Climate Change and Happiness

 

image credit | Simon Lohmann

S3 E9: Taking Stock at the End of the Year

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 9: Taking Stock at the End of the Year 

Thomas and Panu took stock of their feelings about the world as 2023 came to a close, and invited listeners to do the same. Thomas reflected on two quotes that are important to him and changing ways he has interpreted their meaning over the years: “In the beginner’s mind there are many possibilities. In the expert’s mind there are few” (Shunryu Suzuki); and “Find your place on the planet. Dig in, and take responsibility from there” (Gary Snyder). Panu described a ritual he participated in for the International Remembrance Day for Lost Species, celebrated on November 30. He and Thomas contemplated the importance of rituals, ceremonies and the arts including the recent Future Landscapes project.  The idea of taking stock at the end of the year is echoed in the recent COP 28 meeting and 1st Global Stocktake—a process for countries to see how they’re collectively making progress towards meeting the goals of the Paris Climate Change Agreement. We know global warming will not be limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius / 2.7 Fahrenheit. We need to adapt to a hotter world, take care of the most vulnerable, and keep working to cool the planet down as quickly and safely as possible.   

Links

• Remembrance Day for Lost Species, 30th Nov

• Global Stocktake | UNFCCC

• Ivo Bystřičan (Director) Invisible Landscapes Documentary and Future Landscapes Film-Music-Podcast Project

• Musical Group: Fyield 

• On the Chinese, Daoist concept of Wu wei 

• Sivuun Ensemble: Silentopia

Transcript

[The Climate Change and Happiness Transcript is on holiday.]

 

 

image credit | Melissa Askew

S3 E8: Supporting Young People with Caroline Hickman 

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 8: Supporting Young People with Caroline Hickman 

Thomas and Panu were joined by UK therapist and researcher Caroline Hickman. Caroline reflected on her formerly separate backgrounds as an environmentalist and a psychotherapist and pivotal nature experiences she had in midlife as a diving instructor that brought “all the parts of her life together." Caroline, Panu and Thomas discussed their recent activities and collaborations including the groundbreaking 2021 Lancet global survey of young people's climate emotions in ten countries worldwide. This research was powerful, Caroline and Panu explained, as it revealed crucial underlying facets of climate anxiety in youth including a lack of faith in leaders and a sense of betrayal by adults. Caroline also told of her interview studies with children and the fact that kids often know and care more than adults notice. Join us for a candid conversation and an invitation to reflect on what climate feelings tell us about the needs of young people and adults around us.  

Links:

• Caroline Hickman

• Caroline Hickman, Elizabeth Marks, Panu Pihkala et al. (2021). Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: a global survey. The Lancet. 

• Elizabeth Marks & Caroline Hickman. (2023). Eco-distress is not a pathology, but it still hurts. Nature Mental Health. 

• Podcast: Ten years to 1.5°C: how climate anxiety is affecting young people around the world The Conversation (2021)

Transcript

[The Climate Change and Happiness Transcript is on holiday.]

 

 

image credit | Andre Hunter

S3 E7: What To Do If You Are Feeling Bitter

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 7: What To Do If You Are Feeling Bitter

Thomas and Panu reflected on varieties of the feeling of bitterness in response to the chronic stress of climate and environmental problems—ranging from Finnish concepts like epäreiluuden tunne (unfairness-feeling) to the “Cassandrafreude” described by climate scientists (the bitter pleasure of things going wrong in exactly the way you predicted, but no one believed you when it could have made a difference). As Panu observed, it is a psychological and ethical challenge to be proud (in a healthy way) of one’s own good actions, including “chosen losses” where a conscious decision is made to relinquish something, and to avoid (at least overly strong) bitterness. Thomas also referenced thinkers like Myisha Cherry and Audre Lorde who highlight the ethical reasons for not forgiving in the face of betrayals and injustice. 

Links

• Myisha Cherry:  Why I Don't Believe in Forgiveness

• Helen Rosner, 2021 A Philosopher’s Defense of Anger

• Audre Lorde 1981 The Uses of Anger: Women Responding to Racism 

• Rosemary Randall 2009 Loss and Climate Change: The Cost of Parallel Narratives (see discussion of types of losses)

• Thea Gregerson et al 2023 The strength and content of climate anger

• See also Harriët Bergman 2023. Anger in Response to Climate Breakdown (Paywall)

Transcript

[The Climate Change and Happiness Transcript is on holiday.]

 

 

S3 E6: A Climate Vocabulary with Herb Simmens

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 6: A Climate Vocabulary with Herb Simmens

This episode found Thomas and Panu in dialogue with Herb Simmens, a long time advocate for addressing climate issues in local government, and author of the compendium of climate-related terms, A Climate Vocabulary of the Future. What kind of new words could be useful to make sense of living in the midst of climate change?

Links

• Herb Simmens

• A Climate Vocabulary of the Future, 2nd Edition

• Bureau of Linguistic Reality 

• Glenn Albrecht on Negative and Positive Earth Emotions

• Finnish art project Utopedia. Inventing new words related to environmental futures (in Finnish)

Transcript

Transcript edited for clarity and brevity. 

Thomas Doherty: Well, hello, I'm Thomas Doherty.

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala.  

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness, our podcast, the show for people around the world who are thinking and feeling deeply about global climate change and all the other environmental issues that we can be aware of, and that affect us in our personal lives, in our daily lives. And like we say, we're all emotions all the time. So we really try to make a place for all our different feelings and our thoughts, and maybe our actions as well. And we have a guest today with us:

Herb Simmens: I am Herb Simmens, from Washington, DC, and the author of A Climate Vocabulary of the Future.

Doherty: Yeah, so we're really … We've been chatting with Herb and we love words here at this podcast, feelings words, concepts, and Herb has a whole book of an incredible lexicon of climate words. And we know this is one broad approach that people do to make sense of this big issue is trying to get the vocabulary of it. And I personally, as a lover of words, appreciate exploring an area through its vocabulary. So we're going to talk about that today. And you listeners can think about how this is landing for you. And you might also check out Herb’s book as well as kind of a guide, as an accessible guide to a lot of different really interesting concepts about climate change. Panu, do you want to get us started?

Pihkala: Warmly welcome, Herb, very glad to have you here. And we share a love also, for crafting words. I've done that mostly in the Finnish language, which functions so that we often put words together and of course, then you may also mix them a bit. And I see some similar things happening with English also in your book. And, but let us start with sort of roots and history. So could you share a bit about your own journey? What brought you to do this kind of creative, multifaceted work around climate issues?

Simmens: Well, thanks and I really appreciate the opportunity to be here today. I've really enjoyed the podcasts that I've listened to. I sort of grew up in the era and at least in the United States, when public policy and when government was looked at positively. Some of your listeners at a younger age may feel that … may be surprised to even hear that such an era existed. But, in the 1960s with then President John F. Kennedy [who said] “Ask not what your country can do for you,” you know, “what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country?” And as a result, I got involved in … I studied public policy, and worked in state and local government for many years. And I was actually the, the manager of a town in New Jersey, back in 1988, when Jim Hansen, the now famous climate scientist, appeared before Congress and said, “Global warming is real, and we have to pay attention to it.” And I remember, even back then discussing it with people in my town, what do we need to prepare for? And over the years, I continued to be involved in various ways, running a small nonprofit that was a consortium of New Jersey's colleges and universities focused on climate. I had the opportunity to help get the county that I live in right outside of Washington create or adopt the first climate emergency in the United States and the second in the world in 2017, and a whole bunch of other things that I won't take the time on now. 

But you know, in the last … a few years ago, it struck me that, what's maybe sort of obvious to me and to some people, but it wasn't to everybody back then, was the climate affects everything. I mean, you could sort of do it like a parlor game and just pick a topic or a word and say, “How does climate connect to this?” you know, and sooner or later, you'd be able to figure out a connection. And so I thought, well, since climate affects everything and sadly not that we wanted to, climate being climate change, that it's important for us to label what's happening, both to educate people and to stimulate people to have their emotions activated, if you will, because it's so important to identify what's going on. 

And plus, I just always have loved playing with words. So I basically wrote the first edition of the book, and in 2017, it had about 400 terms, half of which are original. And then I sort of put it aside, I didn't want to deal with words for years. I was like … and I dealt with other aspects. And then two years ago, I thought, it's time for an update. And to my amazement, I thought I would, you know, add 100 words. But I added another four or five hundred words and terms. And here we are today. And I guess the fact that I added so many terms, sadly, is an indication of how much more pressing and huge climate is as a problem.

Doherty: Yeah, so are you from New Jersey originally?

Simmens: From Philly [Philadelphia] across the river from Jersey.

Doherty:  Yeah. So that one's one strand to talk about a little bit. It's just this background, because, you know, Philadelphia, broadly, New Jersey, you know … here I'm in Portland, Oregon, which is known as an environmental consciousness kind of town, but for whatever reason, New Jersey or Philadelphia might not necessarily be seen as environmental hotbeds. But, that's not really true, right? You've been aware. The point I'm trying to make is that there are people aware of climate change, and have been aware of climate change for many, many years, and in all parts of the country and all parts of the world. So you've seen climate change, as an issue in local city government, state government for decades and decades?

Simmens: Well, you know, I would like to be able to say that I agree with your statement, but I'm not sure I can say that, because it's mostly been a non-issue when it should have been an issue. And that's what I've seen is the level of indifference, minimization, denial, you know, name your word, speaking of words. And I'll just very briefly give you an example here in Montgomery County, Maryland, where our community literally declared an emergency and set the toughest greenhouse gas emission reduction target in the country, maybe the world of an 80% reduction countywide by 2027. And it has been an important issue in the county, but nowhere near an emergency. The distinction between another important issue, like taxes are important and good schools are important, you know, at that level, as opposed to, we've got to put this first because our future is in line. It hasn't happened here. And I haven't seen it happen pretty much anywhere in the country.

Doherty: Yeah, so it's both-and. I talk to young people a lot, and they think this issue is new, but like yourself, you've been living with this issue for years. It was almost 30 years between Hansen and when you all did the climate emergency. So I just want to just make sure that we shout out to listeners who have been working on this for years and just honor that. That's the piece I want to honor here.

Simmens: Absolutely. There's so many people that put their hearts and souls into this issue for, as you say, for years, if not decades. And you know, it's been lonely. It's been, you know, you could have a whole vocabulary and you maybe you have had shows about this, you know, the emotional price that one pays, when one is sort of looked at as a kind of Cassandra, or one is looked at as this Doomsayer. When you know … and then you never want to be in a position 5 or 10 or 15 years later saying, “You know, I was right. You know, things are … we did need to act 10 years ago, or 20 years ago, or 5 years ago, whatever.” So it's very emotionally draining to have been in that position. To honor, I mean, it's critically important to honor those folks as you suggest, and to recognize the price that many of us have paid.

Pihkala: Yeah, I think that's a very important point. And I've been working mostly in Finland publicly in this, ecological emotions, and especially ecoanxiety in the Finnish form, which is more like “environment-anxiety” (ympäristöahdistus). And that has led to some interesting discussions with people who have been aware of ecological issues and sometimes climate issues for decades. And now finding some validation because there are public discourses about psychological toll. Of course, there is also, you know, feelings of honor to be had when, you know, that you are trying to work for the right things. So there's always a complex mix of emotions and one of the new words in my Finnish book is “suojelijakiitollisuus,” which is quite technical, it literally means “gratitude about those who have participated in nature protection.” It's more of a pedagogical word, you know, drawing attention that it is a source of gratitude for me, and I know for many others, those people who had to work sometimes in much more difficult circumstances than now, psychosocially speaking. Of course, it's not easy still. And we have, in some places growing identity polarization around climate issues, for example, But anyway, just resonating with some of these things. And does this remind you of some of the concepts in your book?

Simmens: Well, I mean, there are many concepts in my book that span the whole range of, you know, sort of climate, climate emotions, if you will. I mean …maybe I can mention just a couple of the terms that I'm not sure, you know, I'm not sure how much on target they are with what you're saying, but they're sort of in the ballpark. One of the things is, because of the nature that those of us who are involved, essentially have a pretty good sense of what's going to come and maybe how bad it's going to be, but not necessarily when and how and where is the level of uncertainty. So I came up with the concept of an “antemortem,” where you're basically…mortem being death, essentially, you're in anticipation, you're sort of anticipating or analyzing what may happen, and sort of grieving in advance.  You know, because today if you are where I am, it's a beautiful day. It's 80 degrees Fahrenheit, and you know, the world is wonderful. It's .. there's a kind of hidden, you know… Here's another one … the “false climate summit.” For those who are mountain climbers know that often in certain large mountains, you get up there, and you think you're at the summit, but you're not, there's another one behind it. So, I coined the term “false climate summit” that we know we've made a certain degree of progress, or we've gotten through this, [and we say] “Oh, my God, there's another one,” you know, “where am I then going to get the … candy bars and the energy bars and the emotional support to get to the next summit? You know, that kind of thing. 

And another one is what I call “bifocal behavior,” the idea that climate almost requires the same way with people with certain kinds of glasses, to be able to look at the distance, and to look at what's now at the same time. We can't take our eyes off of the, you know, the sort of the future 30 years from now, or else we won't achieve it. But if that's all we look at, and we don't deal with the opportunities and the pain and the suffering and the grief and the confusion, then we will have failed or at least not succeeded. So anyway, those are a few terms I'll just throw out. You're going to have to stop me because I got 1000 In the book, and you only have a few minutes! But what you know is that, you know, those are a few that cover various dimensions of climate and, you know, sort of the emotional landscape.

Doherty: Yeah, … it's great. I have to make a note about this idea of [false summit]. As someone who's been a mountain climber, the idea of a false summit, I know what that is. We… we've been climbing for hours, like Mount Adams, near where I live is a big mountain we all can see. And it has a very notorious false summit when you're the first time climbing up there. But they tell you there is but you don't believe it until you see it. And when you get up to this … precipice, you think that must be the top, and then you get to this and then you see a whole other set of the mountain, and little tiny ants up on the side of the mountain, which are the other people that are far ahead of you. 

Yes, we love to do wordplay here. But you know, “False Climate Summit” is also a play on words about some of these meetings that we have, like the upcoming COP. I think a lot of people would think that's a “false summit,” in the sense of it's already sort of infiltrated by fossil fuel interests and 

things like that. 

Simmens: Oh, I don't know how you can say that, Thomas! [laughs] The fact that it's being led by the head of the oil company, the head of a Middle Eastern oil power, you know, oh, you're much too cynical!

Doherty: Yeah. So humor is our friend, if we can if we can find humor. But you know, so I'm curious of where you find your words. I imagine you're always on the hunt. There's some of your words that are very pop cultural, which I like. Like there's an entry called “So Holocene,” which is a great, great kind of pop culture term. So the idea that the Holocene is this traditional geological age that we've become accustomed to as humans, and now that's changing because of climate change to a different geological regime, you know, in the planet. That's the Holocene era that we're mourning the loss of. But to say something’s “So Holocene” that means it's kind of like “so yesterday.” It's “so 90s.” …It's so quaint that you're, you know, so when we make our summer plans, and we think we're going to do a certain thing. “Oh that it is ‘So Holocene’ that you think you're just going to make some plans, and there's not going to be wildfire smoke or a flood or something like that.” Do you know where you got that term “So Holocene” from?

Simmens: I think that one I found online somewhere, maybe Twitter, I don't know. You know, I distinguish in the book, I have a sort of a special dot or mark for those terms that, as far as I know, are original with me. At least when I do a Google search … they didn't show up as a climate term. And those that I basically …you know, taking out of the reading I do and whatever. But generally, I mean, most of what I've done is simply to, as I'm reading, if I'll read a paragraph in a book, and it may not even be about climate, and I think, you know, the author is taking a whole paragraph or a whole page to explain this concept. There should be a word or a term for this. And so that's what I'll do is sort of scribble on the side of the book and say, you know, maybe a couple of different terms. 

And that's how I, and also, when I'm walking here, I'm not a mountain climber, but walking and hiking. You know, I basically, I guess, my experience is enriched by looking at the relationships between the plants and the animals and the birds and the sounds. And then, who knows where creativity or even if one would be so bold as to even call what I've written creative, but you know, sort of something will come to me. Like the idea of one of the terms I have is “biophonic discord.” Basically meaning, and this is a tragic term, where it represents something tragic, which is that, one of the many spheres of life on the planet is the soundsphere, the “sonosphere.” And that is being changed dramatically, as is everything else. As you know, as certain animals are more or less prevalent in an area, et cetera, and plants and all the rest of the ecological changes. And so we have a kind of “biophonic discord” that's out there. So anyway, that, you know, I don't know if that's a great answer to your question. But I guess the simple answer is they come from everywhere and nowhere and half the time they surprise me when they pop up in my head.

Pihkala: Yeah, that's definitely creative, in my opinion and mind. You have already hinted at some of these, but I'd like to ask even more explicitly about what has this project meant for you, this whole endeavor of coining these words? And whether you had some particular aims consciously, when doing the books? So, something about the impacts, and aims…

Simmens: A lot of my goal, and that's why I attempted, and only the reader can tell if I succeeded, I attempted to put some humor and lightness in the book at times as well. But in a way, it's sort of an attempt to give a reader the opportunity to learn not just about climate change, but about the connections between all the aspects of climate and life in a much more digestible way than, you know, sort of picking up a book that's 400 pages and, and reading and you have to read from page one linearly to the end, because the second chapter depends upon reading the first, whereas my book, you can, you know, pick it up any place, point your finger to a term and read it and get the benefit of that without having to, you know, be disciplined about everything. 

So maybe it's sort of like a bite-sized effort at providing information that is not, as far as I know, not available, at least in this format in any other manner. And that was a lot of the motivation for me. And then the other is pure selfishness. It's been great fun to do it! And I, you know, I have one of the terms is “microguilt” in my book. I have a lot microguilt when I say that to you right now. It's like, how can I say something is great fun when we're talking about such a potentially tragic issue? And you know, one of the things I've learned, that I don't always practice years ago from a therapist, is the concept of instead of but-and to notice something could be fun and tragic, fun and onerous at the same time. It doesn't have to be one or the other. So it's really been it's been great fun for me, you know, I wrote about half the book sitting at a Starbucks on the beach in South beach in Miami Beach, in one of the most wonderful venues I could ever imagine. I was so excited there. I used to write love letters to the manager, I mean, about how great a venue they had! 

Pihkala: So anyway, yeah, thanks for expanding on that. And I can personally resonate with much of that, especially in connection to my second Finnish book about eco emotions, which was a handbook. So it had some similar ideas. You know, you can open it from anywhere, and then different types of things which are given names, or little descriptions. And I ended up writing short, prosaic texts in between to sort of explore some aspects of eco emotions. And we've often in this podcast talked about the need to be open to both sadness and joy, for example. So there’s great dangers in this era, because it is so difficult and so much filled with suffering, that we sort of start to deny ourselves and others the possibility for joy, joy and laughter. And that's not something that even the people who live in varying conditions filled with suffering always do, quite the contrary. So there's something very human in the ability also to share things that produce gladness with others. And I don't want in any way to “brightside” suffering and very dark circumstances. But I really think that this idea of being open to creativity and humor and at the same time being open to very sad issues as you are also in the book, I think that's really crucial.

Doherty: Yeah. And we are again, being lovers of words, there is this idea of creating a kind of vocabulary, is done, you're probably familiar, you know… I'm going to call you Hank, I think, right, instead of Herb I think you might go by Hank for more casually. You know, Glenn Albrecht in Australia and has done a lot of work around his own lexicon and [new words like] “solastalgia.” And probably if he were here, Glenn would agree with some of this and have his own unique take on it. But it is this personal, creative, it's a creative response. And then the Bureau of Linguistic Reality, and …  looking at some books on my shelf. But we've got other kinds of books..  I myself have coined, you know, my own terms like “climate hostage,” and various sorts of things. So there's this creative… So for the listeners, you know, there it is exactly as, as Hank says, it's “yes and.” And so we can feel this and that, and it's the 360 degree range of emotions. Our mind is primed to look at danger and threats. So we tend to focus on those first from a survival standpoint. But we have to work hard to bring those other emotions in. And so just honoring that. 

I had a question. I mean, we've got the pop culture terms in the terms that you create, Hank yourself to kind of make sense. But then there's some other words. I noticed you have a lot of great testimonials in your book, you know, from people like [author] Kim Stanley Robinson, and some of the people that I admire. Kim Stanley Robinson, of course, has imagined whole, you know, worlds and future scenarios. And you have a word “World Climate Organization.” So that's the proposed organization that will be responsible for managing climate. So it's almost like the World Trade Organization, but we would have a world climate organization or a carbon reserve bank. So we would… so the World Bank would also, you know, work on this more directly. But those must be terms that people have been actually proposing in the real world. I would assume that you've heard about somewhere? 

Simmens: In some cases, yes. In some cases, no. And actually, in the first edition of the book, I had a separate section with terms that I came up with or that were existing, that reflect policies, I mean, or actions as opposed to simply, you know, describing an emotion or an owner situation. And so that's where I had a whole section on things like the World Trade Organization, as you say,or the carbon Reserve Bank. Some of them were original to me, and others, you know, are sort of out there. Ironically, when you said, the World Climate Organization reminds me of the World Trade Organization, there is an international group that was established to attempt to come up with strategies to avoid overshooting the 1.5 [Celsius] targets. And there I have just been in touch with them two days ago. And they're trying to basically come up with a report in history and a strategy. And the guy who is head of that head of that is the former head of the World Trade Organization, just coincidentally. 

But yes, those kinds of things are from my background in public policy. I mean, there's part of me that says, Oh, yes, here's this new entity, and here's this new organization. And here's this new group that we could create. You know, that go, you know, a world counseling group, where you, you're trained 1000s and 10s, of 1000s of peer counselors to support each other. I mean, you know, to me, the broader vision that I that I have and I tried to reflect it in the vision that I wrote is, is that there's so many new institutional arrangements that I think are not happening, that could really enrich our lives, no matter what the ultimate outcome, if there is one, will be of the climate crisis. And that certainly one of them is to have millions of people doing peer counseling with each other. 

Doherty: Yeah. And I know, I've heard people talk about that. And folks who are working in transformational resilience and the Climate Psychology Alliance, and people doing climate cafes. [So that’s right.] So that's the other angle here, like, again, thinking of writers like Kim Stanley Robinson. It’s … there's an aspect of futurism where we kind of just lean a bit into the future, the near future, you know, predictions. It’s not science fiction. It's really just taking existing trends and just moving them forward, or also, realizing that there are things already happening, that I didn't realize, that I thought were going to happen in the future that already are happening [now]. So, I think there can be some pleasant surprises when we realize, “Oh, these things are already happening.” And some more things are happening in Finland, for example, that in the US might seem futuristic, but the Finns have been doing for a while.

Simmens: Well, you know, there's the book, I may have attempted to accomplish too much with the book, because the scenario that I write in the book for looking back from 2035, basically shows how the world can and I think absolutely it's a feasible if not probable future, can reverse climate change and restore a safe climate, through the careful knitting together of a lot of these institutions and ideas and concepts that aren't being given full attention by the world community. You know, that's a whole other podcast to go into all that. 

But, I came up with a term that some groups that I'm working with to activate some changes at the international level are using the “climate triad,” which is basically currently, we have one of the terms that came up with ERA “emission reductions alone,” the current model of climate action is almost entirely focused on emission reductions, and of course, adaptation. But what a number of us are saying we need to broaden that, to give equal attention, and weight and action to removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and most controversial, and maybe some of your listeners will, you know, turn off when I say this right now, but some form of what we call “direct cooling of the climate,” others call geoengineering, which has enormous potential and yes, can be scary, to literally lower the world's thermostat in a matter of months, and prevent incredible amounts of suffering. And this 2035 scenario is sort of built around that concept.

Pihkala: Yeah, and that's fun. One part of the book, which we haven't discussed much yet is that it begins with these scenarios, which also then link to many of the words in the book. So that's an interesting way to provide links to some of the content but also, I liked the way that what you are trying to do, of course, is imaginative, but also sort of realistic at the same time, estimations of things that may go into the good direction and and things that seem to go to a bad direction. So I liked the nuances there. And a Finnish smaller scale version of inventing new words for the future was called the Utopedia (http://utopedia.fi/mika/). So that was also about futures, not just about utopia, but that's something that also came to mind when reading these scenarios that you've built. So there is an element of utopia, which I'm not interested about, you know, like that “we will all live under blossoming apple trees”. Not that kind of utopia, but more like being able to discern things in the future that would be important and desirable.

Doherty: Yeah, we're coming toward the end of our time. But this is just…I thought I was going to highlight a few key phrases and entries from your book, Hank, but I couldn't stop! So I've got too many highlights now. So I might just, you know, so it's climate vocabulary for the future. So it's a climate vocabulary really also for the present, obviously. But, I think for listeners who might not have time or bandwidth to read Kim Stanley Robinson's novels or really take a course in climate science and climate adaptation, or carbon capture, some of those neat science things, this is a great accessible entree into these concepts, and also how they fit together into a future scenario. 

And I think, you know, what we describe of the future becomes the future. So it is … we do need to actively go into the future and create it, or else it happens to us. So I really appreciate Hank, that you've done this and shared it with people. Panu, do you want to finish us out with some thoughts here?

Pihkala: Yeah, we always try to finish with at least you know, being able to look more toward a tomorrow. Herb, is there any that kind of word that comes into your mind from your book, which is sort of related to the desire to live?

Simmens: Well, if I could, I thought maybe I would just read one brief paragraph, from this vision for the future that comes at the end, that follows what I said earlier about a vision that actually could restore a safe climate and not just avoid the worst. So this comes at the end of a 20 page narrative. So, it has to be looked at in the larger context. But basically, what I say is: 

As of New Year 2035, the Triad based restoration movement was proving that it could succeed in achieving the unthinkable this century — restoring a healthy climate. To celebrate the success, revelers in 450 cities celebrated by cheering on as 450 carbon concentration clocks showed the first decline in CO2 concentrations since the industrial revolution from — you guessed it — 451 to 450 parts per million.

Restoration inspired billions to turn from social media, Kim Kar- dashian, fast fashion, drugged despair, enervating energy battles, and false fascist allures to the most exciting challenge of all — rebuilding a thriving healthy planet for all by meeting the One Generation Climate Challenge. We find ourselves finally on the path back to the sweet comfort of ecostasis — with harmony within and between the planet’s ecosystems and life. 

So that's sort of how I end this scenario.

Doherty: Yeah, thanks. It's important for us to spend time with these visions, and you do a great job, you don't sugarcoat any of the problems, but you also, you know, you don't deny any of the solutions, either. And the possibilities. So that's that, “yes-and.

Simmens: That's right. And I think it's just the concept that we have one generation, roughly one generation where if the world comes together, or mostly together, to do the right thing, it would motivate you know, literally hundreds of millions of young people and whatever. And that's I guess, that's my larger sort of mega goal is the hope that that the words and the concepts in this book and play a tiny role in in motivating people to get beyond, to certainly acknowledge the despair and the grief and everything we legitimately feel, but to transcend that, or do at the same time build a future that we have to do right now or it'll be too late.

Pihkala: One thanks for joining us. It's been truly delightful, and I look forward to spending even more time with the climate vocabulary.

Simmens: Thank you so much. It was really great to chat with you guys and you, you do a wonderful job and I really feel honored to be on your program.

Doherty: Yeah, thanks. I'll be sharing this book with some of the people that I work with. And we'll have some show notes here that will describe Hanks’s and maybe some other references that Hank thinks are helpful. So this is climate change and happiness.com. You can find us at that address, climatechangeandhappiness.com and please support us through our website or through our Patreon to keep bringing you these very interesting shows and great guests. And Hank and Panu. you have a good rest of your day. Take care. 

Pihkala: Thanks Thomas. Take Care. 

The Climate Change and Happiness podcast is a self funded volunteer effort. Please support us so we can keep bringing you messages of coping and thriving. See the donate page at climatechangeandhappiness.com

 

 

Climate Emotions Wheel © 2023 by Anya Kamenetz, Panu Pikhala, Sarah Newman, Megan Slade, JulieSouza, Ryleigh Corrigan is licensed under CC BY-SA4.0 | Resource at ClimateMentalHealth.Net. Based on research by Panu Pihkala at the University of Helsinki and particularly his 2022 paper: “Toward a Taxonomy of Climate Emotions“ | Featured in NYC Times Square Hope Hydration Hydrostation.

S3 E5: The Climate Emotions Wheel

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 5: The Climate Emotions Wheel

Thomas interviewed Panu about his recent climate emotions research and the Climate Emotions Wheel created by the Climate Mental Health Network based on Panu’s work.

Links

• Climate Emotions Wheel

• Climate and Mental Health Network

• Panu Pihkala 2022 Toward a Taxonomy of Climate Emotions

• Gen Dread: Climate emotions aren’t all “negative”

Transcript

Transcript edited for clarity and brevity. 

Thomas Doherty: Please support the climate change and happiness podcast. See the donate page at climatechangeandhappiness.com.

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Doherty: Hi, this is Thomas Doherty …

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala.

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. This is our podcast. Panu and I have been working on this podcast for a couple of years now. It came from our own personal dialogues, and we thought we'd open this up and share this with the public and with our, you know, bringing in our colleagues. This is a podcast for people around the globe who are thinking, and most importantly, feeling a lot of interesting, deep things about climate change and other environmental issues. And so in this particular podcast, we talk about the emotional aspects. Panu has been doing a lot of research and writing on this. I'm working with people on this and also doing my own writing and work. And so this is a place for the emotions, all emotions all the time. The emotions are in our bodies, they're physiological, we can measure those, the feelings, of course, are infinite, because it's our language and our words and all around the world are all kinds of different feelings words we use to describe our emotions. So, Panu, speaking of emotions, I know you've been working on this for years now, recently, someone adapted some of your work into an emotions wheel. A Wheel of different kinds of emotions that think about in terms of climate change. And I thought we would touch in on that, see what you see what you think about that, and how that how that flows out of your work. And we'll go from there.

Pihkala: Yes, thanks, Thomas. This climate emotion wheel has now been shared pretty heavily in social media. And the visualization and the selection of the words was made by the organization, the Climate and Mental Health Network. And they asked me to comment on the project also. So, I did some of some of that. And there's been interesting developments. For example, it's been on a Times Square advertisement in New York for him for a while. And so it really seems to resonate with many, many people. And myself, when I started to dig deeper into emotion studies, I remember that visualizations were very helpful—in addition to all this text that we have about emotions. Robert Plutchik has this famous emotions wheel and there are several versions available online. And as you Thomas well know, emotion researchers have debates between them as all researchers do. So there's no standard emotion wheel that would be accepted by everyone, I really think that these are practically useful. But of course, they also have their limits. And there are always simplifying things. So there's pros and cons in using this. But I'm very happy that my work has been useful in the creation of this wheel.

Doherty: Yes! You can go on Amazon and find a climate emotions wheel pillow and a climate emotions wheel … therapists use these in their work. And there's posters. And any mental health person will be familiar with this stuff. It's helpful to have some sort of guide to all different kinds of emotions. So there's two things that we're talking about in this podcast for people in the know. For researchers, there's all the backstory of how people empirically study this. And it's quite interesting. And then there's just our own need of it. Because we cannot be alive without having emotions, all living things have some sort of emotional response to the environment. And then of course, as humans, we have these nuanced, potentially nuanced feelings. So it's nice to have, like anything else, a guide, a taxonomy, as you say, a list of words. And the wheel is just putting that into a graphic form. And so I think it's helpful. Do you think, you know, as someone who gets deep into this. Obviously, I believe you think it's helpful for people to look at these kinds of wheels and I'm so impressed that it's in Times Square, I didn't know that. I think that's great. Is there any downsides of putting this onto a wheel?

Pihkala: Well, there's all always potential dangers. And also in relation to the old emotion wheels, people have been wary of the possibility that folks would think that the emotions in the middle somehow are really the most important and primary ones. That's a big debate in emotion research, whether there are sort of basic emotions or universal emotions shared by people worldwide. [Yeah.] So that's one possible misconception is that, you know, these four, emotional words in the middle, that they would be the only real overall candidate categories. But then then again, that is not what know what the wheel and the people are saying. So, the makers of the climate emotion wheel, they didn't intend that this would have all the relevant emotion words, they just wanted to provide many useful emotion words, so that people can think about what they may be feeling and what others may be feeling. So this may be validating both for people themselves and in relation to others. And we know from science, that if we have names for emotions, even roughly pointing to the right direction, then it's easier for us to engage with that, with those emotional energies. And I know Thomas that this is a very commonplace thing for you as a therapist, you know, helping people to name and recognize what they are actually feeling.

But this brings us to a very important another point, which is that there's lots of different emotional energies often in our body-mind, by body-mind I mean that our body and mind are connected, and I liked the word even though it's a bit technical. And that's also something which sometimes doesn't come up in climate emotions research or public discussions. For example, people may sort of have the presupposition, that, you know, should I feel just anger? Or is somebody just feeling anxiety or sadness or just hope? And it's not so, people are feeling many kinds of emotions and feelings and sometimes there can be interesting clusters of emotions, or interlaced emotions, you know, emotions which are somehow tied to each other in the person's experience or the group's experience. And that's something I think Thomas we haven't talked about yet in the podcast, even though we have been talking a lot about climate emotions. But I'm interested about these emotions that go together for some people in certain situations.

Doherty: Yeah. When I see the climate wheel (and we'll put a link to this—you can google “climate emotions wheel” and you'll find this and you'll find other famous wheel models of emotion.) I think of the color wheel, you know, when people are doing art and design, when we're mixing colors to get different shades. I haven't seen that, you might have seen that talked about, but you know, these primary colors, you know, primary emotions. Obviously, humans like to categorize things so we're always sort of seeing what box and so they categorize emotions they're always looking for, for more simpler sets of emotions. But the color wheel I think is a helpful analogy. Because feeling blue, whichever emotion you want to categorize for blue, and then of course, feeling yellow emotions, you know, creates green emotions. So we can run with that metaphorically. People who are feeling sad about the environment and also love and curiosity might lead them to some deeper connection with the environment. You know, I don't know. So, I love playing with the metaphors. But yes, and just for the public. I mean, we're … we've, you know, read too many pieces and too much stuff about climate emotions. We're kind of deep into this. But just keeping in mind like Panu was saying, people have researched emotions for forever going back to you know, Aristotle or whatever, and tried to make different categories and different things.

And there's some famous researchers out there that have studied people's facial expressions and how emotions are physical things in our bodies and we have the physical posture or facial expression that causes us to feel certain things. So the bi-directional aspect. Psychologist used to be a debate about what came first—a thought or a feeling you know—which was faster? That's an interesting area and, of course, more recently, people have been like yourself, talking about climate emotions and really trying to figure out what people are feeling about all these issues. And that's, that's newer. And that's really interesting.

And then we have different even different views on that, right? We know people use regular emotions words like loneliness or loss. You know, Glenn Albrecht is a thinker that has created a whole special vocabulary of climate words to kind of, I think, give justice to these unique kind of … and I think that speaks a little bit to those special feeling mixes that you're talking about. But, you know, “solastalgia” is a well-known word that that a lot of people have heard that was came out of that work, this combination of being nostalgic, but feeling lost for an area that you're actually haven't left, it's idea that the world is leaving you versus you leaving the world. And we're, that's a very interesting, nuanced emotion that's really touched a chord for people. But it's important for people not to get confused about this. These are just diverse, interesting ways, you know, that people are talking about emotions. Right? Is that a fair statement, Panu?

Pihkala: Yes, I think definitely, so. And I love the color metaphor that you are using Thomas and I have sometimes been thinking about shapes and colors. So if a person, like many Finns are, is feeling, climate, guilt, and sadness, and hope, at the same time, or next to each other, what kind of form and color a visualization could depict that? And this is something of course, which can sometimes be done in self-reflection or in workshops for it, for example. And it's not scientific, but it's helpful. And that's the most important thing. And Glenn Albrecht work has been highly influential for my own book and solastalgia for example, is in this taxonomy of climate emotions paper. It didn't end up in the wheel, but it's, it's there, broadly. Earth emotions, as Glenn calls them. There's lots of very important shades that are coming out.

Two big things that are also related here is one that you hinted at Thomas, which is sort of the length or intensity of emotion. So there may be sort of short-lived emotions or feelings and tentatively, maybe longer time, affective phenomena, for example, mood. And this is something which is important in relation to climate emotions, also. And I know that many people have generally a bit like sad moods and you know, then hopefulness may pop up at times. And if you have a tendency towards sad mood, that doesn't mean that you wouldn't ever experience joy, for example. And this is one of the richnesses of our emotional lives. And especially when they are healthy, when we are able to feel these different emotions, then our capacity to feel all kinds of emotions is larger. And this is a long road for any of us.

I know that personally, for example, it's a continuous learning process to be open to various emotional energies. Of course, one needs to also do some regulation about it. And in social situations, we can't just always let all emotion out. That would be very problematic. But it's also very problematic if we do too much suppression or repression. And finally, before, I want to ask what you think about this issue, the “about-ness” of emotions, so climate emotions, some of them are about climate change in general, but then some are about certain aspects of it. And for example, joy, it's very difficult to feel joy about the existence of the climate crisis. But it's very often that I feel joy because of the large number of climate activists, for example.

Doherty: I was thinking about some of the research, but the last … What was the last part about climate activists? So I didn't quite follow that piece. The last part of your statement there.

Pihkala: Yeah. Well, what I mean, is that some of the so-called positive emotions, may be much easier to feel in relation to, for example, climate action. Yes. Yeah. Then to climate change in general?

Doherty: Yes, exactly! I was watching some film recording of the recent climate march in New York City. And I saw a little bit of the speech of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, you know, and it was very uplifting and it was, you know, you could … I could sense the energy of the crowd there. And so I think that's one of the one of the aspects, one of the many is like, we don't feel them [emotions] only in isolation, they're social, you know, social things that happen within groups of people. So that's, that's one angle here. And what is, there's a saying, you might know it, I think it's a Swedish saying about being together cuts our grief and half, but it doubles our joy, you know, something like that. So, being together with people is both helpful for sad feelings. It helps to bear the weight of sad feelings, we're sharing them, but like, being together and sharing them positively kind of multiplies, … I mean, we could do a whole podcast on emotions. We do! But we could do a whole other podcast just on the science of emotion. And the social aspect and the neuropsychological, brain aspect of it, and the philosophical, social justice aspects of this kind of stuff. It's just fascinating.

Pihkala: Yeah, I think that's a great, great point Thomas and very relevant for climate emotions. Because some of them are so heavily intertwined with our social relations. And that's why, for example, I didn't just apply any theory of basic or universal emotions, because those are more related to, you know, “what did we get in evolution type of thing,” and what sort of emotional energies we need, for example, if we live in a forest or jungle, but then amidst other members of our tribes, and also contemporarily, there's all these dynamics about guilt, and honor, for example, social approval or disapproval, and feelings related to sharing life, but also social hierarchies and so on. So many of our climate emotions, are heavily moderated by the social dynamics. And that's, I think, an important aspect.

Doherty: Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So there's a saying, you know, all models are wrong, some are useful. So all these different models are limited in some way. They, they obscure something. And that's why we have different thinkers. And that's why I have people with different models, because they show things that that are lost. So a wheel image captures some things, but a list captures another process. You know, I mean, one way to moderate our climate emotions, and is go to different groups of people. I mean, that's one way to categorize climate subcultures like what is their dominant feeling? Well, I know if I go to this meeting, it's going to be dominantly fear and anxiety of this particular group. I know that this one is going to be curiosity. You know, if I know this one, it might be if I go to the Climate March, I imagine the feelings are going to be righteous indignation and camaraderie. And so we can we can put ourselves where we want to get the feelings, you know, it's, we're social beings, you know, we're group animals. And so that's one way of coping, coping with this stuff.

And like I talk about being a climate cosmopolitan, like, I can go and hang out with the people that are creating new interesting language words and see what that's like. And I can go to the scientists and see what they have to say. And I can go to the march and see what they have to say. And it's the right tool for the job. I think practically, when you're, if someone's trying to make change in their organization, or in their school or in their job … this is the classic with any kind of change. You have to understand your audience and you have to understand how they typically speak. I know if I bring in ideas like solastalgia or “terrafurie” is another great word. I love that—sort of like anger about the climate and environmental issues. You know, it's anger, like we all know, but “terrafurie” has this special tone to it. Now with some groups, they would love to hear that and it really is helpful. But if I am at the hospital, at Mass General Hospital, and I'm talking about working with the patients and the researchers, and I say, we have to channel our terrafurie, well, they might say, “Okay, that sounds like environmentalism. That's not going to fit here in our hospital.” So, if I talk about emotions, and that our clients are struggling with difficult emotions, and that, you know, so it's using the right emotional language for the right subculture and for what you're trying to do. So there's always this practical side. I imagine you've seen that as well in your work.

Pihkala: Yes, definitely. Definitely so. My public work in Finland has taken me to many kinds of audiences and it's quite different if you work with an environmental NGO, or then a network of car sales persons who have become interested about climate matters. So just to mention a couple of couple of examples. Our episode with Renee Lertzman some months ago was closely related to this, because she's one of the persons who has been studying and observing emotions which are under the surface. And that's a yet another complication, that there may be climate emotions that people are not aware of themselves for complex reasons. For example, it may feel intuitively too painful to allow all the sadness to come to the surface, for example, or people, including myself, often might want to repress some of the guilt. So, for communication and education, that's another layer of trying to be aware that there may be things under the surface. And for me, following the guidance of Susan Moser and others, one key takeaway has been to not be threatening in communication because there is so much fear underneath the surface in people, even those who don't claim themselves to be environmentalist in any way. So, all kinds of threatening imagery, for example, can just block people more. So that's something that I do in my public work, that I really try to make those safe spaces and allow for different kinds of emotional responses, including sometimes frustration towards environmental matters in general. Then sort of recognizing and validating that can be a way forward in the conversation. Instead of presupposing that everybody should be right away keen about this matter for sure.

Doherty: Sure. When you brought in repression, then that opened up a whole another window around emotions that brought I mean, if, if we could bring Sigmund Freud back, or Melanie Klein, or one of the great psychoanalysts, you know, they would, of course, have a whole very rich take on all of how we feel emotions, what's conscious or unconscious, I'm always pragmatic about this. So it's like, you know, certain things we express, like, we share, certain things we suppress, like, we don't share for various reasons, because I'm not going to talk about this feeling in this particular audience, or in this particular situation, or, “Hey, I'm in a crisis, I can't afford to break down right now I need to keep on my game face and get things done.” So I'm going to suppress this emotion in service of getting things done.

And then of course, the idea of repression, where we shove these under the surface somehow and forget that they're there, or unconsciously channel them, that's a whole another rich area that, you know, some listeners are going to respond to. So that's a whole another, and just broadly, like you say, the therapeutic process, because it's a process, you know, it's like, like anything else these some, like, I've talked about this before. But you know, when I work with people, I say, well, there's, there's both what do you feel? And you can use a wheel for that or whatever? And then what do you want to feel? So there's, there's this kind of going toward, like, What feelings do I want to grow and cultivate? That turns this into a personal growth project. And then of course, from that there are some feelings that are frankly, a stretch. Like I don't know if I'm going to be able to get to, you know, empowerment. That seems like a stretch at a given moment when I'm feeling loss and depression. But I can stretch toward it.

And because feelings are wild, and you know, things happen. And I go to that …  I can guarantee if you're depressed, but you went to that climate march and, and you listened to some of those speeches, you might lo and behold, feel empowered. So it happens. So there's those stretch feelings. And then then there's some feelings [that] are really scary, tender feelings that people don't want to go to. And we have to be very respectful of that and kind of kind of sneak up on those feelings and become comfortable. So it's a whole process, right? I guess that's the therapeutic process, whether you're in therapy yourself or, or just your own life, you know, your own daily struggle. So, really rich.

Pihkala: Yeah, I think Thomas that's very helpful for us all and a great, brief definition of suppression and repression. And that's those kinds of things. You know, pumping up the energy in a certain emotion is one option and then sort of pumping it down. I'm not sure if this is the best metaphor in English, but anyway, there's more technical terms, for example, in emotion-focused counseling, which I find very interesting, and that's something I've been trying to learn myself also in relation to emotional energy is that sometimes, you know, consciously sort of increasing it a bit or allowing it to grow a bit more, if the situation so demands, and then sometimes, you know, trying to lessen it often because the situation doesn't allow more of that. And those situations in my life are often related to public facilitation or speaking. And it's terrible if you are having a presentation or workshop about ecoanxiety and then the facilitator breaks down. So that's going to be quite a situation when the group then has to carry the facilitator and that’s human and may happen to certain degrees. But for safety, it's important that there's enough of that. But I wonder whether you, Thomas, how much do you use this with your clients? You know, these skills of sort of bumping up or down the energy of emotions?

Doherty: Oh, yeah. I mean, it's at the heart, I think, of almost any therapeutic work, I mean, in my sort of approach, and the manuscript I'm working on, you know, it's basically chapter two of this manuscript, you know, how to feel or how do you want to feel? The first chapter is how to think, so it's starting to just be aware that we have all these models, and we have different lenses we look through and there's diverse ways to look at the world. I think that's a good place to start. But then yeah, how do you feel? I mean, I've always thought there's three main tasks in environmental work: how do we feel about the situation? How do we describe it, what do we think about it? And what should we do? And so much of our all our education and academia and science and climate change, reports in the news is all about the description and how do we think about it and all the data and all the info. And then of course, what should we do this policy or that policy? But the “how to feel” is always underneath all of that.

And that's why … part of my theory on how why ecoanxiety is so prevalent, because it's bubbling up, because people's feelings aren't really honored. And then we know just in science in general, scientists are taught not to share their personal feelings and policy laws are very dispassionate. Right? That's the ideal being dispassionate. But where those feelings go? So, yeah, so I think it's just huge. And, yeah, sometimes we want to, we want to fake it till we make it and pump up some positive emotions, just like coaching a team of young people in a sport or something like that, or coaching ourselves, running over a hill when we're running our race, or getting through our day. And then sometimes, yeah, we want to take time to just “feel all the feels” like, you know, Britt Wray has a section in her book about, you know, feeling all the feels, all of them, you know. So yeah, so giving permission, giving permission about that.

Where do you think you're going? Where are you going with some of your work? Like, what, what kind of projects are you working on now? Or what's the next step for this for you?

Pihkala: Thanks. Thanks for asking. Since the completion of the process model of ecoanxiety and grief, which we discussed at an earlier episode, I've been working heavily on theories of grief and bereavement, not to be gloomy, but bring out nuances related to how much change there is around us and in us, and the sort of perceived need to be able to name those kinds of nuances. Like you know, changes and losses related to identity and roles, in addition to the very visible changes in our so called natural environments. So that's hopefully going to be finished quite soon. The first quite long, regrettably, again, long article about theories of grief and bereavement as applied to ecological grief. And the sort of practical next step is what I've been drafting was just like a sort of questionnaire or self-reflection sheet about ecological sadness and grief. So if somebody wants to do that kind of work, either as in a work or with others, then there's sort of practical application of, of doing reflection about what things are changing, and that should also include, I think, those kinds of changes which have many sides, there may be both personnel growth and loss at the same time, for example. So those kinds of things. And I'm eagerly awaiting your forthcoming book, Thomas. Also, I know that's a long distance run but it’s in the process.

Doherty: Yeah. And it's, you know, I mean, I shared a milestone, I shared the first chapter with my, you know, my book agent person I'm working with and so that's been a personal milestone for me this week, to keep moving forward, you know, into this process. But you're speaking to a final thing here, I think we can end on, which is, you know, on the emotions, whatever, model you want to use, whether it's a vocabulary list, or [making up ] new words, or the emotions wheel, there's one thing to talk about it from a distance. And it's another thing to, like, if we're like a dart and we throw ourselves at the emotional wheel, we land, boom! in sadness, or, you know, we land in depression, and we, okay, we're sitting in that. And that's a whole, that's a process, that's part of the, you know, we're in that and oh, okay, I have to open myself up to this loss and depression.

And of course, loss is a part of life. So many, many losses related to just general life and letting go of things. And, of course, from a Buddhist perspective, you know, life is suffering, because we're attached, and we have to let go. So just being aware, at any given moment, you're going to be sitting, we're going to be sitting in a in a section, I can also be in a section that's has empathy. Okay, I'm empathizing with myself, and that. So we can, we can kind of move our peg around the wheel. When we're in a slot, we're in a slot and we have to feel that so that's the job, I think. So we can nudge ourselves to sort of different sections, if we want, we will find ourselves in different sections. Is there anything you're looking forward to for the rest of the evening Panu as we and as you wrap up your long day, Panu?

Pihkala: Autumn is coming in Finland, so the sun is already setting. So if there may be a chance to get a bit of sun, sunlight, or when going out. And how is your starting day looking like?

Doherty: Well, yeah, I know, you're really a student of the seasons, and I am as well. And so there's the seasons of emotions. And so yes, I was actually thinking about autumn as well, because we're in early, early autumn coming into October here, and the leaves haven't really changed yet. But the weather has clearly changed. And it's cooler and wetter. And for me personally, that moves me more into the purple part of the [climate emotions] wheel there where I'm more likely to, to naturally feel some loss and melancholy as the year is ending. So yes, but I'm frankly looking forward to after this, I'll be with my therapy training group. And I have people coming in from around the world this season, from India, from Italy, from England, from Hawaii. And so in a few minutes, I'm going to jump in with that group. And they're, you know, they're really interested in this stuff. And we'll get we'll get to talk about this stuff. And it's generally pretty much like this podcast, very uplifting for me. It gives me hope, gratitude, empathy, inspiration, empowerment, interest, it keeps me in that blue positive section of the wheel. So that's all good.

And you know, I have I've spent some time in the overwhelm section this week! My daughter has been home from school because she's been ill and I've been working on my manuscript, you know. So yes, we can get overwhelmed. So listeners, just be aware you're in all these different feelings. Some of you are experts on certain news areas, both as scientists or as humans. So be well and Panu you have a great evening and listeners, take care.

Pihkala: Take care.

 

 

image credit | Benny Hassum

S3 E4: An Australian Climate and Emotions Perspective with Dr. Joelle Gergis

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 4: An Australian Climate and Emotions Perspective with Dr. Joëlle Gergis

Joëlle Gergis is an award-winning climate scientist and writer from the Australian National University. Joëlle was a lead author on the IPCC 6th Assessment report: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. As the southern hemisphere summer approaches, Joëlle Gergis spoke with Panu and Thomas about her most recent book Humanity's Moment: A Climate Scientist's Case for Hope and the unique emotional challenges of confronting the human and wildlife toll of climate disasters in Australia. As Joelle noted, Australia is one of the world’s most vulnerable developed nations in terms of climate disruptions as well as a leader in fossil fuel production. So, Australians’ efforts at coping and making change are important learning for others around the globe. 

Links

• Joëlle Gergis

• Humanity's Moment: A Climate Scientist's Case for Hope

• Essay: ‘I feel my heart breaking today’ – a climate scientist’s path through grief towards hope

• Fear and Wonder podcast

• “8 in 10 Australians are concerned about climate change with a clear public expectation of Government action”

• Tara Crandon 2023 Our mood usually lifts in spring. But after early heatwaves and bushfires, this year may be different 

• Is this how you feel? Letters from climate scientists

• Lesley Head & Teresa Harada 2017 “Keeping the Heart a Long Way from the Brain: The Emotional Labour of Climate Scientists.” 

• See previous CCH episodes with Susanne Moser and Daniella Molnar

Transcript

Transcript edited for clarity and brevity. 

Thomas Doherty: Please support the climate change and happiness podcast see the donate page at climatechangeandhappiness.com.

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Doherty: Well, hello, I'm Thomas Doherty.

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala.

Doherty: And welcome to climate change and happiness, our podcast. This is a show for people around the globe who are thinking and feeling deeply about climate change and other environmental issues. And as we say, we're all climate change emotions all the time. That's what we're focused on here. Even though people are more open to talk about their feelings and thoughts about climate change, it's still not common to have open conversations about these things, particularly about the emotional level. So it's what we do here. And today we are very honored to have a guest.

Joëlle Gergis: So, I'm Dr. Joëlle Gergis. I'm a climate scientist and writer from the Australian National University.

Doherty: And we've heard of Joelle. I've got a copy of her book here Humanity's Moment and Joelle is, if you're in the know about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and how this group comes together across the world and meets, and Joelle is one of the scientists that's involved with the IPCC. We'll talk a little bit about her journey and her background. And Joelle is our first guest from Australia. So, this is a great opportunity for us to think about the continent of Australia, and all the unique experiences that are happening for people there. I know we have listeners in Australia, so this will be nice. And Panu do you want to get us started off in our dialogue?

Pihkala: Warmly welcome, Joelle, very pleased to meet you. And there's been very interesting conversations between Australian people around climate emotions and all the strong contradictions around them, also related to governmental policies and physical impacts. And I've personally benefited from quite pioneering work by the Australian Psychological Society and a great organization called Psychology for a Safe Climate. So there's some great material for constructive encounters with climate emotions. And that's something very notable in your work, Joelle. I think that you are so open about speaking of climate emotions, as a scientist, and there's some research going on internationally about the emotions of climate scientists. That's one topic we might touch upon here. But firstly, we'd like to ask you a bit about your journey. How did you become so heavily involved with global climate change and end up being a writer and researcher who is open about various sides of the issue?

Gergis: Yeah, thanks for having me. Firstly, on the podcast, it's a real pleasure to be here. And it's also quite an interesting thing to be the first Australian to speak to you guys. So, I guess as a young person growing up in Australia, you know, we have such a ferocious climate. And I remember a particular time in my childhood in 1994, when there was a really severe bushfire season, and there was ash falling all throughout my neighborhood. There was a thick smoke. And I wondered to myself, well, what is it that makes Australia's climate so erratic and so extreme? And that led me to wanting to study environmental science and climatology at university.

And I guess it's been a 25 year journey, really, for me in terms of teaching, researching and writing about climate change. And then that journey led me eventually to be selected as a lead author on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Sixth Assessment Report. And for me, I suppose that was a real turning point in my career, where all of a sudden, I could see what was happening at home in my own country of Australia. And Australia, as you probably know, is often seen on the news in very dramatic ways, whether it's a wildfire or it's a flood or a very severe drought. So, in many ways, Australia is a bit of a poster child for climate change in terms of some of the real world impacts. And we're actually considered the most vulnerable nation in the developed world when it comes to climate change. So, it's a really interesting perspective to be both, you know, researching climate variability and climate change in a country like Australia, but also thinking about different ways of communicating our science.

And so for me, that opportunity to really think about what is it that is getting in the way of emotionally engaging the average person and a topic like climate change, because it can be so overwhelming, and so soul destroying, in many ways for a lot of people, because of the enormity of the challenge we face is huge. And, sometimes people feel very powerless in the face of that. And of course, you would know also in Australia, we're the largest exporter of coal and liquefied natural gas. So, there's been a very entrenched resistance, if you like,  to actually implementing climate policy that is meaningful in any sort of scientific terms. But also just thinking about what it is to be, I guess, an Australian at this moment and how we show up on the global stage.

So really, my work has led me deep into the heart of the IPCC. And as I was working on the IPCC, there were all sorts of extreme events unfolding. You might have recalled the "Black Summer" wildfire season that we had in 2019-2020, in that summer period, and that basically saw around 25% of Australia's forests burned in a single bushfire season. In an extreme year, you might get 2%. So to get 25%, it was a global record in terms of the sheer enormity of the blazes. And now the koala is actually considered an endangered species along the east coast of this country. And that's not something I ever thought I'd experienced in my lifetime.

So, as an Australian involved in a United Nations process, I realized I had quite a unique perspective on the climate crisis. And it made me want to write about it. I realized that I could join the dots between the different things that I was saying, and I wanted to help people who don't have a scientific background really follow the conversation to understand the profound moment that we find ourselves in right now.

Doherty: Yeah, I mean, Joelle it is interesting, because for someone like myself in the United States, I see similarities to the US political situation in terms of entrenched fossil fuel interests that are deeply—this is not unique to the US or Australia, either—it's deeply woven into the fabric of society and the economy and people's identities. And then also, yes, Australia being the kind of canary in the coal mine so to speak, even going back to my early environmental work regarding ozone depletion, and chlorofluorocarbons back in the 1990s. You know, one of the things we talk about in our show is environmental identity, our identity in relation to nature in the natural world. And I think the pathway to being a scientist, to really be empirical and really study, is a certain kind of environmental identity [and a] certain set of values. So, I was wondering if you could say a little bit about that. There must have been something that drew you in the science direction, to the measurement, to really understanding, including ancient patterns and things like that. I'm curious about that 

Gergis: Yeah, I guess for me, My motivation for being a scientist is driven by my love of the natural world. And, and I guess that extends into understanding it in all of its intricacy. And I guess I really enjoyed and responded to learning about science at university and also throughout high school. And so I guess, for me, that scientific understanding is just another way of knowing and understanding the world. And I was drawn to it because I quite liked the way it could be quantified and measured, and then compared in different parts of the world in a comparable way. So science gives us sort of universal tools that we can use to compare across different regions. And I think that's very powerful. While it is important to have a local subjective understanding of things, I also kind of responded to the idea which is, is embedded in science, which is that it provides us with a global framework to understand the world and I think that's really, really powerful. So for me, I was drawn into wanting to understand science from that empirical perspective. But my motivation for being a scientist comes from a very deep personal place, which is really wanting to protect and understand what it is that we are experiencing right now. So I guess it was sort of the joining of two different worlds for me.

Pihkala: Thanks for sharing all that. In your writings, you're also very open about vulnerability and many people have different kinds of experiences, and sometimes also traumatic ones in our past, and you've been exemplary in being open about the impacts of those kinds of experiences. So that's something I highly appreciate. And in the global networks around climate emotion, or eco emotions -- and that's, of course, something we very often discuss. So how to, on one hand, share our vulnerability and build strength out of inner vulnerability. But then, of course, also to protect people -- that one can't be open about all the things in all places. And, sometimes, we need to have different kinds of protective layers, either social or psychological, or combinations of this. And, as mentioned earlier, you have been very open about various climate emotions you have as a scientist, and since we've been talking about science, could you share a bit about that part of your journey? How was it to start engaging more with emotions as a scientist, because Western science has this history of, of, you know, reason over emotional analysis?

Gergis: Yeah. And I actually think it's a little bit of an outdated idea, because I believe that you can be professional and rational and logical, but still have an emotional response to your work. And as I was working on the IPCC report, there were just so many extreme events playing out in my country that I could no longer ignore the emotional response that was coming up in me, and to pretend like I was cold and detached around that was disingenuous. So for me, I felt I couldn't help it, I had to be real about it. But I don't think that compromises in any way, my ability to be professional.

And so for instance, one example was that we are home to the Great Barrier Reef, and the Great Barrier Reef is the largest living organism on the planet. And since 2015, we've seen 50% of a die-off from repeated mass coral bleaching. So, we're actually seeing large scale ecosystem collapse right now in real time. And we're all bearing witness to this. And for me, that is something that became increasingly hard to not speak out, because as a scientist, I understand the cause of that. And that's the increase in our ocean temperatures. And so for me, it was something that became something I couldn't walk past.

And then I also mentioned the wildfires of 2019 - 2020, where we saw about 3 billion animals either killed or displaced in a single bushfire season. Again, we're talking about extraordinary levels of destruction. And our ecosystems are still recovering from that time and may never recover in some areas. So, in our subtropical rainforest ecosystems, which are World Heritage listed, so they're of universal scientific and cultural value, we were seeing areas that are usually lush and moist areas that are, you know, waterfalls and mosses and ferns, actually ignite, just to give you an idea of how dry and hot it was. So watching the areas that I love disappear before my very eyes, and literally working on the IPCC report, as these events are unfolding, it became basically unbearable, to be a witness and to not say something.

And so that's really where I feel I started to become more vocal as a commentator and started to speak out more, I guess, in a personal way. And because I think a lot of scientists feel afraid of the very thing that you said, Panu, which is that people will consider us to be irrational or unprofessional, or this sort of thing. But, then when you speak to these people, at conferences, over a cup of tea, they'll tell you how they really feel about it. And so, with my writing, I've actually found that I've had quite a few colleagues contact me and say, Thank you. Thank you for actually doing the work that you're doing and being brave enough to share your emotional response because I feel that too.

And you know, maybe it's also a gendered thing in terms of this. Science is very dominated by men. And as women, there's about, for example, in IPCC in the working group I was involved in, about 25% of us were women. So it is a very male dominated area. And I'm not passing judgment around that. All I'm saying is that there are different ways of relating, and I guess women can sometimes be a bit more open about their emotional response.

And so, for me, it feels like a really important part of an authentic conversation that we need to have and that were having anyway behind closed doors, in terms of whether people are going off to see therapists or talking to their friends and colleagues. And the truth is, when you speak to people who are on the front line of say, recording ecological changes in our landscapes, they're coming back from their field trips and weeping in their offices, because they're realizing that they're seeing changes that are a one way street, that they see it, there are some areas that will not recover. And we're seeing that in parts of Australia already right now. So I think I've just shone a light on something that already exists, it's there. And I'm just trying to give some voice to that. And to provide us with a language to be able to speak about it. Again, we're talking about science being this sort of universal language.

But it's also sometimes when we're talking about the realm of emotions, that's usually the realm of, I guess, psychologists, social scientists, people who aren't really involved in the physical sciences. And so I've been very inspired by some of that literature. And also just people I know from those areas who try and think about ways to bridge that gap. Because I feel like it's the missing link, to be honest. Because unless we have an emotional response to the changes that we're seeing in the world, then that's not going to drive any kind of personal action, or inspire anyone to get political or to change their consumer or their voting behavior. And so we have to care about this. And that's so I term it in my book “connecting the head and the heart.” Yeah. So actually having an emotional response to the very real and frightening reality of climate change. And all the statistics that you'll often hear.

Doherty: Yeah, this echoes very strongly what Susanne Moser, one of our guests, talked about. [She is a] pioneering kind of climate communications person and had the same story—that people would come up to her and say, you know, “How do you cope? How do you make it” and basically hearing it from behind the scenes. So, it's really glad that people like you and Susi are able to bear witness and speak out. So you've got this book, and you pulled this together And you took a risk with it. And it's out there in the world. Now, you've been speaking: what's been your journey since then? So this must have been a rite of passage for you. You know, have there been any surprises or any insights as you've shared this message around?

Gergis: To be honest, I've been really blown away by the positive response. And also from people I usually wouldn't expect to hear from. So you mentioned earlier, the Psychology for a Safe Climate Group here in Australia. The founder reached out to me and I actually did an event for them recently, which was very well attended. And it was just really heartening to see a group of professional psychologists wanting to engage in this topic, and ask me questions and try to find a shared understanding of how we move forward. So for me it's just really inspiring to feel like, once we get our professional psychologists and other people who understand, I guess, the human condition, much better than scientists like me -- because as a scientist, my skill runs out pretty quickly at that point. And we need to use the full diversity of our communities and all those different knowledge bases, and sort of rise to the challenge in their collective way. So for me, I've been really thrilled that psychologists have been reaching out to me, which is really fantastic.

But all sorts of people… in my book, I also speak a lot about trying to rehumanize the conversation and I make a special call out to creatives. So the art sector, to really think about ways that they can use their platforms, as musicians, as writers, as you know, visual artists, or filmmakers to try and help people make those emotional connections because sometimes it might be an artwork, a photograph, a song that helps shift someone's idea about something. If you think about the Vietnam War, it was that image of that napalm bombing with the young girl running burnt, that really galvanized public opinion about taking an anti-war stance. And that was a very powerful image. So all of the conversation and words that had been spoken up until that point didn't matter. What mattered was really people having an emotional response to then take to the streets. And that resulted, I guess, in the social license being removed for the continued aggression and all that sort of thing happening.

So, I feel a similar thing in terms of the creative arts sector having a really, really important role to play right now, which is helping people connect with their emotional selves and thinking about ways to help us connect  in a deeper way. Because I believe that once we do make that connection and understand that climate change isn't about the numbers on a graph, it's about the people and places we love, and protecting those places, I think everything shifts. And so I think art is really well placed to do that, because art is where we reflect, where we find ourselves, where we make sense of where we've come from. It helps us contextualize our history, our presence. And that's where we go to process. And so I really feel there's a very strong role for the artistic community, alongside the usual suspects of policymakers and all those other people that we already talk about, or renewable energy experts.

But I really wanted to, in this book, open the conversation up to many different types of people. So it isn't the usual suspects having the usual conversation. And you know, talking about renewable energy policy isn't particularly inspiring for a lot of people. It's really important. But people want to talk about cultural aspects of what it is to be human at this moment. And we are holding a global grief collectively right now. And what does that mean? What does that mean to be living through the most profound moment in human history? I think there's endless answers to that question. But these are things that we need to talk about. And we need to talk about them in nuanced ways that bring in lots of different voices to help us understand this moment.

Pihkala: Thanks a lot for that, that's very profound … more and more, my own research work this spring has been orienting around ecological grief and climate grief, continuing some of the earlier work and thinking about local and regional manifestations, the relationship between those and the global dimensions. So I think it's very complicated as you say that, when people encounter local or regional ecological losses, there is a resonance with the global situation.

There is one study about reef grief, as they put it, around the Great Barrier Barrier Ree. But, the role of arts, as you say, I think is very, very profound and, and also, as an effort to engage with complex emotions, like guilt, for example, or various kinds of kinds of sadness. And there's a lot of scholarship in Environmental Humanities and communication about what kinds of images would be useful for different people in different places. And sometimes, guilt inducing images can also be used for not so ethical purposes. And sometimes they can lead people to become more active and it all seems quite complicated, indeed.

But the basic idea of different people working together and the creative arts, that I think is very important, echoes some of our conversations with Daniela Molnar, for example in an earlier episode. But how about yourself? Would you like to share something about the methods you use to cope yourself? I know that that's something people need to develop in order to stay with the trouble and these difficult subjects.

Gergis: Yes, sure. So for me, as I mentioned earlier, my love for the natural world is what drove me to be a scientist. So when everything starts to get very difficult and hard for me, I step back, I try and take time off work, and I go into nature. So whether that's along the coastline where I live, where I've got beautiful access to beautiful beaches and the ocean, that's really a calming place for me. And I also love the subtropical rainforests near where I live. So I try and get out into nature, go camping. And just remember that I'm just another creature on the planet at this particular moment in time. And try and enjoy just being a human in a body. Because sometimes in the work that I do, you can become very cerebral, very locked up in your mind. And I think it's important to physically get back in your body. So for me that is either swimming in the ocean, it's going on a long trek, or some kind of hiking or anything to just remind myself of the fundamentals. That really, that I'm a part of nature, and it's a part of me.

And also, I guess it's also putting myself in the way of beauty and that is going to an art gallery or listening to beautiful music or reading poetry or just literature and reminding myself that humans are really capable of beautiful things as well. And so oftentimes, when we talk about climate change, it's often a very, it can be a dark and doom and gloom conversation and a bit of a degenerative narrative rather than this regenerative moment that we also face, which is an opportunity that is here is that we can finally learn to live sustainably on the planet, if we choose to remove the social license for the continued exploitation of fossil fuels. And that has to be done everywhere, but I do believe that it's happening. It is happening around the world. It's not happening quite fast enough. But, the social movement we need does exist. So whether it's Greta Thunberg, and her school strikers, and the millions of people around the world who care about this. You can't say that it's just an environmental issue for a particular interest group. It's all of humanity.

And this concept of global citizenry is something that I really had the lived experience of when I was working as an IPCC author, whereas literally sitting at the table, and there's someone there from Pakistan and Mexico, and Colombia, and Israel, and France and the US. It was such a diverse group of people. And to be there representing my country of Australia, it was a real privilege, but it's also realizing that people care about this everywhere around the world. And there is a very altruistic element in humanity that exists. Sometimes we can get overly focused on the dark and the negative, but there's also a force that is pushing back against those darker forces. And that is all of those people around the world who have woken up and want to create a better future. And I think when you do connect with that, that becomes inspiring for me. So sometimes I'll find it in literature. Other times I find it in music, I find it in all sorts of different places. But I think I need to remind myself that there's still goodness in humanity.

I sometimes think about my IPCC colleagues or I think about the nurses and doctors in our COVID-19 wards all around the world who were trying to keep society open and people alive. And all the people that go out and fight wildfires in really ferocious conditions. And these are people you know …you can't say there isn't goodness in humanity. It's just that it coexists. The dark and the light coexist. And I guess it's this moment that we find ourselves in where we either choose which side of history you want to be on. And so when I step back, I can see that but when I'm sometimes deep in it, it's hard to see. And so I think perspective really helps. And so for me, it's about sometimes stepping back and thinking about myself as a human in a broader context outside of my professional identity as a scientist.

Doherty: Yeah. So listeners can take this, and this is a theme that has come up before. It's a paradox. Immersing in some of these difficult, troubling issues also brings us together with like-minded people. And it reminds us that we're not alone. And that's what I've heard from other people on the IPCC: that camaraderie and that sense of special global fellowship that comes with this work, I think, is really powerful. If only we could get the public into those rooms temporarily to feel it. I think that would be really neat. It doesn't unfortunately come across in the IPCC reports. What we need is something like a documentarian would do behind the scenes, kind of, you know, a really nice artistic story of that. But it is something for all for listeners to take in. Like, just because you open yourself up to this, there's a lot of unexpected things that will buoy us and strengthen us, that camaraderie and things like that.

And then I just want to do one quick thing. I think a key part of your mission is this idea of, I guess, changing the social license, the term “social license” is probably not something listeners are familiar with. So I have an idea of what you mean, but it might be helpful for you to briefly just define that, because I think part of your mission is, is evolving that or changing that.

Gergis: Yeah, that's a good question. So, I guess the people that we elect to represent us whether it's at the local level, or the state level or the federal level, in some way need to reflect our values. And so for instance, as Australians – I’ll use an Australian example, if we care about the continued destruction of the Great Barrier Reef, then we need to actually say to our politicians and people in power, who have the potential to do something about this, that this is no longer socially acceptable for us. So really, it's really saying that we no longer approve. We can't actually stand back and bear witness to that and be okay with that. So for me, it's really thinking about this sort of collective values. And collectively, whether we vote in or out particular representation at that political level, makes all the difference.

And in Australia, we had our federal election last where we actually had a landslide in terms of a progressive government that basically showed that people want to do things differently. So, although we had been a real outcast in the global community in terms of our very weak Paris Agreement targets and our commitment to reducing our emissions, a lot of Australian said that is not good enough. So that's what I mean when I say social license is basically the green light or not, to allow our politicians to behave in a certain way. And so that's basically how I suppose social tipping points happen. 

So when enough of a critical mass actually cares about something you can actually change the course of history in that way. And it turns out, you only really need about 25% of a population to do that. It doesn't need, like 80%, or some other really high number. So when I came across that research, which I do talk about in my book, Humanity’s Moment, it's one of those things that made me feel like this is actually achievable. So once you get your 25%, you get your critical mass, and the rest of the society will go with the progressive element. And so that's true of anything. And it's no, it's not to say that these victories are a done deal, and that they are set in stone. Just like civil rights and gender equality, sometimes it's three steps forward, and two steps back, but we're inching our way towards something that is better than the past. And I think that is true of the sustainability or the climate crisis we find ourselves in right now. It's the same idea that we're going to have imperfect victories along the way, but that shouldn't stop us from disengaging or zoning out and saying, “Well, what I'm doing is not making a difference” or anything like that. Because it's that collective, you know, accumulated impact that will really make a difference. And when we have people standing up all over the world, which we are seeing, then I think that's how the world changes.

And that's why I think that we will look back at the 2020s as a really profound moment in our history, I consider it the most profound moment, because it's really in terms of the carbon budget, we have to reduce emissions by 50% by 2030, to be able to avert the worst aspects of climate change. So what happens now really matters. And so the people alive today are really going to determine the course of the future of humanity. And that's a huge thing to say. But it's also, I hope, a galvanizing thing to think about, because what you do really matters. At this moment, every single person around the world, it really, really matters.

And so from a scientific perspective, what the IPCC is saying is that we want to avert the worst aspects of climate change. And, in fact, we can do it. So I just talked about the 50% reduction, we can do that with existing technologies that exist today and deploy them. And so it's achievable. So when we hear these really negative narratives coming from vested interests, this is where people start to get confused, or they start getting overwhelmed.

And for me, it's one of those things that I really hope that if we start thinking about a more regenerative narrative and a positive frame for the future --that's not to say, it's all going to be fantastic, it's going to get worse before it gets better 100%. But it's still worth fighting for, and there is so much worth saving. And so from my perspective, every fraction of a degree of global warming that we avoid, is really, really vital. And that is really the take home message of the IPCC’s work is that we want to try and minimize the amount of warming to minimize the amount of damage and so it's a profound moment. It's a huge moment.

Doherty: Well said, I feel inspired listening to you! This is why I enjoy the podcast because we have these conversations. I get to meet inspiring people like you too also, it's really great. Well, we're coming to the end of our time. Obviously, we could always do more. But this has been a great introduction into your work. Panu, do you want to think about some closing comments or ideas here?

Pihkala: Yes, warm thanks, Joelle for all that and that points towards many important climate emotions or attitudes and virtues. Moral outrage, for example, something which is sometimes called Climate Anger, but it may not capture the whole breadth of having this sense of injustice and the determination which can come with it. And that's something I see happening in Australia also that people are understandably fed up with certain policies. And so that kind of climate moral outrage seems to be operating and that's very important. Emotional energy as we have been talking about in this podcast also. But once more warm thanks for joining us and all the best for the very complex and multifaceted work you are doing.

Gergis: Thanks very much. It's been my pleasure.

Doherty: Yeah. So the emotions, also elevation, I feel this emotion of elevation. I'm inspired. I mean, I am lucky that I have this podcast and things that I'm doing. So I get some wind in my sails. And I know others are still finding their pathway. But, that's okay. You know, like Joelle says, there are all the answers and all the tools are available. They're here for us. So we're going to wrap it up. We have our lives. It's late evening for me here in Portland. So I'll take care of my daughter and get her ready for school in the morning and all that sort of stuff. Panu, what’s your day look like for you? You've got the early morning.

Pihkala: Yes, this is one reason why we haven't had Australian guests before because the time zones make it slightly tricky. But as with many complex problems, they are not impossible. So now I have the day ahead of me. The kids are leaving for school right now. And I'm going to work with climate emotion research. And how about you Joelle? What's the rest of the day like for you? 

Gergis: It's nearly 3 pm here. So I'm finishing up just a little project I was working on. So just some paperwork on that. No, but thanks, guys for making the time to include me in your important ongoing discussion. And it's nice to have an Australian voice. I think sometimes we just hear from the same people. And so thank you for the opportunity.

And this is a little taste of what it's like to try and do an IPCC meeting. So imagine now 15 People from all over the world. So often sometimes it'd be two am for me or six in the morning, and all that sort of stuff. So it's really difficult when we try and do these international collaborations, but I hope it is fruitful and worthwhile.

Doherty: Me too. I think it is. Well, Joelle, keep up your good work. And I wish you best of luck on your book tour and future work and we'll put some links to your writings on our show notes. And you all listeners, take care of yourselves. You can find us at climatechangeandhappiness.com. You can see all our past episodes. You can support our podcast through our Patreon. And all of you and listeners be well and take care.

The Climate Change and Happiness Podcast is a self funded volunteer effort. Please support us so we can keep bringing you messages of coping and thriving. See the donate page at climatechangeandhappiness.com. 

 

 

image credit | Oscar Ävalos

S3 E3: Oppenheimer and Nuclear Anxiety

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 3: Oppenheimer and Nuclear-Anxiety

Thomas and Panu reflected on the recent Oppenheimer film, and how cold war-era fear and anxiety about global nuclear armageddon compares with contemporary fear and anxiety about the threats global climate change poses to society and the livability on our planet. Thomas spoke to the challenge of weighing the benefits of nuclear power as a strategy to help combat the climate crisis against the environmental dangers, ongoing dangers of nuclear conflict, and the still toxic legacy of radioactive waste from the construction of atomic weapons. Panu reflected on various forms of anxiety and other feelings these dilemmas inspire in us, including the “anxiety of responsibility” we feel about making decisions about them. 

Links

• Oppenheimer Christopher Nolan 2023 Universal. 

• The Day after Trinity John Else 1981 Oppenheimer documentary 

• Atomic Cafe Kevin Rafferty, Jayne Loader and Pierce Rafferty 1982 Cold war newsreel documentary 

  Trailer and Full Movie

• 1950’s Baby Tooth Survey and Early Campaigns to Raise Awareness about Dangers of Over Ground Atomic Bomb Testing in the US

• On the History of Nuclear Testing

• ‘The Psychic Toll of the Nuclear Age’ Essay by Robert Jay Lifton, The New York Times, (1982, Sept 26)

• Robert Jay Lifton on COVID and Death Anxiety 

• Panu Pihkala 2018‘Death, the Environment, and Theology’. Dialog 57, 287–94

Transcript

[The Climate Change and Happiness Transcript is on holiday.]

 

 

image credit | Ifrah Akhter

S3 E2: On Walk and Talk Therapy with Jennifer Udler

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 2: On Walk and Talk Therapy with Jennifer Udler

In a session devoted to the healing aspects of walking outdoors, Thomas and Panu spoke with social worker Jennifer Udler, author of the new book Walk and Talk Therapy: A Clinician’s Guide to Incorporating Movement and Nature into Your Practice. Their discussion touched on the practicalities of walking therapy as a modality, philosophical and transformative aspects of walking in terms of metaphors and pilgrimages, and the recognition that walking opens us both to the wonder of the natural world, and also dark aspects, including lack of safe spaces for some, and a new normal in which we all cannot separate our walking from climate change effects like heat and wildfire smoke. A key takeaway was the importance of developing a consistent relationship with a specific place, across seasons, times and weathers. 

Links

• Jennifer Udler

• Walk and Talk Therapy: A Clinician’s Guide to Incorporating Movement and Nature into Your Practice

• On walking in damaged places: Trebbe Johnson Radical Joy for Hard Times

• Erica Berry (2023, March 21) Climate Grief Was Clouding My Time Outside. So I Turned to Ecotherapy

• Jennifer recommends the Facebook group Walking, outdoor therapists

Transcript

[The Climate Change and Happiness Transcript is on holiday.]

 

 

image credit | Derek Owens

S3 E1: Coping with “Unnatural Disasters”

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 3, Episode 1: Coping with “Unnatural Disasters”

Panu and Thomas offered listeners advice with how to cope with the new class of “unnatural disasters” that have beset the globe in past weeks and months—horrific damage from wildfires that are supercharged or that arise in places we don’t expect them, coping with simultaneous earthquakes and hurricanes—in Greece, Canada, Los Angeles, Lahaina and beyond. Thomas explained key differences in how varied types of disasters are experienced and understood. He reflected on how the loss of a treasured place like Lahaina touches both Hawaiian natives and the many visitors who have had special life experiences there (with echoes of New Orleans and the Katrina disaster). Panu shared insights from his research and the recognition that coping calls for “skills in grief,” and when appropriate, “skills in joy.” Thomas introduced the concept of “disaster subcultures”: recognizing how groups see and react to the same disasters quite differently, for example, government officials, professional first responders, and the general public—and the resulting “disaster diversity” we need to respect. What are the pros and cons of concepts like “Polycrisis” for our coping? Either as a technical description of simultaneous catastrophic events or a blanket term for a sense of global breakdown? Join us and share your thoughts. 

Links

• Elizabeth Kolbert on “Unnatural Disasters”  (2023, Aug 20, The New Yorker): 

“After visiting the wreckage of Lahaina, Hawaii’s governor, Josh Green, called the Maui fires the “largest natural disaster Hawaii has ever experienced.” In fact, the fires would more accurately be labeled an ‘unnatural disaster.’ As David Beilman, a professor of geography and environment at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, recently pointed out, for most of Hawaii’s history fire simply wasn’t part of the islands’ ecology. “This Maui situation is an Anthropocene phenomenon,” he told USA Today.” (2023, Aug 20, The New Yorker) 

• Ville Lähde on “Polycrisis” (2023, Aeon)

“There is ‘a’ polycrisis and ‘the’ polycrisis. That is, on the one hand, people are trying to find a clear working definition of a polycrisis, to define its key characteristics, in order to forge a research concept with which to examine a diverse range of concatenations of events . . . On the other hand, ‘polycrisis’ is understood not as a common noun but as a proper noun, denoting this particular stage of world history. There is only one polycrisis: this historical epoch, when humanity has created a world interconnected and interdependent to an unprecedented degree, combining vast material wealth with radical inequality and teetering on the threshold of ecological collapse.”

Transcript

[The Climate Change and Happiness Transcript is on holiday.]

 

 

image credit | Bethany Beck

S2 E26: “Breathing the Sky” — Climate Coping for Children and Adults with Leslie Davenport

Thomas Doherty, Panu Pihkala

Season 2, Episode 26: “Breathing the Sky” — Climate Coping for Children and Adults with Leslie Davenport

Panu and Thomas were joined by Leslie Davenport who discussed her 2017 book Emotional Resiliency in the Era of Climate Change, and recent All the Feelings Under the Sun designed for children. Leslie reflected on her background in dance and as a member of an interdisciplinary medical team and how this contributed to her focus on the body and creative visualization in her ecotherapy work. 

Links

• Leslie Davenport 

Media

• Sindha Agha with Leslie Davenport How to Find Balance in the Midst of Climate Crisis | PBS Short Docs

• PBS News Weekend: Climate change causing a sense of despair? Here are some ways to combat it

Teaching

• Climate Psychology Certificate at California Institute of Integral Studies 

Books

• Emotional Resiliency in the Era of Climate Change: A Clinician's Guide

• All the Feelings Under the Sun: How to Deal With Climate Change 

Transcript

[The Climate Change and Happiness Transcript is on holiday.]