The last time Californian climate scientist Peter Kalmus was on an airplane was in 2012: He says it made him feel physically sick and like he was “stealing” from his children’s future, and vowed never to fly again.
US President Donald Trump’s administration has made no secret of its disdain for climate science, but that has not stopped some ordinary Americans from finding ways to drastically reduce their own carbon footprints, hoping to persuade others through their examples.
Kalmus was pursuing his post-doctoral studies in 2009 when he became increasingly concerned about the prospect of climate breakdown, tipping points such as the thawing of the Earth’s permafrost triggering runaway global warming that wreaks havoc on weather systems.
“I was shaking people by the lapels, posting screeds on Facebook, not really getting anywhere,” he told reporters in an interview from his home in a Los Angeles suburb. “Eventually, it dawned on me that I should maybe bring my actions into alignment with my beliefs.”
Drawing upon his expertise as a scientist, he calculated the emissions associated with various aspects of his life and was surprised to learn that electricity consumption made up a tiny portion compared with air travel.
“So I started focusing on flying less. I tried being a vegetarian for a month and I liked it better,” he said, quickly realizing that, rather than feeling like sacrifices, the changes he made were improving his sense of well-being.
Some people, like Tarek Maassarani, take their philosophy to what others might see as extremes.
The bespectacled 40-year-old with long blond hair does paid consulting for the US Institute of Peace and is an adjunct professor at two Washington universities, but performs the bulk of his work in the volunteer sector.
Two years ago, he moved out of a cohousing community in a Washington suburb when his two sons shifted to Utah to live with their mother and has been living at friends’ houses ever since.
Apart from relying almost exclusively on his bicycle for transport, including deep into winter, Maassarani is focused on avoiding buying new products because of the energy-intensive nature of their production.
He instead depends on hand-me-downs, “and I sort of extend the life of things well past what most people would do,” finding ways to keep tatty decade-old cell phones and laptops going, he said.
He gets much of his food from dumpster diving or from the leftovers at buffets from conferences he attends, describing himself as a “supply-and-demand vegan.”
What this means is “I don’t buy any animal products, I try not to create any demand signal for animal products,” he said.
At the same time, if meat is all that is left when he rummages through garbage or approaches buffets (he makes it a point to go last), he will consume it.
Maassarani is quick to admit that his case falls well outside what most people could envisage and is made possible only by living in what he calls a “consumption excessive society.”
“I’m aware of course that if the excesses weren’t there, it wouldn’t work, but then again the problem wouldn’t be there,” he said.
Others, like Elizabeth Hogan, lead more conventional lives, but are still reorienting themselves toward more carbon neutrality.
Hogan, who works as a consultant on mitigating the impact of ocean plastics on marine life, outfitted solar panels on the roof of her home in Washington.
She and her husband estimate these will account for 80 percent of their energy needs, with the balance coming from wind power bought at a premium from their electric provider.
“Both of our careers are very planet-oriented, so it’s kind of our whole lives, but I am certainly not claiming to be perfect,” she said, conceding that they both fly extensively for work.
Her love of cheese means she is a vegetarian, rather than a vegan, but sources her dairy from a nearby local farm that cleans and reuses glass bottles returned to them.
How impactful can individual action be in the absence of systemic changes from the top? After all, the US’ current climate commitments are rated by Climate Action Tracker as “critically insufficient” in meeting the goal of limiting long-term warming to 2°C above pre-industrial levels.
Kalmus, who has written a book on his experiences, said meeting critical goals to avert disaster will require a “rapid cultural transformation,” and acts of individual defiance help achieve that.
“The reason everyone’s waking up is because there’s been this massive grassroots shift over the last year or two,” he said, citing the global youth movement for climate action.
One of the many ways people can contribute to that movement is by telling others about steps they have taken, “then when you say: ‘This is really urgent,’ your words are backed by the truth of your actions,” Kalmus said.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing