Rethinking How We Scale Climate Solutions

In my January 10, 2024, article in Green Builder Magazine I boldly claimed climate is NOT the greatest existential threat compared to the exponentially growing disparity gap in wellness 

The basis for this conclusion is data showing a strong correlation between U.S. counties with the least wellness and voters choosing leaders denying climate science. When you've been underserved for decades, it is so much easier to hear fear and blame than save the planet.

Fast forward to November 2024 and we now have leadership with firm commitments to terminate climate-related policies and programs. Thus, if you don't manage wellness, you lose the ability to sustain a meaningful path to managing climate risk.

And this brings me to scaling climate solutions. I’ve heard that staff at federal agencies and departments involved in environmental protection are in a frenzy renaming climate- and carbon-related programs as they brace themselves for new leadership.

The problem is much deeper than just changing names. The underlying policies and programs although admirable in their intent offend more than half the American citizenry unwilling to accept new regulations (e.g., new home mandate for rooftop solar systems), reduced freedoms (e.g., regulations restricting preferred fuel choice for cars and appliances), complex science (e.g., climate change), and significant burdens (e.g., tedious accounting for embodied carbon).

These types of climate initiatives are detached from the everyday existence of too many households struggling to manage wellness in all its forms: financial, health and future security.

We have a listening problem. We adamantly preach urgency related to complex metrics few can understand (e.g., embodied carbon Life Cycle Assessment, environmental product declarations, carbon footprint, greenhouse gas concentrations, ocean acidity) rather than being laser focused on first understanding and empathizing with the key metric affecting the growing majority of Americans: lack of well-being. And then climate advocates are surprised they and their urgent cause are not being deeply seen.

Quoting from a famous old Paul Neuman movie, Cool Hand Luke (understood this is a complete age reveal), “What we have here is a failure to communicate.”

Climate is too important to not get this right. And the most frustrating part is that we get to the same outcome, zero carbon buildings, if we effectively translate the enhanced financial, health and future security wellness that come along for the ride with highly efficient, all-electric buildings.

It like an unforced error in tennis. We go for the unnecessarily difficult shot with high risk of losing the point rather than the high percentage shot that can give us a chance to win the point.