“Climate lessons” and co2 asceticism

Interview with the cultural scientist Nico Stehr to religious elements in the climate debate

Nico Stehr is a professor at Zeppelin University in Friedrichshafen on Lake Constance. Together with the meteorologist Hans von Storch he wrote the essay "Insights into the feasible", in which he shows blind stains in the climate bank.

In your article "Insights into the feasible" you describe if I understood you correctly, the possibility, individually by waiving luxury and convenience to rescue the climate "contribute" as a quasi-religious act, which allows the "climate-essiste" individual, through the loveable CO2 asceticism, to demonstrate its own moral high quality against the other, ie the environmental witness, and have been added.
Professor Stehr: The public appeals of climate researchers, politicians and environmental organizations in Germany and other countries are all aiming for only one climate change: Under Climate Protection is the limitation of the outboat of greenhouse gases. As a result, it does not surprise that individual or small groups, impressed by these appeals, in fact stranded to reduce their CO2 imprint and ‘virtuous’ to behave – for example by living in a low-energy house or cycling with the bike contribute to climate protection. I am the conviction that climate protection can not be understood as one-sided. It is less about the protection of the climate before society, but I believe that one must also become increasingly serious thoughts on climate protection within the meaning of the provision, ie the protection of society before the climate change,. Also the goods of virtuous behavior. You write that Al Gore "tabooed" climate change provision and instead waiver sermon. This is reminiscent of setting the pope to sexuality and AIDS. There are structural similarities here?
Professor Stehr: No, not necessarily. But Al Gore has not only occurred in recently that one should emphasize the reaction of society to climate change, especially the reduction of greenhouse gases. In contrast, precaution or even worse will be a term that is particularly tabuised – as a kind of ‘challenge’ of nature understood, which is why one should concentrate as much as possible on the problem of reducing greenhouse gases. That’s at least his position. This attitude has never changed Gore in the last two decades and also emphasized in the youngest time after being more intensively facing the topic of global climate change, again. The public debate is not presented as an alternative to CO2 avoidance, but almost exclusively so-called "Climate kept" How do you explain that such persons are prefixed as counterpart to the CO2 avoiders to words?
Professor Stehr: The public discussion with the so-called climate controlers, which question the anthropogenic climate change in terms of principle or do not accept the causes of climate change referred to by climate research, is partly due to the climate assistants themselves. In the public there is now a consensus that is more comprehensive than that within climate research. Namely, that we have to do it with changes in the natural climate, for which the behavior of people is responsible. The medial conflicts with the skeptics are partly co-determined by the climate assists, such as Stefan Rahmstorf, or even caused. In my opinion, it is not worth it, in view of the extensive surveying in the public political space, the consensus of climate research and what is really necessary to social and politically necessary in the coming years, with the skeptics. In view of the wearing nature, one should become increasingly thought about paths and measures that have the handling of these changes in mind: So climate protection as a protection of society before changing. Especially as such precautionary and adding measures immediately grab and not, as the reduction of greenhouse gases (if they should be successful), will be noticeable in decades or end of this century. What do you consider from funds for risk bonding the loads of climate change?
Professor Stehr: The successful precautionary and adding measures cost natural. For this resources, and the consequences of climate change will be serious in societies, which can not necessarily affect these measures. Accordingly, it will be necessary that the developed companies, which are now responsible for the majority of greenhouse gases, is to deal with such regions in Africa or Asia, which are unable to adapt to changes from their own power. If it is about, then such funds are politically and morally necessary. The danger of climate-reduced weather events such as heavy rain, excessive floods and heat periods, is already very rough in many regions of this world. Just think of New Orleans. The vulnerability of our livelihoods is increasing in the mabe in which the growing world-evolution of worlds settles in regions, which are danger, in the growing population groups are neginegalized and victims of the political economy so-called Natural disasters become.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.