For those who believe in climate change, the science is simple: gasses released during the extraction and use of fossil fuels are causing the planet to heat up. Carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, exist naturally in the earth’s atmosphere, and reflect sunlight back to earth. Historically, the atmosphere has helped to create a stable land temperature. That balance is being disturbed. The more we drive petrol powered cars, eat lots of meat and use coal and gas to heat our homes, the more of these gasses we release into the atmosphere. More gasses means more heat reflected back to earth, which means higher temperatures.
Some people still do not believe in climate change. For some reason the scientific reasoning evades them. Science fiction does not help. Apocalyptic representations of the future where we have technologised even further, were scrap metal junk yards become the scenes of battle, skew our appreciation of what is possible. Data cantres, largely driven by AI, are predicted to use twice as much energy as they currently use by 2030, equivalent to the electricity consumption of Japan. Cryptocurrency uses as much energy as Norway, and continues to grow.
In a world that has been fighting climate change for decades, these new technologies are pulling us in the opposite direction. Although data centre consumption is only projected to be 4% of the global total, energy consumption by sector is made up of a long list of fractions of a per cent, so 4% is actually quite a lot. Symbolically, growth in these areas signifies a culture that does not want to prioritise nature, that does not, or can not wait for clean energy.
In a way, we cannot expect everyone to understand climate change. 100% of people believing the same thing is impossible, our spiritual climate forbids it. The philosophy of yin and yang is such that as soon as soon as one group of people believe one thing, another will believe another. But isn’t climate change so important that it falls outside of the scope of yin and yang? You could say that believing in healthy ecology is like believing in the need for fresh water to drink, or healthy food to eat. Do we not need a healthy atmosphere to live and breathe? In recent times, even those things evade us. We are polluting our water, and poisoning our food. Nothing is beyond the cosmic force of balance; industrialisation has come at a cost.
The ancient philosophy of opposites is in operation at all times. Overcoming these contradictions is the human experience. Growing up, I used to believe that everyone should be a socialist. Then in my twenties, I discovered yoga and I believed everyone should be a yogi. But as I got older, I realised that this was an immature, simplistic way to look at things. Like the natural world, with its thousands of plants and animals, we are a diverse people. Expecting everyone to believe the same thing is energetically impossible; we should be curious about the diversity that we live in, not struggling for unity.
This is easier said than done. It seems to be our human condition to try to improve our lot. Utopic thinking is an easy trap to fall into. But unlike issues such as inequality and health, which bring about much suffering, our ecology threatens the survival of the entire human race. Systemic change is urgently needed to avert a crisis. We need to prioritise ecology and to bring down carbon emissions.
I worry that populism is an unconscious reaction against the environmental movement. No Light Ecology aims to minimise the light released by our ecological efforts. We need to target those groups in power who have the influence to change industry, and consumers need to change their buying patterns too. But can we do it without a great shift in energy? Spreading knowledge about the climate could be considered enlightening. But in some ways it is in the shadow of the climate emergency. Does the urgency of the problem overshadow the light of truth that talking about climate brings? Does true awakening come with its own cost? Climate doom, a kind of depression has been reported in the press, as more people become aware of the potential apocalypse we face.
If we can move more towards right brain thinking, which processes our emotional wellbeing, rather than our left brain thinking, which brings rational, logical, linear thought patterns, we open up the opportunity to feel the plight of earth, and to appreciate that we face danger by consuming so much. If we remain in predominantly left brain thinking, we may fail to feel the emotional, unconscious connection between what we do with our time, and the effect we have on earth. Whilst left brain logics should reveal that greenhouse gasses equal atmospheric pollution, equals climate change, we need emotional maturity to process the enormous significance that such truth holds. If something is too big to process, we tend to ignore it, or feel overwhelmed by it.
Right brain thinking also encourages us to create, rather than consume. We connect more with our surroundings, taking inspiration from the things around us. By meditating, practicing healing arts like yoga and singing, we can develop our right brain. When we achieve greater balance, we seek joy and connection, we grow in mindfulness and achieve deeper relationships. It is not all sweetness and light. By engaging with the right brain, we come across our shadow side, and even trauma. In order to create and connect to our hearts, we sometimes have to accept difficult truths. Life can be hard. It is no wonder that we hide in our rational brains.
Technology panders to our shadow side. We hide away, we bury our heads in the sand. Instead of spending time in nature, we watch TV, instead of making music, we collect CDs, instead of baking, we buy processed cakes, instead of growing food, we go to the supermarket, instead of playing sports we watch them, instead of acting in a play we watch soap operas. That subtle distinction between creating and consuming has transformed society, community has broken down, nature has degenerated.
In a world of opposites we cannot expect everyone to understand climate change. But we need to reach critical mass, where enough people believe in it to create change. Changes to our consumption patterns where we only buy recycled or biodegradable goods; where we walk or cycle instead of driving; where we buy organic instead of conventional produce. Once infrastructure has been improved, and once prices have come down, more people are likely to engage new behaviour patterns for both climate, and for reasons other than climate.
In reality, not everyone is going to believe in climate change. Even though it is backed up by science, it is still a belief that people choose to believe in, or not. The gasses are invisible, the weather from year to year is difficult to remember: for people who cannot follow the science, or do not trust authority, climate change is nebulous. Do not panic. This fragmentation of society is normal. In fact, it cannot be any other way. In a world of opposites we need to get used to living amongst a range of viewpoints. Critical mass is a fraction of the whole. Although it is difficult not to despair, do not be discouraged when you meet people who do not believe in climate change. In a world of opposites, it is extremely unlikely that everyone will ever unite.
