-- Scotts Contracting - StLouis Renewable Energy

Search This Blog

11.08.2010

Heroes wanted in climate science story

Heroes wanted in climate science story

Nov 8, 2010 USA Today

Dan Vergano

In a house in the woods, somewhere far away, perhaps lives someone who doesn't love a good story.

"Deep in our nature" lurks a love of story-telling, wrote the Greek philosopher Aristotle around 350 B.C., the world's first literary critic.

And psychologists and neuroscientists have increasingly backed up ol' Aristotle, looking at story-telling as something fundamentally human. Brain scan studies, for example, show listening to stories lights up more and different areas as children age. Alzheimer's patients loss of the ability to follow stories may be the most debilitating aspect of their dementia.

But despite the narrative neuroscience, some groups of scientists, particularly climate researchers, might want to polish their story-telling skills. Where 97% of active climate scientists agree climate change is a reality and only 52% of the public say they agree, according to an Eos journal survey, something may have gone wrong in how scientists communicate to the public.

"There's a narrative vacuum that needs to be filled," wrote the science writer Keith Kloor last month. One catch is that scientists simply prize facts over stories, as climate scientist Gavin Schmidt of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, noted last week on the " RealClimate" blog.

So is that the problem?

"Scientists, academics, and politicians on the left, do not do stories very well," says Harvard political scientist Michael Jones, who earlier this year led a Policy Studies Journal report on the use and misuse of narrative in policymaking. "You have to tell a story, though, if you want people to retain information."

Work that Jones did as a graduate student published this year, involved experiments on 1,586 people to show how this plays out in the way people talk about climate science. Each person was randomly treated to one of four opinion articles and answered survey questions about their climate opinions before and after reading the article. Each article discussed a recent report on the U.S. effects of global warming.

One of the four was simply a list of the effects of climate change from Alaska to the Atlantic Ocean, and points in between, such as "It is 66% likely that the Great Plains area will experience more severe summer droughts."

The other three options were all identically-worded stories, with the same facts as the list, but with the good guys, bad guys and solution for global warming swapped out. The options they looked at:

"Individualist" story — presented "free competition" as the hero of the story, with "bureaucratic unions" and "the infamous Club of Rome" as the enemy, with a market system as the solution to global warming.

"Hierarchical" story — presented "scientific expertise" as the hero of the story, with " Ecodefense" and the "infamous Earthfirst!" as the enemy, with nuclear energy as the solution to global warming.

"Egalitarian" story — presented "equal participation" as the hero of the story, with "the radical Cato Institute" and "selfish politicians" as the enemy, with "community-owned renewable" energy as the solution to global warming.

People were more likely to agree with scientist's views about climate change after reading a story, rather than a list alone, regardless of which one they read.

"But what surprised us was how much the hero mattered," Jones said. People liked the villains less after reading the story, but that didn't affect their views much. Instead, having a hero they liked made them much more favorably disposed towards a solution. "Simple stories with likeable heroes are the most effective, they make people overlook incongruent things in the narrative," Jones says. "Obviously, this has implications across a lot of areas."

The findings don't mean that scientists suddenly need to invent parables to reach the public, he suggests, they just need to do more than just throw out the facts and hope that will do all the work. Instead of simply listing the evidence for climate change in reports, and then hoping people decide from hearing it that climate change is real, the findings suggest that scientists would be better off presenting their results in a narrative targeted to their audience's likes and dislikes. Libertarians, for example, might better listen to the facts about climate change if business is presented as the hero that can save the day from ill effects of increasing temperatures. Environmentalists want to hear about renewable energy. Normal folks (that's the hierarchical ones) will listen better if they hear that national security is threatened by a dependence on fossil fuels.

Of course, Jones acknowledges that some portion of people just won't accept the evidence for climate change no matter how it is presented, where about 12% of the population was "dismissive" of climate worries, according to a George Mason University survey released in June. "Some of the opposition to addressing climate change is completely rational," he adds, coming from regions of the country, such as West Virginia, where coal and oil interests would see prices in their industries rise with efforts to account for the environmental costs of the greenhouse gases created by burning fossil fuels.

The results aren't too surprising, says science writer Chris Mooney, who presented an American Academy of Arts & Sciences report, " Do Scientists Understand the Public?" this summer, looking at steps towards smarter public discussion of personal genomes, nuclear waste, energy and other new technologies. "Scientists have started taking steps in this direction," Mooney says, pointing to the National Academy of Sciences working with Hollywood writers. "They just need to take more."

Scientists don't like to hear the story about telling stories, Jones adds. "One of the first places I presented this research was to scientists with the National Weather Service. They hated the idea that you have to tell people a story instead of just giving them 'the facts'," he says. "But the real question is do you want people to hear you, or not?"

Yahoo! Buzz Mixx



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

Dot Earth: Cities as Hubs of Energy and Climate Action



Nov 6, 2010 New York Times

ANDREW C. REVKIN

9:49 p.m. | Updated

A pair of energy and development specialists from the mayors' offices in New York City and Los Angeles are going global.

Jay Carson, a former deputy Los Angeles mayor and aide to both Clintons, and Rohit Aggarwala, the former chief sustainability advisor to New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, are going to work for C40 Cities, a coalition of cities in rich and developing countries working to initiate and share ways to cut emissions of greenhouse gases and boost resilience to impacts of climate change.

The two advisers make the move as Bloomberg prepares to take the chairmanship of the group for the next two years. He's in Hong Kong at a meeting focused on China's cities and is giving a speech laying out new goals for the group.

The group was created in 2005 in London, largely under the direction of that city's mayor at the time, Ken Livingstone. In 2006, it held its second meeting, in New York City, and began working with the Clinton Climate Initiative, a project of former President Bill Clinton's foundation (and one that Carson worked on).

I spoke with Carson and Aggarwala briefly earlier this week:

"Our goal is to take C40 to the next level," Carson told me. "As it's become clearer that there's not going to be much action at the federal level, the importance of C40 grows. Some might say it's boring, nitty-gritty, nuts and bolts stuff, but it's in the implementation that happens at the city level where we're going to see the most action on climate change in the near future."

Aggarwala noted that cities are natural hubs for initiatives that use energy more sparingly and move people more efficiently through transportation options involving feet, bicycles or mass transit. He said that the philosophy brought to the group by Bloomberg presumes that "economic growth, improving the quality of life and improvements to the environment are all the same thing."

"A city is inherently more transit oriented and walkable than a suburb," Aggarwala said. "You're going with the grain of urbanization."

Postscript: In the meantime, there are few signs of serious action by wealthy countries to carry out the pledges they made last December to help poorer ones withstand climate impacts and adopt less-polluting energy policies and technologies. On Friday, an advisory panel convened by the United Nations to propose ways to generate some $100 billion a year within a decade released a report on ways to start the money flowing. The best it could do was conclude that raising this money was "challenging but feasible."

Oxfam America and other groups working to limit vulnerability to disasters, including those related to climate extremes, were cautiously upbeat about the analysis. "This should be a clarion call to negotiators tha

...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

Good Energy Policy Makes For Good Economic Policy

Good Energy Policy Makes For Good Economic Policy No Matter Who Is In The Majority

Nov 4, 2010 Huffington Post
While news outlets around the country continue to debate the impact of the midterm elections, I'd like to talk about a topic that was of importance long before political ads dominated TV -- and it will continue to be important long after the political analysis of this week's election ends. That topic is good energy policy.

In the U.S. and around the world, we're facing an epic energy challenge: meeting rising energy needs while also reducing emissions from energy use.

No matter which side of the aisle you support, I think that facing this dual challenge requires a framework of energy policy fundamentals to help guide our course. Regardless of the political complexion of the House or Senate, there are some key policy principles that should be considered not only for energy legislation, but also for any efforts aimed at our economic recovery:

1. Support all economic energy sources to meet growing demand: With global demand for energy projected to be about 30 percent greater in 2030 than it is today, we can't afford to rule out any economic energy sources. We must continue to support production of oil, natural gas and coal, which collectively meet about 80 percent of the world's energy needs. We also must support the development of alternative energy sources when and where they hold economic potential.

2. Promote fair, stable and predictable tax and regulatory policies: Investments in energy resources are measured in decades, not years. The success of these long-term projects depends on consistency in our tax and regulatory structures. Additionally, U.S. energy security depends on a fair tax structure that promotes investment in energy supplies around the world. A recent 10-country study found that the U.S. government takes a larger share of oil and gas earnings abroad than nearly all other countries in the study -- and potential new tax rules could make the U.S. the least competitive among this group, except for India.

3. Don't burden taxpayers with unnecessary energy business risks: Continuing long-term subsidies for alternative energy supplies that are not sustainable in the marketplace is a misuse of valuable taxpayer funds. We've seen this happen with the continued government support of corn ethanol, in addition to other renewable energy sources. By intervening in the nation's energy markets and picking "winners and losers," I think we're overlooking more immediate solutions to our economic and environmental challenges. Consider the fact that natural gas emits about 60 percent fewer emissions compared to coal, the main fuel used for power generation in the U.S. and around the world. And, we have plenty of supplies of it in the U.S. -- so allowing the natural gas industry to compete on a fair basis with other electricity feedstocks would promote new investments and employment and support national energy security.

For the new members of Congress heading to Washington in January, as well the returning legislators, economic recovery and growth will be a top priority. One pillar of good economic policy is a sound energy policy. The U.S. oil and natural gas industry is ready to work with our country's leadership to do its part in meeting America's energy and economic recovery needs.



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

Guest Post-Dryer Net-Energy Saver

Guest Post Provided by: Scotty, Scotts Contracting GREEN BUILDER, St Louis "Renewable Energy" Missouri--http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com-- contact scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com for additional information or to Schedule a "Free Green Site Evaluation" Home Repair and Green Building Entrepreneur !!!

Benefits of the DryerNET

  • Saves energy.
  •    Saves money.
  •    Keeps heat from the dryer in the house.
  •    Cuts down on drying time.
  •    Adds humidity to the air.


Web page:  dryernet.com     

Connect with Scotts Contracting

FB FB Twitter LinkedIn Blog Blog Blog Blog Pinterest

Featured Post

1 Hack To Eliminate Your A/C Power Bill This Summer!