During that moment, in front of the sink, I made the connection with Steven Running’s theory of ‘Climate Grief’. And realized the professor was probably right. I am grieving life as I knew it, before I heard of global warming. Care-free times marked by abundance, convenience, and the freedom to do as I pleased. Those times are over, and I have a hard time adjusting. Here, from Dr. Running’s web site, are excerpts from his paper on ‘5 Stages of Climate Grief’:
I recently took a fresh look at the widely recognized concepts on the “5 stages of grief” that Elizabeth Kubler-Ross defined back in the 1970s to summarize how people deal differentially with shocking news, such as being informed that they have terminal cancer. It seems that these stages of grief provide a very good analogy to how people are now reacting to the global warming topic, so I have formulated my “5 Stages of Climate Grief” as follows.
The first stage DENIAL, are the people that simply do not believe the science that the earth is warming, or secondarily that humans are the cause. Despite seeing a 50 year record of global atmospheric CO2 rising every year since 1957, and global air temperatures of the last dozen years in a row being the warmest in a millennium, they dismiss these trends as natural variability. These people see no reason to disturb the status quo. Most people rightfully started at this stage, until presented with convincing evidence. That convincing scientific evidence recently summarized in the 4th IPCC report has, according to opinion polls, dramatically reduced the number of people in Stage 1.
Many people jump directly from DENIAL to Stage 4, but for others, the next Stage 2, is ANGER, and is manifested by wild comments like “I refuse to live in a tree house in the dark and eat nuts and berries”. Because of my public speeches, I receive my share of hate mail, including being labeled a “bloviating idiot”, from individuals that clearly are incensed at the thought of substantially altering their lifestyle. My local newspaper has frequent letters to the editor from people angry to the point of irrational statements hinting darkly about the potential end of modern civilization.
Stage 3 is BARGAINING. When they reach this stage many people (such as self-righteous radio talk show hosts) who used to be very public deniers of global warming begin making statements that warming won’t be all that bad, it might make a place like Montana “more comfortable”. It is true that the building heating requirements for my hometown Missoula have decreased by about 9% since 1950 due to milder winters. At this stage people grasp for the positive news about climate change, such as longer growing seasons, and scrupulously ignore the negative news, more intense droughts and wildfires, and no glaciers in Glacier National Park by 2030. Most importantly, at this stage people are still not willing to change lifestyle, or explore energy solutions that are less carbon intensive. They seem willing to ride out this grand global experiment and cope with whatever happens.
Many people at my lectures have now moved to Stage 4, DEPRESSION. They consider the acceleration of annual greenhouse gas emissions, the unprecedented speed of warming, and the necessity for international cooperation for a solution, and see the task ahead to be impossible. On my tougher days I confess to sinking back to Stage 4 myself.
The final stage ACCEPTANCE, are people that acknowledge the scientific facts calmly, and are now exploring solutions to drive down greenhouse gas emissions dramatically, and find non-carbon intensive energy sources. Two factors are important in moving the public from DEPRESSION to this ACCEPTANCE stage. First are viable alternatives to show that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is possible without the end of modern civilization. It is very heartening to see wind turbines, LED lighting, thin film solar and hybrid cars on the market right now, not some vague future hope. Second is visionary national leadership, a “Marshall Plan” level of national focus and commitment, so everyone is contributing, and the lifestyle changes needed are broadly shared, in fact becoming a new norm. Progress on that front has not been good so far. An obvious flaw in this analogy is that many people are simply ignoring the global warming issue, a detachment they cannot achieve when they are personally facing cancer.
It is both welcome and important that some leaders of the business community, from DuPont, General Electric and WalMart down to the smallest entrepreneurial startups are now strongly pursuing goals of de-carbonized energy, improved efficiency and conservation. Large social changes always unavoidably breed pain for some and new opportunity for others, depending much on how rapidly people react to new realities. We really need most of our political, business and intellectual leaders to reach Stage 5 ACCEPTANCE in order to move forward, as a nation, and as a global citizenry. There is no guarantee that we can successfully stop global warming, but doing nothing given our present knowledge is unconscionable. How otherwise can we look into our grandchildren’s eyes?
Steven Running’s contribution to the understanding of the psychology of climate change needs to be brought to the attention of a wider audience, as it may help rally some of the deniers and skeptics. My only criticism deals with his presentation of grief as a linear process. While that makes for good logic, I don’t believe it represents reality. I, for example move back and forth between anger, depression, and acceptance, and often times, may experience all three feelings concurrently.
La Marguerite 
In the interest of objectivity, here is copy of email I just received from Marc Morano in response to the above article:
‘La Marguerite,
You wrote: “Steven Running’s contribution to the understanding of the psychology of climate change needs to be brought to the attention of a wider audience.” I agree. We all need comic relief from time to time and Running’s 5 stages of ‘Climate Grief’ provides endless humor.
Please tell the whole story. Please read report below and reconsider your man-made climate change views.
Thanks
Marc Morano
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport
(Marc Morano is Communications Director for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) Inhofe Staff)
First, I think it’s great to be able to sense and share feelings like this. We humans (including me) should take more time to be in touch with our sometimes mixed feelings.
Second, I think it’s helpful to understand that, although we might grieve the loss or adjustment of some aspects of daily life as we’ve come to know them, many humans before us had to be sensitive about their use of many, many, many things. Of the 100 billion humans (or whatever the number) who have ever lived, how many have had clean running water, in their bathrooms, to let flow, while brushing their teeth? So, we think we are grieving the loss of life’s conveniences, and that is a loss of some sort, but it helps to remember that many of those conveniences are recent conveniences, and “learned” conveniences, and many of them aren’t really necessary, and many of them may not even be real “conveniences” when you really think about the baggage that comes with them.
As one example, I assume that early American Indians had to be very aware of their use of seeds, water, food, and so forth in many instances.
So, in a sense, when we have to be more aware, or conscious, of some of our habits (until they change and the new ones become natural to us), and when we grieve at having to change some of them, it might help to think of this process as RE-learning some of the earlier, natural aspects of being human. That is, we may be losing some of our recent excesses, but we aren’t really losing human basics. Actually, we are perhaps re-learning some human basics that 90 billion of our ancestors understood as “life.”
If you’ll excuse me now, I have to go get my Vente Nonfat Latte down the street.
i suppose i must thank Marc Morano for the revealing statements on the above link.
Thank you for the overwhelming scope of public denial.
Thank you for the kaleidoscope of scientific insecurity.
Thanks again for the open view of terrain to be examined.
too sad to be angry, i suffer from blunt trauma to my belief system. It is with utter disbelief that i approach the depth of irresponsible assumptions in the Morano report.
Designing laws toward solutions to save resources from run-away mass consumption is crucial at this time… implementing sustainable energy systems is necessary, focus, focus!. while entire papers are written to discredit sources of evidence of climate damage, lobbyists are busy-busy, sneaking loop-holes in the political arena for corporations and politicians to profit from public confusion.
i see the wall, i feel the wall; it may take a while to find the breach of reason within willful ignorance, but we all will.
It’s not “objective” to present lunacy. If I were writing an article about satellites orbiting the Earth, I would not present an article from the Flat Earth Society “in the interest of objectivity”.
Now, as to Running’s article. As I understand EKR’s stages of grief, they’re not presented as linear, either. It’s just a rough sketch of what people go through.
I think the analogy falls down a bit. EKR’s grieving stages were for things forever lost, things we could do nothing about. If someone has died, they’ve died and that’s that; this is why “acceptance” is such an important thing for people, you cannot live if you cannot deal with reality.
This is why so many people get stuck in “bargaining” when dealing with losses that are not obviously final, permanent and inevitable, like getting divorced or losing your job. Climate change is something which is not obviously final or permanent, or inevitable. So the “acceptance” part of EKR’s five stages isn’t a perfect match.
This is not to criticise Running’s model as such, but rather to note that it means people have difficult handling the issue; “acceptance” obviously doesn’t work.
Your grief is misguided, the earth is headed into a cooling trend set to peak around 2050. The sun induced warming cycle from the 1980’s to the late 1990’s is drawing to a close. Don’t worry, you’ll be fine.
Check this out too, it should also calm your nerves:
http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=13834&t=Scientist+says+Earth+could+soon+face+new+Ice+Age
http://climateclock350.blogspot.com
My little text only climate clock. updated every 10,000 years! Kidding1
LaM,
Great post! I had never heard of Dr Running or his concept of Climate Grief. what a great way to spread the message, yes. Thanks for this, and you are right, Running deserve a bigger audience. Maybe you can mention his name one day on the Dot Earth blog and point readers there to Running’s website.
Very interesting conept.
NOTE: “During that moment, in front of the sink, I made the connection with Steven Running’s theory of ‘Climate Grief’. And realized the professor was probably right. I am grieving life as I knew it, before I heard of global warming. ****Care-free times marked by abundance, convenience, and the freedom to do as I pleased. Those times are over, and I have a hard time adjusting.***** ”
EXACTLY. A very important message!
Thanks all for a most lively discussion.
I believe it is important all voices be heard. To use one of Nadine’s words, part of examining the psychology of green, is to experience firsthand the ‘kaleidoscope’ of opinions. I may not agree with Marc Morano and the ‘minority’ he represents, but I welcome his comments.
Jeff, I agree with your point on an intellectual level. The truth of my emotions speaks another story, however, and one that matches Steven Running’s interpretation perfectly.
Kyle, I beg to differ with your understanding of grief. There are many types of deaths, not all as final as physical death. I know from experience that divorce does feel like a death, complete with all five stages . . . And I do believe the same applies to global warming, and the ‘death’ of an era we had grown used to.
Danny, thanks for reminding us about the clock ticking . . .
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/earthfrenzyradio/blog/2008/01/16/Climate-Change-A-Blueprint-for-Survival
LaM
If you or anyone here is interested on a rainy day, here is live interview i just did with radio station on New Orleans on global warming issues and my project of polar cities…..
— danny
Hi again! Great post – as usual. They are always so indepth and I really enjoy them.
I want to pick myself up a “toilet sink” from Sinkpositive.com. I first saw them on blogs and read about Sadhu Johnston, the Dept of Environment head for the City of Chicago.
I, too, cringe when I hear that running faucet just flowing and flowing.
-Jason
http://www.screamtobegreen.com
I have to check that Sinkpositive web site!
[…] a combination of apathy, frustration, guilt, resentment, some of it that can be linked to Steven Running theory of Climate Grief […]
Poeple don’t want to hear the truths about global warming is not right.
Actual politicians don’t want to destabilise the economy of the planet by creating a “Global Panic” on earth announcing total change of the world map.
What is the oceans would raise more than 10 meters in just 15 years ?
Billions of humanbeings would be homeless, millions would die starving,…what a big mess isn’t ?!
That’s why the actual “leaders” of the planet prefer to make pressure on the media so they won’t talk about inconveniant thruths…!!!
It has always been like this during centuries, politicians have transformed and deformed the reality, isn’it ?
Suat G
[…] 7, 2008 by lamarguerite The bathroom sink seems to be the most propitious place for my ah-ah moments. This morning, as I washed my face, the realization of the water running a bit too long threw me […]
[…] the five stages of climate grief long before me, including a Nobel laureate, a widely published California social worker and a blogger less than half my […]