Kalapuya Climate Teach In

I participated today at a version of the National Teach In on Global Warming Solutions at Kalapuya High School in Eugene. Other versions were held at UO, LCC, OSU ... but reportedly, this was the only one at a Eugene high school.

The event was a positive experience, an opportunity to present a new version of my climate lecture (including more thoughts about positive actions that can be taken based in part on backpacking & mountaineering experience); meet some new & interesting people; & gain insights into two potential projects.

I was the key note speaker (thanks to Kalapuya for the invitation), offering a version of my "Can humans stop climate change?" lecture, even if ... um, slightly adjusted for a younger, though intelligent audience.

(Two weeks ago, about a dozen of the students had run all night (in tag teams) from Eugene to to the capitol in Salem to make a statement about global warming. Unfortunately, no one from the capitol could take the time to meet with them for even a couple of minutes.)

Participants included ~125 high school students plus maybe 30 adults, most staff members at the school - including an advanced student at Euglena, Calan Taylor, who is a science teacher there, & the main organizer of the event - but also other teachers & professionals, including psychology & politically-oriented. Even Mayor Piercy even dropped by briefly. (The school, its history & educational program, building & location is worthy of a separate post.)

The event was well-organized & coordinated. The flow was structured, but flexible, twisting in a comfortable way to accommodate a change in student energy levels.

The morning began at 8:30 am with this film (* see footnote), my 45 minute lecture, then two 45 minute "break out" sessions. It was clearly (& understandably) intense for many of the students. (I mean, how often do high school students hear that the world as we know it is about to change drastically, even if we emphasized that there were many positive things that can be done to both mitigate & prepare, then get to talk about it?) Lectures, mine included, were more oriented for adults. (Hey, some of us are more adult-oriented, & it takes experience to design stuff for younger minds.)

So, students were officially dismissed at 12:30, & told they could go elsewhere if they wished, but all were invited to stay for discussion over lunch. Nearly all of the adults remained, & approximately 10 or 12 of the students. We had a group conversation until nearly 2 pm that included questions, feelings & ideas for how to deal with this.

I felt hope there. Many people - including both students & staff - seemed to "get it", at least as much of "it" as I put out there. (Like I said, that version was slightly shorter than normal - it's usually closer to 1.5 hours - that left out a few important scientific details, & was, um, a bit more reserved than usual. (I didn't want to ruin anyone's day while trying to be as truthful as possible.) Even though the perspective I delivered in my lecture was bad news for some to most, with several expressing an oft heard by me refrain ("I didn't want to hear it, because it's bad news, but I'm glad I heard it"), it seemed to have a positive effect on the group in the sense that when people hear bad news, it tends to galvanize a group to take positive action.

Admittedly, not all aspects of the event were as exciting as others. For example, in some of the break out sessions, too many students were just completely disengaged. But all were learning experiences. All of us - including organizers, presenters & students - seemed to be just sort of feeling our way in the intellectual wilderness, wandering into a realm of education that had not been explored in my experience, both in terms of content & process.

And, personally, I feel that I made some ... very interesting new contacts ... ripe with interaction potential. (Not quite how I want to express that, but it'll do for a first draft.) The experience stimulated for me (& I'll bet others) a couple of new projects that I'd like to help develop over the next few months involving people who were there.

I'll continue to add more to this review in coming days.
______________

Update: Saturday, Feb 7:

* Here's a footnote about the film, noted above, that began the day. I did not see it before my lecture. In fact, I only watched it today. It was produced by the organizers of the national event, Re:Vision, & was mostly an interview with Dr. Eban GoodStein, an economist at Lewis & Clark College, Project Director, National Teach-In, along with others in politics, energy, education & economics.

It's probably just as well that I did not see it before my lecture; I would not have been kind in my remarks about it. With all due respect to the group, who mean well, it felt like a propaganda film. Notably, there wasn't a single scientist interviewed. It's view was as different from my perspective as night is from day. They are pushing that unsupported (& unsupportable) assumption that "we can stop it", arguing that all we need to do is cut emissions to 40% of 2006 levels by 2020, mostly by bringing online "renewables" like solar & wind, & we'll be OK. There was support of economic growth, & no question about a significant change in lifestyle. Just more of the same but in electric cars powered by wind & sun. It paints an absolutely rosy picture.

Of course, my lecture explicitly addresses why it is highly unlikely that we can stop climate change now. I guess I feel for the students who heard my lecture. Even though it was softened a bit, they still went from "we can stop this easily" (the film) to "we may not be able to stop it at all", which is what my lecture is about.

I continue to be annoyed by groups that promise that we can stop it. I'm not criticizing the phasing out of fossil fuels & adoption of solar (even though I have serious issues with wind). What I'm objecting to is that they are promising that if we do so, especially at the inadequate levels they advocate, we can stop climate change, which - one more time - is an unsupported assumption. That's just false advertising & should be treated as such.

Perhaps it's time for me to offer my lecture to Dr. Goodstein.