HEATED

Emily Atkin

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

  1. 3d ago

    The myth of “forest management”

    For season one of the HEATED podcast, Tracy and I threw a lot of ideas and formats at the wall. Over 20 episodes in five months, we covered everything from fracking waste to fossil fuel ads to fashion greenwashing to attacks on weather science. We were figuring it all out as we went. But in the end, one episode outperformed all the others: our myth-busting episode about electric vehicles. As of today, it’s gotten more than 90,000 downloads, whereas the rest of our free episodes averaged about 6,400 downloads. Pretty crazy, right? Fortunately, we really liked doing that episode! So for season two, Tracy and I decided to just do a lot more of that—and way less of everything else. Instead of 20 episodes about anything we can think of, we’ll be doing just 6 episodes, audio-only, each taking on a bad climate idea that’s becoming harder to escape. First up: the idea that “forest management” can solve the wildfire crisis. We hear this one all the time, particularly from Republican politicians amid devastating fires. I’ll be honest: I thought this one would be pretty straightforward. I’ve talked to enough scientists over the years to know that, while taking better care of forests can help reduce wildfire risk, it can’t solve the problem by itself. We also have to tackle climate change—and the reason Republican politicians never mention that is because they’re self-muzzled by fossil fuel industry money. I figured I’d explain that and be done.But then I started talking to a scientist who challenged the first part of that assumption; the idea that forest management is even part of the solution to wildfires. He argued that most of the work politicians call “forest management” is just industrial logging, and that this practice is not just ineffective, but actively making wildfires worse. I’d never really heard that argument before. And the more I tried to figure out whether he and scientists like him were right, the deeper I got into a fierce scientific debate I hadn’t even known existed. Fortunately, as I was deep in this rabbit hole thinking I’d never get out, I got a call from Miranda Green, the host of the Los Angeles Times’ Boiling Point podcast, asking if I might like to collaborate on an episode. I told her about the predicament I was in, and a reporting partnership was born. For the first episode of season two, Miranda and I dive into a debate you almost never hear in the political conversation about wildfires. We don’t come close to settling it, or even covering every part of it. But we do learn that the myth of “forest management” is bigger than I thought: It’s the idea that this vague phrase describes one reliable fix for every forest—and that any amount of work in the woods can make up for a warming climate. I’m sure this episode will ruffle some feathers. Listen to it above, or on your favorite podcast app by searching “HEATED.” The HEATED podcast only exists because of individual listeners who choose to support it—we don’t run ads or accept sponsorships. If you have the means, becoming a paid subscriber ensures we can continue this work. 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

  2. Jul 2

    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

  3. May 28

    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.

Ratings & Reviews

5
out of 5
7 Ratings

About

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

You Might Also Like