The Tone of the Transition

I was driving down a country road in Ireland with my parents. We were in a car of European make, on what we termed the “wrong side” of the road. The road was narrow, with stubby stone walls hugging the asphalt. As the navigator, I was struggling to keep up with our journey. My cell phone was delayed and occasionally not working. We missed our turns occasionally, but I made sure to never scream “take a right!” or demonstrate any panic. I had decided that frantic communication wouldn’t be advised, the stress and confusion of the situation necessitated a calm and measured u-turn, not a swerve or wild turn at the last second.

Now here we are, in danger of “missing our turn.” We’re at risk of making the wrong decision, and as our societal decision making drives us towards a climate catastrophe, a question remains about how alarmist the messaging should be. Blame, panic, or fear-mongering by concerned parties is likely to solidify and entrench the opposition. Can we create a message devoid of politics and blame, but also normalize and convey excitement for a different future? This will be vital to widen the field of stakeholders. “The sky is falling” might be an ill-advised public relations message, but there is an urgency to our circumstance. Heightening anxiety or tension around an electrified America and clean power production may not be advised, but how else to encourage urgency?

Here is where the financial landscape can be of great benefit. The fact that renewable energy is now cheaper than its dirtier electricity producing counterparts is a huge benefit. Accessing capitalism and our American free-market fetish instead of relying on guilt or ethical encouragement can be a huge selling point. Our interest in saving money, rather than saving the planet, may very well be the most compelling argument of all. Huge tax credits for home electrification and home production will help nudge our society in the right direction.

I’m nervous, personally, that our cultural identity and personal politics are so messily enmeshed with the existential issue of greenhouse gas emissions. The same desire to display values afflicts progressive and conservative viewpoints, and I fear it only hardens the tribalism of our society. Jobs, regulation, and public policy have never been separate from politics. It may have been inevitable that we signal our preferences and politics over issues like electric vehicles, but I fear that with such high stakes, we may be settling into our foxholes and echo chambers on the most important issue of our time.

And this, perhaps, is why I advocate a gentle approach. Shame has been shown to cement people to their pre-existing notions with absolute certainty, and needs to be avoided at all costs. Changing of opinions, habits, and mindsets is the ultimate goal. Convey urgency and concern – that is right and productive to an extent. But let’s stop short of panic or blame. This could swing every interested party over to the side of proactivity instead of the entrenched dissent that emerges when we point fingers.