Although Francis Bacon acknowledged that ‘Knowledge is Power’, Dr Genevieve Guenther contends in this new release that instead, ‘Language is power.’ Language is the vehicle for creating ideologies and belief systems and those who control the narrative, can usually control the level of action and response. A truism that fossil- fuel companies have followed in their efforts to protect their profits over planetary pollution. Language has always been used as a ‘call to arms’ and Dr Guenther believes that this battlefield of what is accepted as the ‘norm’ needs to be rebuilt.
Guenther challenges the repeated talking points language of climate deniers, delayers and doomers and unpacks the shallow rhetoric to expose the reasons for the manipulation of language- often for financial gain. She illustrates how the fossil-fuel propaganda machine learned long ago that repetition of a key message over and over again can become an indoctrination chant. ‘Cost’, ‘Growth’, ‘India and China’, ‘Innovation’ and ‘Resilience’ have become linguistic weapons, where the simple mention of them can be enough to quell climate discussions.
Not any more. Guenther advises on strategies to counteract this polluting propaganda- which only serves itself- to empower those who need to become free from the spell of delay.
She notes, ‘Complicit people and institutions must be called out and encouraged to change. And the fossil-fuel industry must be fought, and the governments that support that industry must be replaced. But none of us will be effective in this if we think of climate change as something “we” are doing. To think of climate change as something that “we” are doing, instead of something we are being prevented from undoing, perpetuates the very ideology of the fossil-fuel economy we’re trying to transform.’ She argues that the ‘guilty collective’ ‘we’ does not exist, but instead is a distorted and dangerous fiction to hide the real actors responsible for climate change. She asks, ‘Who is this “we”? Does it include the nearly 700 million people who live on less than $2.15 a day? Does it include the indigenous peoples who have been living in harmony with their ecosystems for generations? Does it include our children?’
Guenther points the figure at the ‘you’ and ‘they’ robustly in this text and does not shy away from ‘calling out’ the polluting companies for what they are. ‘Since at least the 1970s, coal, oil, and gas companies have known that their products would cause the planet to heat up, undermining the climate that enabled civilization to flourish over the past 10,000 years’. The acknowledgment of the reality of time was landed squarely on by Guenther. By 2100, pathway estimates suggest that globally we could be living in a 2.5-2.8 degree world (compared to the pre-industrial era).
This is the world we are leaving to our children.
A child born today would be 76 years old at the turn of the next century- a world in which living conditions could be unrecognisable for billions. ‘At 1.5°C of warming, about 14 percent of humanity will likely be exposed to life-threatening heat on a regular basis. At 2°C that number more than doubles, rising to 37 percent, or approximately three billion people.’
‘The year 2100 may seem like a long time away, but it isn’t. My own son was born in 2010. His life will play out across this century, when the world will either halt global heating at a manageable level or unravel. All this is no longer about “future generations,” but the families we have in our homes today.
As the IPCC said in its 2023 report: “Any further delay in concerted global action will miss a brief and rapidly closing window to secure a livable future.”
The world can be otherwise.’
We need to use language to create this future imagined world- language which will galvanise people into action, language which will create effective and drastic climate policy, and language which could ultimately save lives around the world.
Being alarmed is an appropriate response
Guenther acknowledges that for too long, we have allowed others to dominate the climate conversations and climate narrative, and that our collective silence has been a marker of group identity and not wanting to stand out from the group. As a result, the fossil-fuel propaganda machine has filled that silence.
‘If you’re not used to doing it, talking about climate change can be very difficult. It can feel risky or socially awkward, as if by bringing up the climate crisis you’re betraying social norms against disturbing other people. Well, you are. But that’s ok. There is a time for speaking out, and that time is now.’
Guenther warns against the fear of the label of the term ‘alarmist’ and powerfully argues that being alarmed at the impacts from human caused climate change, is a normal, appropriate and reasonable response. Taking up this label when it is hurled by propagandists and delayers is both a sane and a safe option.
‘It is perfectly appropriate to be alarmed. Given everything scientists are saying, given everything already happening at warming even below 1.5°C, it is reasonable—indeed, it is sensible—to feel frightened. Fear of what may happen if we do not force policy- and decision-makers to end their support for fossil energy is not a symptom of alarmism. On the contrary. It’s a sign that you are willing to look at the danger head-on and not look away. It is a sign of courage. You should talk about it as such.’
She chronicles how climate scientists themselves need to walk the linguistic tightrope and the dangers of scientific language deliberately being mis-used by bad actors to suggest that there is doubt. Two clear examples are the use of the ‘uncertainty’ and indeed the word ‘confident’, which in scientific evaluation carry a particular meaning different from normal discourse- a gap which fossil-fuel propagandists have driven a wedge through. Scientists, of course, are also communicators and are acutely aware that their evaluations may lead to a paralysis of action if people fall into the mis-understanding that ‘it is too late’ or ‘unsolvable’. It is not the scientific evidence that is in question, it becomes how this information is communicated and presented.
Guenther boldly states, ‘To preserve our safety, the world must stop burning fossil fuels now. Not in our grandchildren’s or even our children’s lifetimes.
Now.
One of the most powerful weapons you have is your voice. End the climate silence that gives fossil-energy interests cover. Talk about the climate crisis as much as you can.’
The chimera of Cost and Growth
Guenther forensically breaks down the twin linguistic charges of ‘cost’ and ‘growth’. She highlights that the biggest financial ‘losers’ are actually the fossil-fuel companies themselves and their profits, which they are trying desperately to defend, at all costs- even to the stage of unlivable conditions for billions- as long as it is ‘them over there’ who are impacted. ‘To meet even a 2°C target, a third of oil reserves, almost half of methane gas reserves, and over 80 percent of current coal reserves must remain in the ground. This unburnable carbon is currently valued as high as $3.3 trillion’.
Guenther then notes the dramatic drop in price of renewable technologies, ‘Onshore wind power is 40 percent cheaper than it was a decade ago. And solar is now the cheapest source of electricity in history.’
The narrative that the economic growth of fossil-fuel companies should be allowed to continue at the expense of living conditions for billions is exposed as the self- protection myth that it is. That somehow those responsible for the situation should be allowed to continue their behaviour and actions is completely unpalatable.
‘The idea that economic growth is itself a climate-change solution, a form of environmental protection that will shield the prosperous from climate devastation. This belief is so bipartisan, so ubiquitous, that it’s not quite accurate to call it propaganda. It’s best understood as a myth.’
A myth that is based on a lack of evidence and facts, but is echoed so repetitively, that it appears to be a crucial element in the lack of change.
‘By how much, and for how long, will economic growth continue if the world continues to burn fossil fuels and emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere? There is surprisingly little research on this seemingly crucial topic.’
If anyone argues that fossil-fuel polluting companies should be allowed to continue the actions that brought us to the danger of planetary tipping points, they need to check their entitled, self-serving, perspective at the door.
Responsibility for emissions
It is impressive how Guenther unpacks the misleading narrative that has promulgated that ‘my country will only act, once we see country X acting.’ China is often the manufactured elephant in the fossil-fuel propaganda, where the fact that China is only responsible for 14% of historical emissions is stridently finger-pointed at. What the accusers chose to ignore is America’s over 25% contribution to historical emissions. For the US not to be a global leader of climate action until China/ India/ Germany acts, is the petulant argument of a child not getting their own way anymore.
‘Yet the United States has remained committed not just to sustaining, but to expanding fossil-fuel production, while blaming the world’s lack of climate progress on India’s and China’s actions.’
China’s world leading renewable programme has allowed it to dominate the market and create economic growth, demonstrating that the two can go hand in hand easily and comfortably. ‘China has become the world’s foremost producer and distributor of clean-energy technology.’
Waiting to see who will ‘take the lead’ on the necessary climate action only freezes global action and it is worth remembering that pollution knows no borders.
Global average temperatures are rising. Global readings of CO2 are rising.
Technological salvation?
Guenther then points to the next step in the polluters’ hand book- having technology as the miraculous saviour, without any behavioural change from fossil-fuel companies. Carbon capture and storage, carbon dioxide removal, direct air capture and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage have now become the new totems of propagandist worship.
‘When you talk about carbon removal, the most important thing is to guard against the false narrative that CDR is a miracle that can decarbonize fossil fuels and restore the climate, if only the world would deploy it wisely. False promises about CDR are propagandistic: they misrepresent reality to sustain an oppressive power—here the power of oil and gas companies—that is harming the world.’
It is a deliberate act to talk about these technologies and describe them as ‘proven’ in order to sustain the life span of fossil-fuel companies- as if business as normal can continue. Worth noting here, as Guenther sharply points out, ‘This technology remains at a nascent stage of development. As of 2023, only around twenty-seven DAC plants existed worldwide, and together, running for a whole year, they captured less than a minute of annual global carbon dioxide emissions.’ So when hearing claims of these technologies as saviours, it is always worth asking how scaled up they can be and what impact they demonstrably have- if those questions can’t be answered by advocates of the fossil-fuel companies, then you know something is amiss.
Transforming the world
The issue is simple. We are being polluted and the polluters want to keep doing this, so they can make more profit.
‘The world must phase out fossil fuels. Governments must wind down the fossil-energy industry, and build up a limited system of carbon removal without their influence, in order to have any chance to achieve net zero, halt global heating, and secure an ongoing future.’
Language can create. Language can empower. Language can change the world.
It is past time that the linguistic narrative is reclaimed by those who want to create a liveable world for people living now and for those still to inherit the world of our actions. ‘But always remember: this is a battle against the forces of destruction to save something of this achingly beautiful, utterly miraculous world for our children. The fossil-fuel industry and the governments that support it are literally colluding to stop you from transforming the world. They are trying to maintain the fossil-fuel economy. As for me—and as for you, here with me at the end of this journey, this book—I will say: we are against them, and we are going to fight for dear life.’
Dedicated to the future
It is no sin to have tried and failed, but it is a terrible sin to not even try- knowing what we know now. The dedication to this book could easily be missed, but for me, it contains the heart of the linguistic battle that lies in front of us. We are building a world for the future through our words, ideologies, policies and actions. What that world looks like by 2100 is up to us all.
‘The Language of Climate Politics’ is dedicated to our beautiful son, Teddy, who is the joy of my life.
With all my heart, I hope this book helps create the future that he, and every child in the world, deserves, but no matter what happens I want him to know that his mother tried.’
Climate Thoughts with Brian 