HEATED

Emily Atkin

A podcast for people who are pissed off about the climate crisis. heated.world

  1. -19 h

    A powerful argument against the certainty of doom

    This July 4 weekend has the potential to be soul-crushing. On the East Coast, a brutal heat wave is reminding everyone that the climate crisis is not some future abstraction, but an extremely scary present-tense physical condition. In Europe, extreme heat has resulted in more than 1,300 deaths. Across the U.S., dozens of large wildfires are burning, drought is still gripping much of the Lower 48, and the powers that be are doing everything they can to ensure this is not only the hottest summer on record, but the coldest summer for the rest of our lives. So if your temptation is to give in to doomerism right now, I totally get it. But if you looking for a reason not to—and if you have some free time to dive into fiction over the holiday weekend—I recommend picking up Retro, a novel out last week by author Jessica M. Goldstein. The book’s main character, Ash, is a struggling actress dealing with similar feelings of despair and hopelessness about the future. And then she gets a job at Retro, a travel agency dedicated to taking wealthy tourists on highly-curated trips to the past. And slowly, her perspective begins to shift—but not perhaps for the reasons you’d expect. What I loved about Retro is that it doesn’t answer that feeling with some cheesy conversion to optimism. It offers something I find far more realistic and useful: the idea that you can be cynical, but you don’t have to be an a*****e. You can know the future is uncertain, and still refuse to abandon it. You can be furious, scared, and nostalgic for what we’ve already lost—and still say, basically: screw it. I’m going to try anyway. Bias alert: Jess is also one of my best friends. I don’t really know how to talk about fiction books as a critic, but I do know how to dish with my girl about climate dread, nostalgia, evil tech billionaires, and the romance and power of platonic friendship. That’s what today’s podcast conversation is: a tonic for anyone who wants to be hopeful about the future but is struggling to do it. We talk about why Retro wouldn’t exist without Jess’s own feelings about climate change, why doomerism can feel so seductive, and why the unknowability of the future is not a reason to give up on it—but the very reason not to. You can find our full conversation at the top of this newsletter, on any of your podcast apps, or on YouTube. Just a heads up, we start diving into spoilers about halfway through the conversation, but we give a pretty explicit warning beforehand. You can buy Retro here (or, for U.K. readers, here), or pick it up at your local public library. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit heated.world/subscribe

    45 min
  2. 28 mai

    Why Kate Marvel left NASA

    This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit heated.world Kate Marvel spent more than a decade at NASA studying the future of life on Earth. Then the Trump administration made that job feel impossible. Marvel, a prominent climate scientist, resigned from NASA last month amid the Trump administration’s sweeping attacks on federal science. Since Trump’s second term started, more than 10,000 federal employees with STEM Ph.D.s have left the government—mostly through layoffs, firings and buyouts—and more than 7,800 research grants were terminated or frozen. In her resignation letter—a masterclass in principled dissent—Marvel wrote that she never expected to voluntarily leave her dream job. However, she wrote, "I’m leaving because I want to tell the truth." In our conversation today, Marvel tells the truth about what’s happening to federal science under the Trump administration. We talk about the work she was doing at NASA before Trump, and why the administration would want to make that work difficult to accomplish. We also talk about one side-effect of Trump’s attack on science that no one is talking about: The loss of nerd culture, and why that culture is important to democracy. Then, for paid subscribers, we keep going into one of the most controversial questions in climate science: geoengineering. We talk about what it means to study technologies that could intentionally alter the climate system, and why the collapse of trusted public science makes those future decisions even more dangerous. We also get into our feelings about the state of federal science, and the strategies we’re deploying to not just cope, but fight back.

    29 min
  3. 7 mai

    Trump’s NOAA cuts would save less than a day and a half of Iran War spending

    Our good friends at the Popular Information newsletter have calculated the real cost of the Iran War so far: $72 billion for the first 60 days, or about $1.2 billion in taxpayer dollars per day. The numbers are revealing, in that they show the Trump administration is perfectly capable of finding money when the goal is destruction. But when it comes to protecting Americans from fossil-fueled extreme weather, suddenly we’re told the cupboard is bare. The Trump administration recently released a proposed budget that would cut NOAA by 26 percent. This proposed $1.6 billion cut—equivalent to about 1.3 days of the war in Iran—would eliminate NOAA climate, weather, and ocean research labs, zero out grants that help improve rainfall and flood prediction, and cut the Integrated Ocean Observing System—our national system for monitoring what is happening in the ocean, where hurricanes strengthen, and where coastal flooding begins. And this comes on top of DOGE-driven layoffs last year that eliminated roughly 880 NOAA jobs, including staff at the National Weather Service. The stupidity of this is almost difficult to overstate. Because Trump is not proposing to gut NOAA during some calm, stable weather period. He’s doing it at the very moment forecasters are warning that a potentially dangerous El Niño may be on the way.In today's episode, we talk to Craig McLean, the former acting chief scientist of NOAA, who spent more than 40 years at the agency. McLean recently wrote that the NOAA budget request “is not streamlining. It’s sabotage.” McLean knows what it looks like when politics corrupts weather science. You might recall, McLean was the NOAA official at the center of “Sharpiegate,” the infamous Trump-era scandal in which the president falsely claimed Hurricane Dorian was threatening Alabama, then displayed a forecast map that appeared to have been altered with a Sharpie to make him look right. McLean pushed back after NOAA leadership rebuked its own forecasters for correcting the president, calling for an investigation into whether the agency’s scientific integrity policy had been violated. McLean was then relieved of his position. In our interview, McLean speaks about what these cuts would actually do, why NOAA research matters far beyond “the weather,” what Sharpiegate revealed about scientific integrity under Trump, and why attacking climate science is so dangerous at the exact moment Americans need it most. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit heated.world/subscribe

    40 min

À propos

A podcast for people who are pissed off about the climate crisis. heated.world

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi