What difference
can we make?
Introduction
Once I became more interested in this area and concluded that the Torah has something significant to say about it, I was still plagued by the sense that there seemed to be very little of consequence that the Jewish people can do about it. I understood that most of the change that needs to happen in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions needs to take place on the level of governments and large global corporations. I assumed that the impact that individuals can have through their own behavior is pretty miniscule.
If I was correct, I reasoned that it would be difficult to argue that we, as Jews, are obligated to do anything differently to what we have been doing until now. However, upon deeper reflection, I concluded that my initial skepticism was unfounded when I discovered that many of my assumptions were ultimately not true.
Every tenth of a degree matters
A lot of climate negotiation and planning has revolved around aiming to limit global warming to around 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, however reaching that target is becoming more and more unlikely. As a result, this can create a sense that we’re going to fail, causing those concerned about the climate to become more and more anxious and desperate. This attitude, however, is based on a big misunderstanding.
The 1.5°C target was chosen for a complex set of reasons (some would say not great reasons), but not because scientists said that we had better meet that target or else. It would certainly be a great achievement if we can meet that target, and - as studies have shown - it would be a significant improvement on limiting warming to 2°C, but if we don’t, all is not lost. As the science has shown, every tenth of a degree will make a significant difference to the magnitude of climate impacts. So even if our efforts mean that warming is limited to, let’s say, 2.9 degrees, whereas it would otherwise have reached 3 degrees, that’s a difference worth working hard for.
Still, would our actions even make such a difference?
Spiritual versus physical impacts
It’s important to point out that, as Torah-observant Jews, we believe that we impact the world on two levels. There are the visible and tangible physical impacts of our actions and there are also the perhaps-less-visible spiritual impacts of our actions. Many of our spiritual greats have argued that our spiritual impacts in the world are far superior than our physical ones. As R’ Chaim Volozhyn writes in chapter 4 of Nefesh HaChaim Sha’ar 1:
And this is the Torah of man — each person in Israel should not say in his heart (God forbid): “what am I and what power do I have to effect anything in the world via my lowly actions?” Rather one should understand and know and establish within the thoughts of his heart that all the details of his actions, speech and thoughts at all times are not for not (God forbid). And how great are his actions…
So, even if it were the case that our actions have little impact on the physical plane (and I will certainly argue that this is not the case), there is no basis to feel that we can’t make a difference. By acting l’shem Shamayim (for the sake of Heaven), whether it is through spiritual action, such as davening and learning Torah, or whether through more practical efforts, if Hashem wants us to succeed, we will. (On the other hand, if He doesn’t, then we won’t. But we have good reasons to think that He wants us to try, and the results will be in His hands.)
What about the physical impacts of our actions? How big an impact can they make?
Change is happening, how fast is in our hands
One of the debilitating thoughts that I have experienced in this area is that
Change: a question of when, not whether
When people try to measure their impact on the problem, they usually think in terms of how much they are reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which might seem pretty insignificant in the larger scheme of things. But that’s a very short-sighted way of looking at things. The greatest impact that is possible will happen by a change in public opinion. Let me explain.
At the moment you have many world governments that are, on the one hand, taking climate change very seriously, but are also concerned by their “climate-minimalist” constituencies (i.e. either skeptics or at best, slightly concerned), who don’t want the cost of living to rise due to climate-related policies. This is stopping them from adopting more bold climate policies than they otherwise would. Progress is being made to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but not at the rate that we would ideally like.
Now, as time moves on and global warming is advancing, we are experiencing more and more significant climate impacts. As this continues, we can expect that this will cause an increase in concern about the climate and a reduction of climate-minimalism. Furthermore, the younger generation is far more concerned about climate change than the older generation, so this will also lead to a reduction of climate-minimalism over time.
Eventually we can expect to reach a point where the entire world (or almost all of it) will decide that addressing climate change is a top priority. Without partisan politics and cynicism getting in the way we can expect government cooperation on climate policy and corporate investment in climate technology to advance exponentially. Everyone will be pouring resources into technology and policies in a race against the clock to try and reduce greenhouse gases as quickly and efficiently as possible. Once we reach that tipping point, it will be incredible.
But there’s one problem…
This all sounds very nice, but the problem is that, by the time we reach that tipping point, a lot of irreversible damage could already have been caused, damage which might only be manifest decades later.
So this is how I am suggesting things might forseeably pan out - we will have:
the current “pre-tipping-point” period - whereby things will continue to progress, but not as quickly as we would like, and
the “post-tipping-point” period - at which time things will really fly ahead, but it probably won’t happen as early as we would like.
So, while I think
Well, it might not be a question of whether we get to that point, but when. There’s good reason to imagine that as more and more significant impacts of climate change start to take effect, things will reach a point where it is just too obvious for anyone to ignore. When that point comes, dismissing climate change will be like declaring the world is flat. Only the most extreme will feel comfortable saying it, but the vast majority of the public, on both sides of the political divide, will be pushing for climate action.
Now, it might not necessarily work that way. Psychologically-speaking, people become very invested in their positions and tend to dig in their heels even when pushed to the wall. However, we know that from a demographic perspective younger people are significantly more concerned about climate change than older people. So even if we don’t get there because of growing impacts, we are likely to get there because of the generational trends.
In other words, I am suggesting that we should not gauge our impact by seeking to measure how much our actions can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but rather by how much we can speed up the process of reaching a broad social consensus, because that, in my opinion will be the real gamechanger in terms of reducing emissions.
“But won’t that come too late?”
Some people might respond to this: “If you’re waiting for the whole of society to be on-board with climate action, by the time that happens, it will be too late to do anything!”
To this I have a few points to make in response:
I’m not saying
