Sunday, December 17, 2006

Needed: A Few Good Elevator Pitches for Global Warming

Here in the northeast the weather is just lovely. Mid-50's today and the Patriots won. What more could you want for the week before Christmas?

On the other hand, all this continuing and truly unseasonable weather is further evidence of a basic planet wide system which is moving further and further "out of whack."

I started Friday by reading a "rant" by Jim at his blog. It's probably not a good idea to starting off my posting with a suggestion that you go and read his post, but that's exactly what I'm going to do. Go now; it's the posting for 12/15/06. While there also read the comments section. Especially the entries from Arcolaura, and mine under the name of SimplyTim. Oh, and by the way, don't forget to come back here for the rest of my post.

Now, where to go with all this. I tested the waters with several people over the past few days. The form of the brief conversations was:

"Beautiful day."

"Yes. But so unseasonable."

"I'll take it anyway. Rather this than snow."

I would put in a few comments, for example, "I wonder if this is what they mean by Climate Change," or "It reminds me of Al Gore's movie - 'An Inconvenient Truth,'" or "Changes are happening."

Well the truth is that I thought those last three comments but didn't give voice to them. Why? Why not say it? Why is it that with so many people who have concern about global warming that they are hesitant to bring those concerns up for discussion? I point the finger at myself as much as anyone else, maybe more so.

The simple truth is that the people I mentioned it to clearly weren't interested in going any further with a serious discussion, at least at that time. (In some of my previous posts I easily went into what could be called an elevator pitch by saying that I had recently taken a "vow...I will rush no more." In those instances, the conversation went from there easily. Why not with this topic? Maybe it's because with rushing almost everyone can identify with it and have multiple examples in their mind. With the weather, with climate, it's too abstract. Maybe that's the real problem here in terms of mobilizing people towards action, towards outrage.)

With one person I said after a pause: "the change is coming."

He said: "Yes."

I had the distinct impression that he was just saying that winter will get here eventually. But there was a question in my mind as to whether he saw what I was saying in a much larger picture but didn't want to get into it.

And that's where I am wondering what some good "elevator pitches" would be. People in business and politics and activists do it all the time. Why are there so many others who are so reluctant to get the message down pat and practise it so that it can bring the conversation a few steps further. I would love to hear what some of your thoughts are.

Arcolaura said that she tends not to come up with quick responses while some others can. My sense is that there was so much depth and perception in her comments that it would be hard to spontaneously come up with them on the spot. That depth requires time and mulling over. However, her ideas perhaps could be shunted back to some of the spinmeisters to polish "pitches" which can break through, or invite more discussion; not just of the presence of changes, but of the implications and also what can or should be done.

Some other thoughts:

1. On NBC nightly news tonight there was an "in-depth report on global warming." I didn't time it, but they think 120 to 180 seconds is sufficient for an in-depth analysis. I won't even say it - yes, I will, are they for real?

There was a "chilling" reference to a new report that it is now thought that all of the ice in the arctic may be gone by 2040. I want to say: "WOW!" But the reality is that I don't know what that really means. I can imagine that it is big but what does it really mean? Maybe that's part of the problem with taking the discussion further with lots of people. The implications for most people are unclear. And with that lack of clarity, it's easier to keep doing business as usual.

A few moments later one of the scientists put it well: "It's what we don't know (about the implications of continued global warming) that concerns me. What are the surprises waiting for us?" Well said. There was a report in the paper yesterday about how they can't find any more dolphins in the Yangtze river. The end of a species, they wondered. I'm sorry, I can't relate to that. Maybe I have this gigantic blind spot but what does that really mean to me? I know it's important but there's that blind spot again - it's like I can't just see over the horizon. Maybe that's where the spinmeisters need to help out with scripts that will move conversations and me as well.

What would be a good example of a sound bite or an elevator pitch which captures one's attention, and seems to stop opposition? Well, when vice president Cheney said: "the American way of life is non-negotiable," it seemed that all discussion stopped for a while. That's powerful. It had the effect, I think, of stopping alternative thinking and by default, let things go on as usual.

Thankfully the discussion didn't stop in my mind and just possibly it didn't in the minds of many others. It takes time to look at that and to see behind the words and the rhetoric. Could it be that in the recent elections that is what the electorate was saying, that the non-negotiability of it all, and the raw power which is used to maintain that position is inherently wrong. Following that logic, the majority of the people didn't really know what has to be done, but they knew that a change had to take place, and they voiced that with their individual votes.

A lot of maybe's here, but maybe that's why the collective "we" don't take the real discussion further, why we don't make a collective decision to slow down, to change direction, because the vice-president was right, that there is a part of us which doesn't want to change. We'd collectively rather rush forward towards maintaining so nothing is lost. But remember, there is the other side in that same collective mind which knows it has to change...but the path, the route, the actions are not as collectively clear. Maybe my elevator pitch to that when combined to global warming is: "I wonder if global warming gives a hoot about the non-negotiable American way of life?"

In a somewhat disjointed way, I keep thinking about that frog in the movie, An Inconvenient Truth; if the heat keeps going up very slowly he doesn't do anything. He doesn't jump until it's a reflex - is that what we're talking about here? It will take a surprise, a threat to not the American way of life, but to the safety of the planet to then change? The nation know that we are collectively taking in too many calories, and yet look at the obesity rates. Now change oil for calories and wonder what would get the "collective" to change. The mind-set which is perpetuating the current direction is monumental and pervasive. The change will have to come from within. It will be a simple awareness, perhaps captured by the clarity of an elevator pitch which is so direct, so stealthy in it's clarity, that it leads vast numbers to shift direction in one way that will make a difference. Then legislation will help the mind-set to move in a direction, not the other way around.

2. As far as I can tell the government has been doing nothing substantive to deal effectively with this problem. Individual politicians appear "green" and will posture this way and that way, but as a whole, the government is deadlocked as usual. I'm basically a pretty conservative guy, but really, the political process on this matter is a joke. Yes, I know how that is a terrible overgeneralization but that's just how I see it. The bigger joke is, I suspect, most people know it, just like most people know that we are witnessing climate changes, but don't know how to move the process forward, for real. What we need is a good "meme" which in it's simplicity changes everything in a positive direction, at least with to the question of global warming.

3. A step in the right direction would be to do what the province of Quebec did, change the speed limit to 60 miles per hour. AND enforce it! Not with giving a ticket if you go 5 miles over the limit, but if you go 1 mile over the limit. My solution would be not to give a financially crippling ticket, just a modest ticket, but take a long time to give it. And then do it again 3 miles down the road, and repeat the process over and again. That would work. It wouldn't solve the whole problem but it would be a step in the right direction.

4. Remember that the basic rule of storms is that they continue until the original imbalance which created them is resolved. If CO2 is one of the major culprits, and we keep producing more and more CO2, and ...

5. A good piece of news may help. I went to two stores today looking for a copy of Al Gore's movie: An Inconvenient Truth, and both stores were sold out.

Addendum: 12/18/06 - My elevator pitch is: "I will rush no more! " Here's why that is so sweet: with that the emphasis is off global warming, and yet it's related. Everyone can identify with the natural balancing which is contained in the mantra, it gets underneath the usual counterarguments. And since rushing is essential to the perpetuation of the life style which we have all been inducted into, to change that piece, from within, one individual at a time, the possibility of "viral marketing" is very real.

9 comments:

Kristen said...

Keep it up, and pass it around. The more we reach people, the more these individual changes will happen, then spread to the whole, just as you describe.

Great post.

I added Jim to my blogroll. Thanks for the new web link ... and I am not talking internet-web, but rather the web of life.

We are all connected, are all a family on the same small planet, and had better start living that way!

Anonymous said...

Go find a pussywillow here in Massachusetts and you will see pussywillows you would expect in late March. Look at perennials, many are sprouting. Many trees also look as though they have buds.

arcolaura said...

Lots of good stuff in here, Tim. I especially like your question:

I wonder if global warming gives a hoot about the non-negotiable American way of life?

You mentioned people preferring to just rush along and not think about needing to slow down or change direction. Unfortunately I think a lot of people figure that if we slow down or turn aside, we will falter in our progress and miss the chance for a technological breakthrough (Iter, for example).

But does technological development have to be tied to economic growth, and in particular, to growth in personal consumption? Do I help make nuclear fusion a reality by driving two hours to the big city and shopping at Toys "R" Us?

If technological development really is dependent on an ever-expanding economy, perhaps the cost is too great. We live in a more-or-less fixed biosphere. The economy keeps growing within it, but only by taking control of more and more of the existing flows of energy and nutrients. And even if there is a breakthrough in energy technology, the resulting economic surge will soon take us up to some new limit of soil fertility, water supplies, ocean buffering, climate sensitivity, human tolerance for crowding. . . or things we haven't thought of yet.

I am rambling on, the exact opposite of an elevator pitch. I have some qualms about pitching my ideas to others, especially since I don't believe I have made a decent effort to change my own lifestyle yet. But if I had to come up with a pitch, it might be something like this:
Can humanity find a way to say, "This much is enough"?

Tim Hodgens said...

Kristen,

Thanks for the support. Yes, we are "all a family on the same small planet."

Toriginal story used to look at how small changes can have unexpectedly big effects (in chaos theory) was captured with what is called "the butterfly effect."

The question was: "can the butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon influence the storm in Cincinatti?" Seems lika an a propos event in this discussion. The power of one is powerful. But as the number increases, the effect increases exponentially in potential. It will not go unchecked, but it will have an effect.

One of the "rules" I follow is: "you can't make one change."

Tim Hodgens said...

Anonymous,

Interesting you should talk about the mums. Today I engaged in a conversation with a man who said that he's noticed that he's seen "flowering on the north side of his PJ rhodendrons (?sp)."

I found it interesting how keen his observations were in relation to the unseasonably high temperatures we are having in this neck of the woods.

I plan to post another entry in the next few days on that conversation. Come back and join in if you wish.

Tim

Tim Hodgens said...

Arcolaura and Proxima,

I'll put up some comments in the next day or so. I love your input.

Tim

Tim Hodgens said...

Arcolaura,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

Re: "I think a lot of people figure that if we slow down or turn aside, we will falter in our progress, and miss the chance for a technological breakthrough."

I often think that one of the games society has conditioned us to continue playing unknowingly, well into adulthood, is Musical Chairs.

As a kid it's fun and involves lots of action. As we get older it gradually dawns on us that it's based on fear of not having part of the limited resources. And that fear makes us move faster and faster. Then at the stage of the "end game" where there are few chairs left, it becomes more fearful and shifts to aggression. That's when people cut more edges, use their elbows more and downright push till they are fighting for their half of the remaining resource = chair.

I will rush no more, Arcolaura.

"This much is enough?" Yes, it presents an opportunity for someone to ask if they want to keep rushing for "that" resource vs shifting towards much better resources.

Maybe for the individual to say and tho slip this into various conversations: "Hold the 'stuff'...but please pass the Quality Time platter."

Tim

Tim Hodgens said...

Proxima,

Interesting about the 5-6 year olds.

I find it's an important to not let the negative / poisonous keep accumulating. Balance, balance. The "world" seems to think, unthinkingly, that actions don't have consequences. Very, very wrong!

Everything has a consequence. Some just have more of a consequence (to paraphrase Orwell's Animal Farm."

Tim

Emme said...

Great post, Tim.

Of course, the problem is larger than us. I think of all of the people who refuse to make changes - because of their sense of entitlement. How can we counter that?