How time is getting weapon in messaging on climate change

Written by Brad Plumer

In summer, when heat waves burn cities or heavy rains flood the coast, some climate scientists and environmentalists will point out any possible link with global warming, hoping that today's climate will help people understand the danger. what will climate change do for tomorrow.

Then comes winter. And, as if on wheels, those who want to deny the established science that humans heat the planet will try to reverse the scenario. In January, when it was very cold, President Donald Trump went on Twitter to make fun of the climate fear: "Would not be mean to have some of this good old global warming right now! ".

Welcome to the weather war. As climate advocates and deniers harden, both countries are increasingly using extreme weather as a weapon to try to win people on their side. The weather, after all, is one of the easiest things for people who want to connect, it's a staple of small discussions and shared experiences that can make it a simple but powerful opportunity to discuss global warming.

But, as Trump's words show, it's also a framing device that can be easily used. This raises the problem of how scientists, who have long tried to distinguish between short-term weather fluctuations and long-term climate change, establish and discuss the links between the two.

"Most people will experience climate change because of the extreme weather conditions," said Susan Joy Hassol, director of Climate Communication Group, Climate Communication. "You do not experience the slow change in average temperature. What you are experiencing is extreme climate change. So, how we talk about it is really important. "

One of the reasons the weather can offer a powerful messaging opportunity can be summarized in human psychology. Climatology itself is often complex and abstract. It can be difficult to feel, at the intestinal level, the implications of a graph showing the evolution of the planet's temperature over time, or statistics showing that on average, the days at 95 degrees or torrential rains become more frequent.

But an unusual weather event that strikes today, such as a sudden heat wave or a severe storm, is more visceral. Laboratory experiments have shown that the immediate environment can influence people's beliefs about global warming. Put someone in a warm room and it is more likely that he agrees that the planet is warming up. Thirsty people become more alarmed by drought predictions.

Psychologists have suggested that these visceral experiences allow our brain to more easily imagine the future states of the world and thus make them more likely. Other studies have shown that an exceptionally hot or cold day can play the same role.

Some messengers have long understood that emotion and immediacy can be a powerful force.

"Trump is a guy of the brand," said David B. Srere, co-CEO and Strategy Director at Siegel + Gale, a brand consulting firm. "He knows his audience and understands how to tell a clear and simple story. Climate advocates and the scientific community need to better understand their audiences and understand how to tell a simple and repeatable story. "

In recent years, some climate scientists have tried to turn bad weather outbreaks into learning moments. "That's what global warming looks like," scientists said during the summer of 2012, a season of widespread drought, wildfire and extreme heat warning.

And they became more and more comfortable establishing these links.

In 2005, after hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, many researchers reacted cautiously, saying it was difficult to attribute a single event to global warming. Some noted that rising ocean temperatures could make hurricanes more destructive, on average, in the future. But even that was pretty abstract.

Over time, this messenger has changed.

Partly because, as climate models have improved, scientists have been able to demonstrate more rigorously how increasing greenhouse gas emissions have made heat waves or heat waves worse. more intense droughts or more likely to occur – an emerging field known as "attribution to extreme weather conditions". Scientists have also refined their communication strategies by using metaphors such as "die-cast dice" to explain how global warming is now making some severe weather events more likely.

"Today's conversation could not be different from what it was ten years ago," said Hunter Cutting, director of strategic communications for Climate Nexus, a non-profit climate-focused group. "At the time, at best, scientists could talk about the effects we could see by the year 2100. We now see leaders associate their points in a much more direct way."

This strategy can go both ways. The deniers of climate change have also sought to use the daily climate to shape their perceptions. Senator James Inhofe, R-Okla., Once brought a snowball to the Senate to suggest that global warming was not a problem. In case of extreme cold, Trump will ridicule worries about climate change.

To counter Trump's tweets can be a challenge, some climate advocates admit. He can lead the conversation: A recent poll by Media Matters, a liberal watchdog group, revealed that television networks rarely broadcast global warming when weather conditions are extreme. But they often note the president's comments on the climate.

Scientists and ecologists have tried various tactics to fend off obstacles. They may note that the hottest days are becoming more frequent and no one expects global warming to completely eliminate the snow. Or they will reiterate that the ups and downs of daily weather are not the same as the broader long-term changes in the Earth's climate, and that a single cold day can no longer refute global warming for a single day hot proves it.

Nevertheless, an occasional observer might be forgiven for feeling a lash after that line. After all, have not we heard that severe weather is a manifestation of climate change when it's hot?

Marshall Shepherd, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Georgia, is not convinced that the president's tweets on cold weather are still holding up.

"I see Trump's tweets as an opportunity to discuss science," he said. "For the 9 or 10% of the population who will make fun of climate science, anyway, you can not tell them more, but many people are legitimately curious about how warming Climate can be real if it is cold today.

This raises the question of whether message skirmishes around severe weather and climate change affect public perception, or whether each party simply preaches to those who are already converted.

There are signs that the opinion is changing. A recent poll conducted by researchers at Yale University and George Mason found that 69% of Americans were "worried" about global warming, an increase of 8 points from the previous spring. The researchers suggested that one of the possible explanations was the series of extreme weather disasters in 2018, ranging from wildfires to hurricanes, as well as the increased efforts of scientists and even local weather broadcasters to relocate them. in a climate context.

"For a long time, Americans have viewed climate change as a distant threat," said Edward Maibach, a professor at George Mason, who works on climate change communication. "But since our most recent survey, I do not think I can say it anymore. We find that many people understand that climate change is already happening. "

Others are more cautious about the interpretation of these trends. A 2017 study, for example, found that people who face extreme weather conditions are more likely, for a short time, to support climate adaptation measures than before. But the effect was modest and faded over time.

It may be that people mentally adapt to unusual weather conditions, updating their idea of ​​what is normal. Politics can also play a role: in a polarized country, many Americans are already tough on their beliefs about global warming.

It is partly for this reason that David M. Konisky, associate professor at the School of Public and Environmental Affairs of Indiana University and author of this 2017 study, asked if better messages could radically change opinions. "It may be that the climate has become so entrenched in identity and worldview that it is not the kind of thing that can get better messages," he said.

Wanyun Shao, an associate professor of geography at the University of Alabama, found that Democrats and Republicans perceive violent weather differently: Democrats tend to view them as part of a more general pattern of climate change, Republicans being more of an aberration. However, his research also revealed that a series of changing weather conditions – from year to year on the other, for example, from increasing summer heat – is beginning to dissipate even in case of conservative doubt about global warming.

"For some people, it takes longer," she said. "But eventually people start to trust their own experiences."