Climate awareness is growing in the real world, but it remains rare in popular entertainment, as illustrated by some new research on climate in film. In this episode, Anna Jane Joyner discusses the efforts of her nonprofit, Good Energy, to help screenwriters tell climate stories better (or at all).
You forgot the best climate scene in Mission Impossible. The tiny crazy fast *electric* Fiat bests the giant gas guzzling tank truck thing in the car chase. The scene is dripping with subtext. It’s seriously my favorite movie car now. Worth a second watch.
I would also suggest adding WALL-E. Set in the 29th century, Earth is a garbage-strewn wasteland due to an ecocide, caused by rampant consumerism, corporate greed, and environmental neglect (climate) -- subtle but powerful messaging
FWIW I got curious about how often "climate" was mentioned in the Annual Threat Assessments from the Director of National Intelligence (https://www.intelligence.gov/annual-threat-assessment). It wasn't until Obama's admin when climate was mentioned, and it got its own huge section.
Using one example of how climate and geopolitics collide is this quote from 2006: "Russia’s recent but short-lived curtailment of natural gas deliveries to Ukraine temporarily reduced gas supplies to much of Europe and is an example of how energy can be used as both a political and economic tool."
Year - #mentions
2006 - 0
2007 - 0
2008 - 0 (released before Obama admin moved in)
2009 - 23 (climate had it's own huge section)
2010 - 29
2011 - 1 (Entire sections on water scarcity, energy supplies, but only one climate mention)
2012 - 0 (similar to 2011)
2013 - 9 (with whole sections on water, energy, climate change affecting food supplies, China's monopoly of critical minerals)
2014 - 4 (big section on "Extreme Weather Exacerbating Risks to Global Food and Water Security")
2016 - 12
2017 - 6
2018 - 5
2019 - 6 (In the "Human Security" section they write: The United States will probably have to manage the impact of global human security challenges, such as threats to public health, historic levels of human displacement, assaults on religious freedom, and the negative effects of environmental degradation and climate change.)
2020 - no threat assessment released
2021 - 9 (In the "Climate change and environmental degradation" section they write: the effects of a changing climate and environmental degradation will create a mix of direct and indirect threats, including risks to the economy, heightened political volatility, human displacement, and new venues for geopolitical competition that will play out during the next decade and beyond.)
The military included the effects of climate through climate caused migration and associated scarcity in natural resources back when I was on active duty in the early 1990's for its two regional war scenarios. DoD has been addressing and planning on and around climate in its its strategies and programs ever since. Also related to why the US stood up Africa Command with a US presence in in the horn of Africa, the India and Pakistani standing off with nuclear weapons over water and etc... BTW - 80% of global Phosphate Reserves (essential for life and food production) are held by Morocco and west Sahara (a Morocco protectorate). Futire area of conflict using current production processes. Another good reason for building systematic capacity for Regenerative Ag as a mitigating and risk reduction strategy (both food and biofuel (a false choice?)) as well as advancing community based carbon management systems (consumerism and climate connection).
I like Ms. Joyner want to thank you for your work and all that I have learned by listening to your interviews. I replaced my gas furnace and gas heater with heat pumps and am on a list to buy a battery assisted induction stove because of you.
> I don't even like it when people say humans cause climate change. It's like, no, a very specific small group of powerful, largely white men made the decisions that have gotten us into the situation. It is not universally humans' fault.
A question was raised during the talk on "Barbie that I did hear an answer on the link between consumerism and climate that should be further explored. Per EPA - 40% of all GhG's are associated with the production of goods and services. Add in that heat and extracted chemical feedstocks is essential to this production and the electrical consumption increase along with industrial emissions are the one the fastest growing areas of which carbon sequestration and carbon air capture alone cannot address in the short term and likely only part of the answer in the long term. Two good places to start (in context of this pod) which you have discussed (beyond energy efficiency) are Agriculture and the Textiles or Fashion (fast fashion) culture. I suggest two shortish documentaries on climate to consumerism connecting for reflection are "Common Ground" https://commongroundfilm.org/. A film profiles a hopeful and uplifting movement of white, black, and indigenous farmers using alternative “regenerative” models of agriculture that could balance the climate, save our health, and stabilize America’s economy and Patagonia's "The Shitthropocene" https://www.patagonia.com/stories/the-shitthropocene/video-150905.html. A journey from the cellular-level origins of our lack of impulse control to the ways our central nervous systems have been hacked in the name of capitalism. It’s also about how we might begin to save ourselves from ourselves.
Anna says, writers will push back on placement of GHG reduction solutions because they feel that is like "being asked to, you know, write a PSA for the Sierra Club." How 'bout the "PSAs" they do all the time for big cars and trucks, driving, flying, oversized houses and posh apartments... There's a whole system for corporations to pay for product placement, right. I just watched a lame Hollywood movie where half the time folks seemed to riding around in F150s, just used a huge sedan, or admiring some other car, or...
By way of contrast, in the Acorn TV series, "The Chelsea Detective," the star rides around his urban London neighborhood on a bicycle. In one wonderful scene he is a passenger in a police SUV which is stuck in traffic, and fumes that, "If I was on my bike I would be there by now." It did not seem like a "PSA for the Sierra Club."
To me, we are at a point in time where the fossil narrative is "their solutions don't work," and just pointing out the climate change is happening is very weak beer.
I can imagine some scenes where demand response and renewables encourage hot sex, if the writers can't.
I struggled to find a succinct description of the actual test being applied to the selected movies. The conversation meandered around quite a lot without any explicit statement.
To love a tree, to love a landscape - is not the same thing as loving the profits from a coal fired power plant. Much of what you call NIMBYISM is actually democracy. And the way you talk about people who love trees and landscapes turns them into your enemies, not your allies. When in fact, we all are on the same team. We all love our biosphere and want it to thrive. There is a great film you should watch, "How to let go of the world and love all the things climate can't change" by Josh Fox. It has an ironic title, in a way, because it is all about climate change and the people most powerfully impacted by climate change and by fossil fuel extraction. I hope you, David Roberts will watch it, maybe repeatedly, and let the message into your heart. If we can't love the people who love the earth, and speak of them with respect, and find ways to collaborate, all is probably lost. Maybe not all, but at least the soul of what it is to be a human in love with the earth. The idea that a tree in some other spot is more worth saving than the tree in front of you that you love and have a relationship with is ludicrous to the person who loves and has a relationship with that tree. To you that tree is an intangible theoretical object. To the person who loves that tree and has a relationship with the tree, it is part of their family. If you cut it down to build something they may grieve that tree the rest of their lives. For heaven sakes, just work around the things that people love, and turn those people into allies not enemies, please. And watch the film. Maybe once a month, and let it in. We can be the change.
I’m sorry, but consumerism is one of the biggest causes of climate change. Look at the climate footprint of the mass production of cheap clothes that are treated as disposable. A Barbie movie has a lot of connection with the purchase of mass produced goods that are treated as disposable.
I know. I wasn’t clear I’m afraid. I’m sorry for that. I was responding to your seeming discomfort with saying the Barbie movie passed the climate test. That the child’s quote about Consumerism destroying the earth was “earth ish” but not really about climate change. I thought considering the quote an example of climate awareness was appropriate especially in a movie about Barbie.
There is some missing information here. Like season 1 episode 4 of ..... what? Apparently Anna Jane Joyner tells the story of convincing her father in this episode, and David has seen it, but what is it? Also what is the name of the "Blow up the pipeline" film?
Thanks for the heads up, I just added this info to the transcript. The show is called Years of Living Dangerously (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2963070/)
You forgot the best climate scene in Mission Impossible. The tiny crazy fast *electric* Fiat bests the giant gas guzzling tank truck thing in the car chase. The scene is dripping with subtext. It’s seriously my favorite movie car now. Worth a second watch.
I would also suggest adding WALL-E. Set in the 29th century, Earth is a garbage-strewn wasteland due to an ecocide, caused by rampant consumerism, corporate greed, and environmental neglect (climate) -- subtle but powerful messaging
FWIW I got curious about how often "climate" was mentioned in the Annual Threat Assessments from the Director of National Intelligence (https://www.intelligence.gov/annual-threat-assessment). It wasn't until Obama's admin when climate was mentioned, and it got its own huge section.
Using one example of how climate and geopolitics collide is this quote from 2006: "Russia’s recent but short-lived curtailment of natural gas deliveries to Ukraine temporarily reduced gas supplies to much of Europe and is an example of how energy can be used as both a political and economic tool."
Year - #mentions
2006 - 0
2007 - 0
2008 - 0 (released before Obama admin moved in)
2009 - 23 (climate had it's own huge section)
2010 - 29
2011 - 1 (Entire sections on water scarcity, energy supplies, but only one climate mention)
2012 - 0 (similar to 2011)
2013 - 9 (with whole sections on water, energy, climate change affecting food supplies, China's monopoly of critical minerals)
2014 - 2 (huge sections on water/food shortages, natural resources impacts, extreme weather events)
2014 - 4 (big section on "Extreme Weather Exacerbating Risks to Global Food and Water Security")
2016 - 12
2017 - 6
2018 - 5
2019 - 6 (In the "Human Security" section they write: The United States will probably have to manage the impact of global human security challenges, such as threats to public health, historic levels of human displacement, assaults on religious freedom, and the negative effects of environmental degradation and climate change.)
2020 - no threat assessment released
2021 - 9 (In the "Climate change and environmental degradation" section they write: the effects of a changing climate and environmental degradation will create a mix of direct and indirect threats, including risks to the economy, heightened political volatility, human displacement, and new venues for geopolitical competition that will play out during the next decade and beyond.)
2022 - 15
2023 - 26
2024 - 9
The military included the effects of climate through climate caused migration and associated scarcity in natural resources back when I was on active duty in the early 1990's for its two regional war scenarios. DoD has been addressing and planning on and around climate in its its strategies and programs ever since. Also related to why the US stood up Africa Command with a US presence in in the horn of Africa, the India and Pakistani standing off with nuclear weapons over water and etc... BTW - 80% of global Phosphate Reserves (essential for life and food production) are held by Morocco and west Sahara (a Morocco protectorate). Futire area of conflict using current production processes. Another good reason for building systematic capacity for Regenerative Ag as a mitigating and risk reduction strategy (both food and biofuel (a false choice?)) as well as advancing community based carbon management systems (consumerism and climate connection).
I like Ms. Joyner want to thank you for your work and all that I have learned by listening to your interviews. I replaced my gas furnace and gas heater with heat pumps and am on a list to buy a battery assisted induction stove because of you.
I think the Bechdel inspired test would have a lot more legs with a name like, I don't know: how about the Joyner Test?
> I don't even like it when people say humans cause climate change. It's like, no, a very specific small group of powerful, largely white men made the decisions that have gotten us into the situation. It is not universally humans' fault.
Does this narrative have a name?
A question was raised during the talk on "Barbie that I did hear an answer on the link between consumerism and climate that should be further explored. Per EPA - 40% of all GhG's are associated with the production of goods and services. Add in that heat and extracted chemical feedstocks is essential to this production and the electrical consumption increase along with industrial emissions are the one the fastest growing areas of which carbon sequestration and carbon air capture alone cannot address in the short term and likely only part of the answer in the long term. Two good places to start (in context of this pod) which you have discussed (beyond energy efficiency) are Agriculture and the Textiles or Fashion (fast fashion) culture. I suggest two shortish documentaries on climate to consumerism connecting for reflection are "Common Ground" https://commongroundfilm.org/. A film profiles a hopeful and uplifting movement of white, black, and indigenous farmers using alternative “regenerative” models of agriculture that could balance the climate, save our health, and stabilize America’s economy and Patagonia's "The Shitthropocene" https://www.patagonia.com/stories/the-shitthropocene/video-150905.html. A journey from the cellular-level origins of our lack of impulse control to the ways our central nervous systems have been hacked in the name of capitalism. It’s also about how we might begin to save ourselves from ourselves.
Anna says, writers will push back on placement of GHG reduction solutions because they feel that is like "being asked to, you know, write a PSA for the Sierra Club." How 'bout the "PSAs" they do all the time for big cars and trucks, driving, flying, oversized houses and posh apartments... There's a whole system for corporations to pay for product placement, right. I just watched a lame Hollywood movie where half the time folks seemed to riding around in F150s, just used a huge sedan, or admiring some other car, or...
By way of contrast, in the Acorn TV series, "The Chelsea Detective," the star rides around his urban London neighborhood on a bicycle. In one wonderful scene he is a passenger in a police SUV which is stuck in traffic, and fumes that, "If I was on my bike I would be there by now." It did not seem like a "PSA for the Sierra Club."
To me, we are at a point in time where the fossil narrative is "their solutions don't work," and just pointing out the climate change is happening is very weak beer.
I can imagine some scenes where demand response and renewables encourage hot sex, if the writers can't.
I struggled to find a succinct description of the actual test being applied to the selected movies. The conversation meandered around quite a lot without any explicit statement.
So here's what I think the test is:
The movie/story must demonstrate five things:
- acknowledgement that climate change exists
- a character explicitly knows it
- the story takes place in accepted reality
- It takes place on Earth
- the story happens now or in the near future
Is this an accurate summary?
To love a tree, to love a landscape - is not the same thing as loving the profits from a coal fired power plant. Much of what you call NIMBYISM is actually democracy. And the way you talk about people who love trees and landscapes turns them into your enemies, not your allies. When in fact, we all are on the same team. We all love our biosphere and want it to thrive. There is a great film you should watch, "How to let go of the world and love all the things climate can't change" by Josh Fox. It has an ironic title, in a way, because it is all about climate change and the people most powerfully impacted by climate change and by fossil fuel extraction. I hope you, David Roberts will watch it, maybe repeatedly, and let the message into your heart. If we can't love the people who love the earth, and speak of them with respect, and find ways to collaborate, all is probably lost. Maybe not all, but at least the soul of what it is to be a human in love with the earth. The idea that a tree in some other spot is more worth saving than the tree in front of you that you love and have a relationship with is ludicrous to the person who loves and has a relationship with that tree. To you that tree is an intangible theoretical object. To the person who loves that tree and has a relationship with the tree, it is part of their family. If you cut it down to build something they may grieve that tree the rest of their lives. For heaven sakes, just work around the things that people love, and turn those people into allies not enemies, please. And watch the film. Maybe once a month, and let it in. We can be the change.
I’m sorry, but consumerism is one of the biggest causes of climate change. Look at the climate footprint of the mass production of cheap clothes that are treated as disposable. A Barbie movie has a lot of connection with the purchase of mass produced goods that are treated as disposable.
Ironically, Marg, a girl in the movie Barbie says exactly that -- to Barbie! That's why the movie passed the test.
I know. I wasn’t clear I’m afraid. I’m sorry for that. I was responding to your seeming discomfort with saying the Barbie movie passed the climate test. That the child’s quote about Consumerism destroying the earth was “earth ish” but not really about climate change. I thought considering the quote an example of climate awareness was appropriate especially in a movie about Barbie.
Ah, I get you. No worries. And thank you for the kind words!
There is some missing information here. Like season 1 episode 4 of ..... what? Apparently Anna Jane Joyner tells the story of convincing her father in this episode, and David has seen it, but what is it? Also what is the name of the "Blow up the pipeline" film?
Thanks for the heads up, I just added this info to the transcript. The show is called Years of Living Dangerously (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2963070/)
How to Blow Up a Pipeline
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21440780/
Thanks, glad to learn about her work and its influence on our storytellers!