Essay by Eric Worrall
“Barriers” to climate action include pressure to travel, and a lack of financial incentives to embrace low carbon approaches to research.
Climate change: university researchers feel powerless to take action – survey
Published: January 31, 2024 2.38am AEDT
Briony Latter
Researcher in Climate Change Engagement, Cardiff UniversityUniversity researchers in the UK, across all disciplines and at all career stages, are struggling to take action against climate change despite wanting to do so.
Many academics worry about climate change but face several barriers to changing their habits, including the pressure to travel. In one case, a climate researcher conducting field work abroad wanted to use slower and more sustainable forms of transport rather than fly back to work at a research institute in Germany. He was fired.
…
The majority think their university does not give them enough information about how to conduct research in a sustainable way. Funding processes, such as applications for grants to carry out research, do not incentivise low-carbon approaches either, they say.
…
Different barriers to climate action appear at different career stages. Early career researchers in particular lack institutional support (such as job security or the encouragement to act), are involved in few projects about climate change (whether as part of research or outside of their roles) and feel uncertain about what they can do.
Mid-career researchers were more likely to complain of a high workload thwarting their ambitions. When asked if senior researchers should have a high responsibility for addressing climate change in universities, senior researchers themselves were more likely to think so than early and mid-career researchers, suggesting that they recognise their own potential role.
…
Read more: https://theconversation.com/climate-change-university-researchers-feel-powerless-to-take-action-survey-221830
Why are academics yielding to pressure to travel frequently, if every flight brings us closer to a lethal climate tipping point? Why is keeping their job so important, if the world is on the brink of climate catastrophe?
Why do university academics want OTHERS to spoon-feed them information on how they can be more carbon neutral? Why can’t they take 5 minutes to look up low carbon lifestyle and professional alternatives for themselves?
If this pathetic effort is all the energy and concern university academics can muster to address the alleged climate crisis, there is no reason for the rest of us care.
These are supposedly the “smart people”. The science is settled! We’re doomed. Quit your pointless academic job, throw some soup on some icon of western civilization, and go on a hunger strike. Or something.
Maybe stop breathing
Block the roads. Do it at night, alone, wearing all black, lying crossways, and leaving a demanding note about going vegetarian.
And take your friends along.
“The majority think their university does not give them enough information about how to conduct research in a sustainable way. Funding processes, such as applications for grants to carry out research, do not incentivise low-carbon approaches either, they say.”
Good professors (or true educators) throughout the ages have taught students HOW to think, rather than WHAT to think.
Now, not only do the professors fail to teach how to think, they themselves want to be told what to think!
Pathetic.
Exactly. University Professors are supposed to be the smartest of the smartest, and these boobies are waiting to be told what to do by the administrators?
They are convinced that CO2 will be the end of life as we know it. They are so concerned that they are going to wait around until someone tells them what to do.
Decisions, decisions, decisions. They are wearing us down to the point of not making any.
“Briony Latter Researcher in Climate Change Engagement”
The job title says it all. That’s what you get when you relabel kindergarten a “university”.
Actually, a research student in Psychology.. ….so… all you can expect is nonsense.
“Smart people”
68% of a population has an IQ between 85 -115. 32% of US citizens 25-64yrs old have at least one grad degree. In the 1950s below10% of the pop had a grad degree. When I went to university, over 400 enrolled in engineering (Sputnik ‘I’ had been launched – a big attraction). Most of these students didn’t complete 1st year and 3yrs later fewer than 80 graduated. Many of the drop outs went on to ‘arts’ faculties.
It must be said that engineering had high entrance standards then, too, so the drop-outs were probably the cream of the crop in, say, sociology and the like that they shifted too. There is little chance that those with less than 115 IQ could have successfully gained entrance.
Today, with 32% (of 25 to 64yr olds) having one or more degrees, chances are good there would be a disturbing number with IQs below 100! This is how one gets a consensus! This is how one gets throngs who will lie, invent data, and engage in geometry, intimidation, gate-keep dissenting scholarship from publishing, threaten and hound out editors who publish dissenting views, cancel individuals out of academic positions (Susan Crockford, the one person army fighting the Polar Bear ‘Expert’ Group’s baseless consensus, lost her position at The University of Victoria in B.C. after Michael Mann was engaged by the P.B Experts to destroy her professional status).
These people aren’t smart!
GOONERY NOT Geometry
The geometry had me guessing!
Real climate physics involves a lot of geometry.
I interpreted it to mean mean twisting logic into strange shapes!
I dunno.
I’m more inclined to blame students getting participation awards from kindergarten through high school.
They’re indoctrinated to believe they receive awards just for existing and bonuses for showing up.
Universities has furthered this farce by dropping standards and worse rewarding students who design weak research with dubious, but always stop the presses findings.
Especially in the pseudo-sciences.
“These people aren’t smart!”
Which is why when I say “smart people”, it’s with the highest degree of sarcasm.
Neither are the rest of us really. If a real crisis comes along, one that requires the best and the brightest to come together and solve it, then we’re screwed. We should have resisted the efforts to dumb down the schools and universities as it wasn’t fair to the low-achievers, we should’ve resisted the efforts to let everybody have a university education, even the really mediocre minds. We should have kept the university places for the top minds and kept the technical colleges going for those suited to the hands-on, technical courses. But we didn’t and now where are we? Start hoping we never have a Carrington event, big asteroid collision or somesuch until we can get this mess sorted.
Different economic conditions would make comparisons impossible – subsidies, grants, necessity for a degree even in some entry level positions, lack of good paying factory jobs, etc.
“Why are academics yielding to pressure to travel frequently, if every flight brings us closer to a lethal climate tipping point?”
Because they are hypocrites. But seriously, you knew that all along…….
Either that, or like John Kerry, they are really just too important not to travel to important meetings. It’s not like we have Zoom capabilities or anything like that.
“ if every flight brings us closer to a lethal climate tipping point?””
Because most of them actually realise it is all a load of massively exaggerated and empty virtue-seeking nonsense.
They’re ALL hypocrites, and they always have an excuse. And they are perfect examples of why no-one is willing to give up fossil fuels – life without them would be rather grim.
As it is less science than it is performance art, it doesn’t matter if it plays in Podunk. Ya gotta wow ’em on Broadway to make it big.
And this is the real hubris of the alarmist crowd. They need incentives to be sustainable while they push for industrial policy that move domestic production and the blue collar jobs it supports to Asia. That production in Asia generates just as much CO2 as production in the west before transportation halfway around gets figured in.
CO2 emissions don’t change, The Kieling curve doesn’t change.But western politicians take pride in their leadership to move blue collar work offshore where things tangible are made and see virtue in their domestic accounting of CO2 reductions while ignoring expanded emissions elsewhere.
So much of their though process is “publish or parish”. They are trained to publish and submit grand applications or they will languish and be sidelined at best or be let go at worst. When their desire is to get a tenured position so they can laze around for the rest of their career, they must play the game. So they must have “research” to publish and that takes travel and energy. Plus you have to present your findings at conferences, so more travel. QED. They cannot save the climate and have a “meaningful” existence within an academic setting at the same time.
“or parish”….
well , tis a religion ….
😉
The majority think their university does not give them enough information about how to conduct research in a sustainable way. Funding processes, such as applications for grants to carry out research, do not incentivise low-carbon approaches either, they say.
Conducting research in a sustainable way? Not incentivising low carbon approaches? What are they talking about? Low wattage lighting in the laboratories? Powering the labs with wind turbines? Paying researchers to work outdoors in tents? Does working in a lab or office connected to a hydrocarbon-powered electrical grid somehow invalidate the research? Should solar-powered cell phone chargers be a requirement for climate researchers?
Miss Briony Latter
(she)
Research Student
School of Psychology
I am a researcher at the Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations (CAST) and am also part of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. My work is people-focused and looks at society and climate change. Prior to climate change research, I worked in the creative industry as a photographer and retoucher, then in communications.
I mainly work on climate change communication and public engagement, and have worked on several research projects with a creative focus. I am currently undertaking PhD research focused on university and research culture and practices in the context of climate change, and am also a research consultant.
That sounds familiar. https://www.colorado.edu/asmagazine/2024/01/18/professors-give-wings-climate-cooling-action
The picture at the top of your link has got to be the strangest academic photo I’ve ever seen. 🙂
Now I’m going to have to go look.
Yep, you’re right, a very strange academic photo.
If not for the guys wearing shirt and trousers rather than a dress…
… could be mistaken for primary school teachers.
I can’t get past their confusion between “affect” and “effect.” Maybe artists shouldn’t be science communicators.
Beth Osnes, a CU Boulder professor of theatre, designed “The Butterfly Affect” with Sarah Fahmy as an immersive experience that facilitates hope and change.
You know she’s right; I’ve often looked to the butterfly as a source of hope, unless I’m spraying pesticide on a caterpillar. It’s theatre alright, comedy theatre.
How does one get the moniker — “professor of theatre”??
How does one get the moniker – “professor of theatre?”
Professing to be one get’s you half-way, then you just need some useful idjits with plenty of money.
You actually got me to click on a link. Thanks for the first chuckle of the day.
That group is going to regret that picture for the rest of their lives if we ever get back to normal.
Is anyone allowed to ask what the ultimate benefit of her research will be?
Money in her pocket and a great big slap on the back.
She probably hopes to be the next Naomi Ora-whetever.
She is probably already working with one or more law offices for the next round of lawsuits against EXXON.
Shel’s a “community organizer” like B. Hussein Obama once was. And look where he ended up!
Just a question. Do you ever give consideration to contrarian opinions or conclusions and give equal effort towards the evaluation of their statements?
They can start by asking themselves what Climate Crisis?
Meanwhile the planet loves all that additional CO2 as NASA showed 8 years ago:
Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds
LINK
She is a child of our times: A victim of the very (Government) machine she’s working for:
i.e. Lonely, chronically depressed and riddled with guilt
It’s where Government exactly wants us all, we’ll do anything to make the beatings stop.
They won’t.
“Lonely, chronically depressed and riddled with guilt”
And frankly, my dear, we just don’t give a damn !!
They should be “Gone With the Wind!”
Well, we wouldn’t care if these same people weren’t part of Big Climate Alarm who want to order every aspect of our lives, even to the Malthusian level. They are anti-humanity while aggrandizing themselves and pursuing the good life. They fancy themselves as the philosopher kings, as us as hoi polloi to be managed like chattel. They are not just incorrect or misguided. They are evil.
They should go full Green, and only wear organic and vegan burlap robes, and renounce technology entirely. Being a hermit is the only lifestyle consistent with their beliefs (or at least what they urge others to do).
Just lazy.
I traveled a lot – conferences, program meeting, field tests, bailing out primes. After a while it’s a drag. I’ve been retired for 8 years, and I still have dreams (nightmare I guess) of endless loops of hotel/restaurant/shuttle bus/flight/shuttle bus/… – repeat loop for hours.
So, write a darn paper, get on a plane, and stop complaining!
Climate change engagement? The climate is engaged to whom or to what?
What are the proper pronouns?
I have no respect for these worthless POS. Every one of them complaining about this should immediately be fired and made to work at a sewage treatment plant or garbage dump or recycling center or farm or any number of other critical jobs. We can do without these academics but not these critical employees.
These guys are like Maynard G. Krebs–WORK!
a lack of financial incentives
This sort of excuse strongly suggests that they don’t truly believe it. If they did, financial incentives wouldn’t be needed.
“Barriers” to climate action include pressure to travel, and….”
…earning a living.
Ain’t life a b___h
They don’t have to use gas and electricity, there’s plenty of wind and Sun and they’re free. / sarc
“ pressure to travel,”
Paid for by someone else, of course. !
Quite the whine. Sad that she wrote it seriously rather than as parody.
They sound like most sinecured academics, in that they continue their quest to do less work and receive more pay.
anyone else getting “domain not found” messages?
Got them for a while, then it came back.
Yeah me too.
Yeah, I got it using a Windows computer and switched over to an Ipad and got the same thing.
“Domain not found”
Revenge of Michael Mann?
Last time it came back on, it had to log in..
Maybe its a wordpress issue ?
I had to log in, too. After that “Domain not found” happened, WUWT now seems to load the page faster.
That’s my temporary impression anyway. For me, in the past when I would open a new tab, it would take something like 15 seconds to load the page, but these last few pages load up almost immediately.
I hope that’s permanent. 🙂
Just got a weird message..
” WUWT is re-directing you too many times”
Then had to log in again when it eventually came up..
Maybe a major DNS server is down somewhere.
I got that one as well earlier today. Weird. Somethings on the fritz somewhere.
DNS Propagation Checker – Global DNS Testing Tool (whatsmydns.net)
Seems ok now, but when I checked a few minutes ago there were several red crosses.
Briony is a research student in Psychology.
Why even give her the time of day !!
So just what ‘research’ are they doing at this late date? I thought the science is settled? WTF?!
They are researching how to brainwash skeptics better. They seem to think butterfly suits are a way to do this.
You can start by buying your clothes and household items at thrift stores — something thrifty conservatives have long mastered.
These overpaid, underemployed academics are experts at talking a good game about taking action against the ” climate crisis” as long as it’s someone else who takes the action because they’re certainly not going to compromise their lifestyles and give up any of the perquisites that come with their jobs. That’s the reason that their doomsday proclamations are inevitably greeted with derision by the rest of the population. They have much in common with politicians who advocate higher taxes and more laws and restrictions that supposedly will save the planet. Except chances are excellent that if they were to reveal their investment portfolios they’d be loaded up with all sorts of green equities that depend heavily on massive government subsidies supported largely by by taxpayers.
In one case, a climate researcher conducting field work abroad wanted to use slower and more sustainable forms of transport rather than fly back to work at a research institute in Germany. He was fired.
That’s because of the fat salary you earn and the number of days you want to faff about compared to the flight cost and time but hey it aint your hard earned eh taxeater?
He has a long history of civil disobedience as part of green protests. I think Gianluca Grimalda’s employer just got fed up with him prioritising activism over his work and engineered the ‘fly home’ situation to get rid of him. Even his own father thinks his activism got him fired.
It’s “settled science” anyway so cutting out all redundant research would be a logical first step to reducing the “carbon footprints” of the institutions.
Why do “university academics” who think this way call themselves academics? Didn’t that term once refer to people who could think for themselves, had integrity, and only sought to find the unbiased truth of how the world works?
Not only was the chap who refused to fly rightfully fired, but this airhead writing the article should be relegated to wearing a Starbucks apron or a MacDonald’s hat! She has no clue on how to do 20 minutes of digging and simple maths to have a look at the CO2 emission of various modes of transport. I present my findings as follows:
JetA produces 3.106 lbs of CO2 per lb of fuel burned, as does diesel and let’s say bunker oil for a ship is the same although it is likely higher.
Gasoline or Petrol produces 3.088 lbs CO2/lb of fuel burned.
Modes of transport: (listed worst to best regards “evil” CO2 emissions, per passenger mile)
Avg cargo ship – 100 pax; 17,000 lbs fuel/hr; 25 mph; yields 21.12 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
Cruise ship – 2500 pax; 17,000 lbs fuel/hr; 25 mph; yields 0.845 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
Human Walking – 1200 miles per year; 530 lbs CO2 yields 0.442 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
Commuter train – 150 pax; 44 lbs CO2/mile; 0.293 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
Airbus A330-300 – 275 pax; 14300 lbs fuel/hr; 600 mph; yields 0.269 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
Boeing 747-8 – 470 pax; 21000 lbs fuel/hr; 600 mph; yields 0.231 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
mid sized car – 4 pax; 0.277 lbs fuel per mile; yields 0.214 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
Boeing 777er – 375 pax; 14000 lbs fuel/hr; 600 mph; yields 0.193 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
Boeing 737-800 – 160 pax; 5575 lbs fuel/hr; 600 mph; yields 0.180 lbs CO2 per passenger mile.
So you see, flying to do so called research can be one of the lowest “carbon footprint” of modes of transport. Thus numbskull cannot even do simple digging of published details, or perform simple math. Mind you I did use basic chemistry mass/molar balance to derive the CO2 per unit fuel consumed – but even that is simple to look up even for an arts idiot or worse some sociopath, oops I mean sociologist….
Besides all of that, CO2 is not some evil, apocalyptic compound, it is the essence of Life, and to be aligned against it is to be anti life, and a serious misanthrope!
The one who refused to fly was, supposedly, an economist as well as a green activist – one would’ve hoped he could add the numbers but apparently not.
How smart can these “researchers” be? Not one of them appears to have questioned how their individual contribution to CO2 production stacks up. They think they are saving the world…
Not a clue that they are less than insignificant compared to 12 gigatons a year, increasing at .4 to .5 gigatons per year from China.
Poor researchers if they can’t find the answers for themselves.
They are SOOOOO concerned about global warming, that they have to be bribed in order to use low carbon research techniques?
Really?