One of the big challenges with communicating climate change is the perception that the impacts will be far into the future or will affect someone else. These perceptions make it very easy to resist action to mitigate potential future impacts because there are a lot more pressing issues closer to home.
A chat about ice cores and oil business
A couple of evenings ago I had an interesting discussion with a friend of my roommate. Let’s call him Pete. Pete, the climate sceptic.
Pete and I had never met before, so we started with the usual introduction, and continued with the usual “Oh, where are you from?” after people notice my foreign accent. This is usually followed by “How did you end up in Oklahoma?” and that is sometimes preceded by “And what do you do here?” This time though, we didn’t make it to the How-I-got-here part.
This project grew out of a week long workshop known as Climate Bootcamp, sponsored by the Pacific North West Climate Science Center. Graduate students, early career scientists, and people working at the science-management interface gathered from around the country to learn about the most recent advancements in climate science, practice ways to communicate climate science with broad audiences, and share expertise.
The National Climate Assessment (NCA) is a report released every four years (last assessment was in 2009) to inform Congress and the President on recent advances in climate change impacts in the United States. However, almost all of the components that go into the production of this report are made available to the public. Some of the components (e.g.
Howdy folks, I’m Zach, I live in Wisconsin, and I like water. I imagine you’ve heard a lot of stereotypes about Wisconsin – we love cheese, we wear cheese on our heads, and we love beer. Well let me just start by saying that these stereotypes are absolutely … 100% true.
A few days ago, I got notice about a special issue in Environmental Communication on “Media Research on Climate Change: Where have we been and where are we heading?” One article in particular caught my attention: “How Grammatical Choice Shapes Media Representations of Climate (Un)certainty” by Bailey et al. The article offers a comparison of U.S.