Hello from my basement, the coolest part of my house, which I’m strategically writing in as the US East coast swelters through a heat dome that will bring temperatures over 100 for the next few days. The last time it got this hot for this long, my AC broke, a situation that brought the seriousness of extreme heat directly to my doorstep.

But it was also the same week, through a bizarre coincidence, I had solar installed (we kept on asking the workers to come inside to cool off, kept handing them water). Climate change’s impacts and solutions are regularly on my mind, but that week was another level.

Unsurprisingly, the salience and worry about climate change happens more during extreme weather, but if you think that’s the only time most people are actively thinking about it, turns out that’s likely wrong.

The latest version of ongoing international poll conducted by Gallup notes the consistency of paradox we’ve seen in public opinion before: most people are worried about climate change, but don’t think most other people are worried about climate change:

Other wealthy countries — the US in particular — stand out on a metric that the report authors say may be an impediment to public support for action to curb warming. People who consider climate change a “very serious threat” vastly underestimate the percentage of their compatriots who believe the same thing.

Fifty-one percent of Americans think climate change is “very serious” but believe only 10% of others do as well. The gap is second only to that in Portugal, where 66% of people are “very concerned” but believe just 24% of others are.

In America specifically, this effect has repeated over and over again. Anecdotally, it’s not surprising to me — as someone who thinks and writes about climate change, I’ve been on the receiving end of a lot of half-nervous, half-joking “so are we screwed?” or “why is nobody doing anything about this?”. When the answers are largely “it’s complicated” and “people are doing a lot, but not enough.”

It’s also points to the difficulty of being motivated to take necessary action when the crisis dwarfs the scale of any one person. One researcher, as far back as the 80s, found confronting people with the high-anxiety, complicated solution combination of climate change’ led to grasping for a silver bullet:

The surveys they conducted led to an insight that set Weber on an unforeseen path.
Some farmers said they preferred a government policy to deal with change. Others said they’d alter their production techniques to accommodate new conditions, and a third group saw ways to adapt financially. None considered that climate change might call for sustained, multiple responses. In fact, identifying a risk-reduction technique they liked seemed to eclipse their awareness of other options.

Weber later called this effect the “single action bias.” Faced with any new threat, people are motivated to do whatever they can to make anxious feelings disappear — even if the response is just the first thing they thought of or not particularly effective. One of the implications of this bias is that scaring people about climate change can lead to one-time, inadequate responses. Approaches that emphasize positive changes and pride may lead to more productive results.

But “getting it wrong” or “not being worth it” is a common issue I run into when people ask me if doing X or Y is good for the planet. It can paralyze, and especially so if you think you’re alone.

As a journalist interested in explaining the world as it is, and potential solutions as they could be, it would pretty easy to scare the crap out of you, but perhaps at the risk of shutting you down completely. Or I could pivot into “some good news for a change” or “positive vibes only, we’ need it!” (indeed some of my stories, especially this one, have been syndicated on such sites).

But what I feel very confident in saying, is that, if you’re a reader of this newsletter, you aren’t alone.

What I’m reading this week

• A heat wave in Europe is testing and potentially expanding a way to keep Paris cool in increasingly hot summers

• The era of “guerrilla solar” has arrived in America; does it make sense for you?

• A Michigan island needs reliable power, can Great Lakes waves provide it?

• Some drought-stricken California farmers turn to grow tequila¹.

• The Switch Energy Alliance markets its free classroom materials as “objective.” But they are backed by the fossil fuel industry, a HEATED investigation shows

• Former NOAA Employees Revive Climate Research and Data Site Shut by Trump Administration

• Big Tech’s carbon emissions jump in the space of one year

• The House Energy and Commerce Committee will vote on bipartisan legislation this week to shield utility customers from the costs associated with data centers, while also advancing legislation aimed at bolstering the nation’s transmission system to meet surging demand. (see also: local pushback from Imperial County California’.