Katharine Hayhoe, scientist, talks about climate crisis solutions and connecting with hard to reach audiences

Katharine Hayhoe won’t say that the climate crisis is insurmountable, but she will say that solving it depends on convincing people it’s a problem that affects them. This includes those in politically conservative areas of the U.S. that tend to lean towards climate skepticism instead of climate action.

Dr. Hayhoe was born and raised in Canada and now lives in Lubbock. Her dual identity as an atmospheric scientist, and a practicing Christian, has allowed her to bring the climate conversation to difficult-to-reach audiences. Dr. Hayhoe, a professor of public policy at Texas Tech University who is also the chief scientist for Nature United, is the author of Saving Us: A Climate Scientist’s Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World.

Widely recognized for her public outreach, Dr. Hayhoe was in Toronto last week to receive an honorary degree from Wycliffe College, the University of Toronto’s graduate school of theology, and to deliver the Sunday sermon at Yorkminster Park Baptist Church. She spoke to The Globe and Mail on why climate change must be addressed through dialogue.

You began your academic career at the University of Toronto studying physics and Astronomy. What drew you in this direction?

My dad’s undergraduate degree was also in physics and astronomy. One of my earliest memories is of him taking us to the park late at nights and showing us how to find the Andromeda Galaxy through binoculars. Our family vacations were planned around astronomical events, like going to the Outer Banks to see Halley’s Comet. I loved science and astronomy. I really couldn’t avoid it.

What was your vision of your future back then?

It was something that I had always hoped to do. But I thought to do that, you have to be in the medical field, and that didn’t come easily to me at all. The math and physics came easily to me. It was almost second-best. Like, if you can’t help people by being a doctor then you can at least contribute to the understanding of science.

When was climate first on your radar?

I needed to take another class to complete my breadth requirements. I had already taken children’s literature, I’d already taken the architecture of the Gothic cathedral. I looked around and saw a brand new geography class. [atmospheric scientist]Danny Harvey. I took the course and was shocked at how urgent climate change was. I had mentally grouped it with other environmentalist issues. If somebody had asked me back then, ‘What’s your perspective on climate change?’ it would be that, you know, David Suzuki’s got it.

How did it impact your career path?

I didn’t have the words back then, but the concept was very clear that climate change is a threat multiplier. It would make poverty, hunger, lack access to clean water, basic infrastructure support, and health worse. I realized that it adversely affects the most vulnerable and poorest people. We now know that Oxfam estimates that the poorest 50% of the world’s population contributes 7 percent to global greenhouse gas emissions. And that’s just not fair. So I was astonished to discover that I have the exact skill set needed to make a difference. How can I not?

Your husband is a minister in Texas and you are a seasoned climate scientist. How did you manage to combine the personal and professional sides of your life?

I had been giving community talks for several years when I received my first invitation to speak at church. They didn’t know that I was a Christian because, as a scientist, You don’t really talk about that. That was where I realized I’d been getting a lot of questions that sort of implied, well, of course you care because you’re a scientist, but why would I care? So I’d been answering those by talking about local impacts and what’s happening in Texas. But I realized I’d never shared with anybody why I had become a climate scientist, which is that I feel it’s an issue of justice and that, as Christians, we are called to love and care for those who are less fortunate than us. I even used Bible verses to explain why it matters to my. I thought, are they going laugh at me? It was actually the complete opposite. I could see their bodies changing and their faces shifting. They were shocked, but they understood what I was saying more deeply. If we can connect over something that we share, that we’re passionate about, those conversations are radically different than the type of conversations that begin with disagreeing.

You write, in Saving Us, that the biggest challenge we face isn’t science denial, it’s tribalism, complacency and fear. What are people afraid?

People are afraid of losing. A lot of climate solutions have been couched deliberately in terms of loss by people who don’t want us to change. And if you’re telling people, ‘no, no, no, you can’t drive, you can’t fly, you can’t eat meat, you can’t live in a house with your family, you can’t have children,’ people could be forgiven for saying the cure sounds worse than the disease.

How can you solve this?

We must talk more about how a better future looks. We’re running away from climate change. We need to move toward the solutions. And in order to run toward them, we need to understand they’re better than what we have today.

Are you concerned that the abortion debate in America will become a dividing issue that divides religiously motivated voters and those who advocate for the environment?

There will always be issues that divide people – that’s just the reality of the world we live in. But we need to come together on climate change, because if we don’t fix it, it will fix us. So we need people to be able to vote for climate solutions no matter who they’re voting for. That’s why I root so hard for the conservatives to have a really good climate plan. It’s getting better, but it still isn’t where it needs to be.

Your writing and public appearances portray you as hopeful. How can you keep that hope alive when the latest assessment by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), shows that global warming is nearly impossible to limit to the Paris Agreement target of 1.5-2 degrees?

I practise hope. I go out and look for stories of people making a difference. I share and discuss them. I make sure I spend time doing the things I love in the places I love with the people I love because that’s what we’re fighting for, and that’s what gives us hope. The IPCC 1.5 Degree Report concluded that every year is important, every choice matters, and every action counts. And that’s a hopeful message.

This interview has been edited.

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines.Register today.