphere that is the first product to emerge from the Bush administration's 10-year program intended to resolve uncertainties in climate science.

Several scientists involved in the new studies said that the government climate program, by forcing everyone involved to meet five times, had helped generate the new findings.

"It felt like a boxing ring on occasion," said Peter W. Thorne, an expert on the weather balloon data at the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction and Research in Britain and an author of one of the studies.

Temperatures at thousands of places across the surface of the earth have been measured for generations. But far fewer measurements have been made of temperatures in the air from the surface through the troposphere, which extends up about five miles.

Until recently Dr. Christy and Dr. Spencer were the only scientists who had plowed through vast volumes of data from weather satellites to see if they could indirectly deduce the temperature of several layers within the troposphere.

They and other scientists have also tried to analyze temperature readings gathered by some 700 weather balloons lofted twice a day around the world.

But each of those efforts has been fraught with complexities and uncertainties.

The satellites' orbits shift and sink over time, their instruments are affected by sunlight and darkness, and data from a succession of satellites has to be calibrated to account for eccentricities of sensitive instruments.

Starting around 2001, the satellite data and methods of Dr. Christy and Dr. Spencer were re-examined by Carl A. Mears and Frank J. Wentz, scientists at Remote Sensing Systems, a company in Santa Rosa, Calif., that does satellite data analysis for NASA.

They and several other teams have since found more significant warming trends than the original estimate.

But the new paper, by Dr. Mears and Dr. Wentz, identifies a fresh error in the original calculations that, more firmly than ever, showed warming in the troposphere, particularly in the tropics.

The error, in a calculation used to adjust for the drift of the satellites, was disclosed to the University of Alabama scientists at one of the government-run meetings this year, Dr. Christy said.

The new analysis of data from weather balloons examined just one possible source of error, the direct heating of the instruments by the sun.

It found that when data were examined in a way that accounted for that effect, the temperature record produced a warming, particularly in the tropics, again putting the data in line with theory.

"Things being debated now are details about the models," said Steven Sherwood, the lead author of the paper on the balloon data and an atmospheric physicist at Yale. "Nobody is debating any more that significant climate changes are coming."

Andrew C. Revkin

revkin, andrew c. "errors cited in assessing climate data." the new york times august12, 2005.

See Also Hockey Stick Controversy; IPCC Climate Change 2007 Report: Criticism; IPCC Climate Change 2007 Report: Physical Science Basis; Media Influences: False Balance; Public Opinion; Urban Heat Islands.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Crichton, Michael. State of Fear: A Novel. New York: HarperCollins, 2004.

Limbaugh III, Rush H. See, I Told You So. New York: Pocket Books, 1993.

Metz, B., et al, eds. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Solomon, S., et al, eds. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Weart, Spencer R. The Discovery of Global Warming. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003.

Periodicals

Begley, Sharon. "Global-Warming Deniers: A Well-Funded Machine." Newsweek (March 18, 2007).

Cockburn, Alexander. "Is Global Warming a Sin?" The Nation (May 14, 2007).

Hopking, Michael. "Climate Skeptics Switch Focus to Economics." Nature 445 (February 8, 2007): 582-583.

Mahlman, J. D. "Science and Nonscience Concerning Human-Caused Climate Warming." Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 23 (1998): 83-105.

Mufson, Steven. "ExxonMobil Warming Up to Global Climate Issue." Washington Post (February 10, 2007).

Oreskes, Naomi. "The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change." Science 306 (December 3, 2004): 1686.

Revkin, Andrew C. "Errors Cited in Assessing Climate Data." The New York Times (August 12, 2005).

Sample, Ian. "Scientists Offered Cash to Dispute Climate Study." The Guardian (February 2, 2007).

Will, George. "Global Warming? Hot Air." The Washington Post (December 23, 2004).

Will, George. "Let Cooler Heads Prevail." The Washington Post (April 2, 2006).

Web Sites

Coulter, Anne. "Let Them Eat Tofu!" Human Events, February 28, 2007. < http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19625> (accessed December 5, 2007).

"Industry-Backed Author: The 'Vast Majority' of Climatologists Don't Believe in Global Warming." ThinkProgress.org, August 9, 2006. < http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/09/vast-majority-climatologists/> (accessed December 5, 2007).

Landsea, Christopher. "An Open Letter to the Community from Chris Landsea," January 17, 2005. < http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/landsea.html> (accessed August 13, 2007).

Mooney, Kevin. "UN Climate Summary Designed to Dupe, Critics Say." Cybercast News Service, February 2, 2007. < http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200702/CUL20070202a.html> (accessed August 13, 2007).

Larry Gilman

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
climate change skepticsintroductionclimate change skeptics are those who doubt or disbelieve some aspect of the mainstream scientific view of global climate change or

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Climate Change SkepticsIntroductionClimate change skeptics are those who doubt or disbelieve some aspect of the mainstream scientific view of global climate change or, in some cases, discount that view entirely. Source for information on Climate Change Skeptics: Climate Change: In Context dictionary.

# data[].attributes.body
Mix the groups share your documents and make a summary as a book summary

# data[].attributes.headline
doc entrainement pour la réalisation de la TI

# data[].attributes.subject
doc entrainement pour la réalisation de la TI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A new literary genre that focuses on the consequences of environmental issues is striking a chord with younger generations-and engaging them in thinking about the Earth's sustainability.

The American Southwest has been decimated by drought. Nevada and Arizona skirmish over dwindling shares of the Colorado River, while California watches, deciding if it should just take the whole river all for itself. But when water is more valuable than gold, alliances shift like sand, and the only truth in the desert is that someone will have to bleed if anyone hopes to drink.

Although the above might read like a slightly dramatic spin on the Western U.S. drought crisis, this scenario-at least for now-is imaginary. It's the teaser for Paolo Bacigalupi's new novel The Water Knife, another recent addition to the rapidly growing canon of climate fiction. Often called "cli-fi," the genre, in short, explores the potential, drastic consequences of climate change.

It's not an entirely new concept-Jules Verne played with the idea in a few of his novels in the 1880s-but the theme of man-made change doesn't appear in literature until well into the 20th century. The British author J.G. Ballard pioneered the environmental apocalypse narrative in books such as The Wind from Nowhere starting in the 1960s. But as public awareness of climate change increased, so did the popularity of these themes: Searching for the term "climate fiction" on Amazon today returns over 1,300 results.

Since the turn of the millennium, cli-fi has evolved from a subgenre of science fiction into a class of its own. Unlike traditional sci-fi, its stories seldom focus on imaginary technologies or faraway planets. Instead the pivotal themes are all about Earth, examining the impact of pollution, rising sea levels, and global warming on human civilization. And the genre's growing presence in college curriculums, as well as its ability to bridge science with the humanities and activism, is making environmental issues more accessible to young readers-proving literature to be a surprisingly valuable tool in collective efforts to address global warming.

When it comes to courting the interest of younger generations, it certainly helps that cli-fi is emerging at the movies and on TV. Last year's Christopher Nolan epic Interstellar shows the American Midwest turning into a second Dust Bowl, with a forecast so dire it drives humans to seek a new planet. In 2014's Snowpiercer, a bungled attempt to stop global warming creates a new ice age. Margaret Atwood's popular cli-fi trilogy MaddAddam is currently being adapted into a series for HBO, whose wildly popular show Game of Thrones also flirts, if unintentionally, with global-warming themes.

The writer and climate activist Dan Bloom came up with the term "cli-fi" circa 2007, hoping to convert the dull phrase "climate fiction" into something more compelling. "I never defined or even tried to define a new genre," said Bloom. Instead, he merely wanted to come up with a catchy buzzword to raise awareness about global warming." The strategy worked: When Atwood used the term in a 2012 tweet, she introduced it to her 500,000 followers, according to Bloom. As the notion of cli-fi took hold, publishers and book reviewers began regarding it as a new category. In this respect, cli-fi is a truly modern literary phenomenon: born as a meme and raised into a distinct genre by the power of social media. Today cli-fi has an actively used hashtag on Twitter, two user-created book lists on Goodreads, and several Facebook groups, including one devoted exclusively to young-adult climate fiction.

Given cli-fi's contemporary genesis, it's no surprise the genre is gaining popularity with high school and college-age readers. In a February 2015 feature for The Guardian, the cli-fi author Sarah Holding wrote that the genre "reconnects young readers with their environment, helping them to value it more, especially when today, a large amount of their time is spent in the virtual world." Environmental themes complement the current trend of dystopian narratives in YA fiction. Bacigalupi's young adult novels The Drowned Cities (2013) and Ship Breaker (2011) show how rising sea levels reconfigure America, while the protagonists of Sarah Crossan's Breathe (2012) inhabit a domed city because oxygen is a rare commodity.
Cli-fi is a truly modern literary phenomenon: born as a meme and raised into a distinct genre by the power of social media.
The genre offers more than escapist thrills: It's becoming a springboard for engaging youth in the sciences. Waning interest in STEM subjects has plagued American academia for years. In 2012 the Programme for International Student Assessment found the United States ranked 20th out of 34 countries evaluated for student performance in the sciences. But colleges in the U.S. and abroad-from the University of Oregon to Cambridge University's Institute of Continuing Education- now offer courses in cli-fi. Earlier this year, students in a cli-fi class at Holyoke extracted DNA from strawberries to understand the genetic engineering themes of Bacigalupi's award-winning novel The Windup Girl (2009). At Temple University, participants in the cli-fi course used their class blog to share links to science news and cited scientific articles in their book reviews. One student majoring in English admitted on the blog that "when it comes to understanding jargon specific terminology and scientific-based language I get lost and often feel stupid." The same student went on to post a detailed review of Atwood's Year of the Flood (2009), examining how climate change would impact various agricultural sectors and describing the chemistry involved.

This fusion of science and the humanities can have practical consequences, encouraging more serious study of STEM, which can intimidate students. With literature and creative writing as a comfortable gateway, "science would become accessible to students who think they aren't interested in science," said Ellen Szabo, the author of Saving the World One Word at a Time: Writing Cli-Fi. Szabo's book discusses the genre's ability to make environmental issues less political and more personal: Making climate change seem like less of a clinical topic can eventually engender real action. Ted Howell, who teaches the cli-fi class at Temple University, noted that the traditional means of conveying the severity of climate change weren't effective with his students. "Once they grasped the basic outlines of the issue, they didn't want to keep reading about 2 percent increases or 4 percent increases in global temperature-they wanted to know what they could do in response," Howell said.

Howell's observation aligns with findings from a 2006 working paper released through the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, which explored how different communication methods influenced people's opinions on climate change. The study explored whether a climate fiction experience-in this case, the popular if scientifically flawed apocalypse film The Day After Tomorrow- would elicit stronger reactions from participants than simply reading a body of information about the causes and effects of climate change. Both sets of respondents reported a positive shift in their concern about climate change following the experiment. However, the group that viewed the film reported a slightly higher willingness to reform social behaviors in favor of mitigating climate change.

Not everyone is convinced of cli-fi's potential. Last year in an opinion piece for The New York Times, George Marshall-the founder of the Climate Outreach Information Network -expressed concern that cli-fi would reinforce what people already believe rather than change anyone's minds. "The unconvinced will see these stories as proof that this issue is a fiction, exaggerated for dramatic effect," he said. "The already convinced will be engaged, but overblown apocalyptic story lines may distance them from the issue of climate change or even objectify the problem."

The Tyndall Centre study also indicated that placing climate change in a fictional context might reduce the urgency readers feel about the issue in reality, or simply reduce it to a vague concern with no practical remedy. Students in the Temple University class felt a twinge of this, too. "Faced with the realization that a truly adequate response to climate change will necessarily involve significant changes to our lifestyle, and sacrifices by those with money, power, and influence, we often grew despondent," Howell said. Despondent, but not hopeless: He noted that uncertainty also helps emphasize the vast possibilities for reform.

Therein lies the challenge. "Science doesn't tell us what we should do," Kingsolver wrote in Flight Behavior. "It only tells us what is." Stories can never be a solution in themselves, but they have the capacity to inspire action, which is perhaps why cli-fi's appeal among young adult readers holds such promise. As the scientists and leaders of tomorrow, they may be most capable of addressing climate issues where previous generations have failed. Cli-fi, like the science behind it, often presents bleak visions of the future, but within such frightening prophecies lies the real possibility that it's not too late to steer in a different direction. As Atwood wrote in MaddAddam, "People need such stories, because however dark, a darkness with voices in it is better than a silent void."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate Fiction: Can Popular Books About Environmental Disaster Save the Planet?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new literary genre that focuses on the consequences of environmental issues is striking a chord with younger generations-and engaging them in thinking about the Earth’s sustainability.

# data[].attributes.body
now that you have discovered what it means, explain what Cli-fi is about and why is it worth telling/reading