Letter: Climate complacency

From Ben Haller, McGill University

I am perplexed by your attempt to put a spin on the environmental problems we face. Johan Rockström and colleagues report that we have already exceeded the limits of sustainability in three areas and are approaching limits in most others (27 February, p 31). How on earth is this the “breath of fresh air” your editorial describes?

I can only imagine that your positive take comes from comparing environmental problems with ozone depletion. That, however, should not be any cause for optimism. Ozone depletion was caused by a few easily identified and easily replaced chemicals; was easy to understand; and did not have powerful lobbies such as the oil industry blocking action.

Tackling climate change, on the other hand, will require huge changes, is extremely difficult to understand, and has some of the most powerful lobbies in the world determined to maintain the status quo.

We are already over the brink for carbon dioxide emissions and, apart from the scientific community, we are nowhere near even reaching consensus that there is a problem. We are obviously not responding to climate change in the way that we responded to ozone depletion.

In your article you state that Rockström’s findings show that we still have some “breathing space”, and scold environmentalists who seek to “minimise all human impacts on the planet”. But we have no breathing space and we are rapidly making the problem worse. You state that there is “no room for complacency”, but your attitude sure sounds like complacency to me.

Montreal, Canada