Season 3, Episode 4: An Australian Climate and Emotions Perspective with Dr. Joëlle Gergis

Climate Change and Happiness

image credit | Benny Hassum

Season 3, Episode 4: An Australian Climate and Emotions Perspective with Dr. Joëlle Gergis

Joëlle Gergis is an award-winning climate scientist and writer from the Australian National University. Joëlle was a lead author on the IPCC 6th Assessment report: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. As the southern hemisphere summer approaches, Joëlle Gergis spoke with Panu and Thomas about her most recent book Humanity's Moment: A Climate Scientist's Case for Hope and the unique emotional challenges of confronting the human and wildlife toll of climate disasters in Australia. As Joelle noted, Australia is one of the world’s most vulnerable developed nations in terms of climate disruptions as well as a leader in fossil fuel production. So, Australians’ efforts at coping and making change are important learning for others around the globe.

Links

• Joëlle Gergis

• Humanity's Moment: A Climate Scientist's Case for Hope

• Essay: ‘I feel my heart breaking today’ – a climate scientist’s path through grief towards hope

• Fear and Wonder podcast

• “8 in 10 Australians are concerned about climate change with a clear public expectation of Government action”

• Tara Crandon 2023 Our mood usually lifts in spring. But after early heatwaves and bushfires, this year may be different

• Is this how you feel? Letters from climate scientists

• Lesley Head & Teresa Harada 2017 “Keeping the Heart a Long Way from the Brain: The Emotional Labour of Climate Scientists.”

• See previous CCH episodes with Susanne Moser and Daniella Molnar

Transcript

Transcript edited for clarity and brevity.

Thomas Doherty: Please support the climate change and happiness podcast see the donate page at climatechangeandhappiness.com.

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Doherty: Well, hello, I'm Thomas Doherty.

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala.

Doherty: And welcome to climate change and happiness, our podcast. This is a show for people around the globe who are thinking and feeling deeply about climate change and other environmental issues. And as we say, we're all climate change emotions all the time. That's what we're focused on here. Even though people are more open to talk about their feelings and thoughts about climate change, it's still not common to have open conversations about these things, particularly about the emotional level. So it's what we do here. And today we are very honored to have a guest.

Joëlle Gergis: So, I'm Dr. Joëlle Gergis. I'm a climate scientist and writer from the Australian National University.

Doherty: And we've heard of Joelle. I've got a copy of her book here Humanity's Moment and Joelle is, if you're in the know about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and how this group comes together across the world and meets, and Joelle is one of the scientists that's involved with the IPCC. We'll talk a little bit about her journey and her background. And Joelle is our first guest from Australia. So, this is a great opportunity for us to think about the continent of Australia, and all the unique experiences that are happening for people there. I know we have listeners in Australia, so this will be nice. And Panu do you want to get us started off in our dialogue?

Pihkala: Warmly welcome, Joelle, very pleased to meet you. And there's been very interesting conversations between Australian people around climate emotions and all the strong contradictions around them, also related to governmental policies and physical impacts. And I've personally benefited from quite pioneering work by the Australian Psychological Society and a great organization called Psychology for a Safe Climate. So there's some great material for constructive encounters with climate emotions. And that's something very notable in your work, Joelle. I think that you are so open about speaking of climate emotions, as a scientist, and there's some research going on internationally about the emotions of climate scientists. That's one topic we might touch upon here. But firstly, we'd like to ask you a bit about your journey. How did you become so heavily involved with global climate change and end up being a writer and researcher who is open about various sides of the issue?

Gergis: Yeah, thanks for having me. Firstly, on the podcast, it's a real pleasure to be here. And it's also quite an interesting thing to be the first Australian to speak to you guys. So, I guess as a young person growing up in Australia, you know, we have such a ferocious climate. And I remember a particular time in my childhood in 1994, when there was a really severe bushfire season, and there was ash falling all throughout my neighborhood. There was a thick smoke. And I wondered to myself, well, what is it that makes Australia's climate so erratic and so extreme? And that led me to wanting to study environmental science and climatology at university.

And I guess it's been a 25 year journey, really, for me in terms of teaching, researching and writing about climate change. And then that journey led me eventually to be selected as a lead author on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Sixth Assessment Report. And for me, I suppose that was a real turning point in my career, where all of a sudden, I could see what was happening at home in my own country of Australia. And Australia, as you probably know, is often seen on the news in very dramatic ways, whether it's a wildfire or it's a flood or a very severe drought. So, in many ways, Australia is a bit of a poster child for climate change in terms of some of the real world impacts. And we're actually considered the most vulnerable nation in the developed world when it comes to climate change. So, it's a really interesting perspective to be both, you know, researching climate variability and climate change in a country like Australia, but also thinking about different ways of communicating our science.

And so for me, that opportunity to really think about what is it that is getting in the way of emotionally engaging the average person and a topic like climate change, because it can be so overwhelming, and so soul destroying, in many ways for a lot of people, because of the enormity of the challenge we face is huge. And, sometimes people feel very powerless in the face of that. And of course, you would know also in Australia, we're the largest exporter of coal and liquefied natural gas. So, there's been a very entrenched resistance, if you like, to actually implementing climate policy that is meaningful in any sort of scientific terms. But also just thinking about what it is to be, I guess, an Australian at this moment and how we show up on the global stage.

So really, my work has led me deep into the heart of the IPCC. And as I was working on the IPCC, there were all sorts of extreme events unfolding. You might have recalled the "Black Summer" wildfire season that we had in 2019-2020, in that summer period, and that basically saw around 25% of Australia's forests burned in a single bushfire season. In an extreme year, you might get 2%. So to get 25%, it was a global record in terms of the sheer enormity of the blazes. And now the koala is actually considered an endangered species along the east coast of this country. And that's not something I ever thought I'd experienced in my lifetime.

So, as an Australian involved in a United Nations process, I realized I had quite a unique perspective on the climate crisis. And it made me want to write about it. I realized that I could join the dots between the different things that I was saying, and I wanted to help people who don't have a scientific background really follow the conversation to understand the profound moment that we find ourselves in right now.

Doherty: Yeah, I mean, Joelle it is interesting, because for someone like myself in the United States, I see similarities to the US political situation in terms of entrenched fossil fuel interests that are deeply—this is not unique to the US or Australia, either—it's deeply woven into the fabric of society and the economy and people's identities. And then also, yes, Australia being the kind of canary in the coal mine so to speak, even going back to my early environmental work regarding ozone depletion, and chlorofluorocarbons back in the 1990s. You know, one of the things we talk about in our show is environmental identity, our identity in relation to nature in the natural world. And I think the pathway to being a scientist, to really be empirical and really study, is a certain kind of environmental identity [and a] certain set of values. So, I was wondering if you could say a little bit about that. There must have been something that drew you in the science direction, to the measurement, to really understanding, including ancient patterns and things like that. I'm curious about that

Gergis: Yeah, I guess for me, My motivation for being a scientist is driven by my love of the natural world. And, and I guess that extends into understanding it in all of its intricacy. And I guess I really enjoyed and responded to learning about science at university and also throughout high school. And so I guess, for me, that scientific understanding is just another way of knowing and understanding the world. And I was drawn to it because I quite liked the way it could be quantified and measured, and then compared in different parts of the world in a comparable way. So science gives us sort of universal tools that we can use to compare across different regions. And I think that's very powerful. While it is important to have a local subjective understanding of things, I also kind of responded to the idea which is, is embedded in science, which is that it provides us with a global framework to understand the world and I think that's really, really powerful. So for me, I was drawn into wanting to understand science from that empirical perspective. But my motivation for being a scientist comes from a very deep personal place, which is really wanting to protect and understand what it is that we are experiencing right now. So I guess it was sort of the joining of two different worlds for me.

Pihkala: Thanks for sharing all that. In your writings, you're also very open about vulnerability and many people have different kinds of experiences, and sometimes also traumatic ones in our past, and you've been exemplary in being open about the impacts of those kinds of experiences. So that's something I highly appreciate. And in the global networks around climate emotion, or eco emotions -- and that's, of course, something we very often discuss. So how to, on one hand, share our vulnerability and build strength out of inner vulnerability. But then, of course, also to protect people -- that one can't be open about all the things in all places. And, sometimes, we need to have different kinds of protective layers, either social or psychological, or combinations of this. And, as mentioned earlier, you have been very open about various climate emotions you have as a scientist, and since we've been talking about science, could you share a bit about that part of your journey? How was it to start engaging more with emotions as a scientist, because Western science has this history of, of, you know, reason over emotional analysis?

Gergis: Yeah. And I actually think it's a little bit of an outdated idea, because I believe that you can be professional and rational and logical, but still have an emotional response to your work. And as I was working on the IPCC report, there were just so many extreme events playing out in my country that I could no longer ignore the emotional response that was coming up in me, and to pretend like I was cold and detached around that was disingenuous. So for me, I felt I couldn't help it, I had to be real about it. But I don't think that compromises in any way, my ability to be professional.

And so for instance, one example was that we are home to the Great Barrier Reef, and the Great Barrier Reef is the largest living organism on the planet. And since 2015, we've seen 50% of a die-off from repeated mass coral bleaching. So, we're actually seeing large scale ecosystem collapse right now in real time. And we're all bearing witness to this. And for me, that is something that became increasingly hard to not speak out, because as a scientist, I understand the cause of that. And that's the increase in our ocean temperatures. And so for me, it was something that became something I couldn't walk past.

And then I also mentioned the wildfires of 2019 - 2020, where we saw about 3 billion animals either killed or displaced in a single bushfire season. Again, we're talking about extraordinary levels of destruction. And our ecosystems are still recovering from that time and may never recover in some areas. So, in our subtropical rainforest ecosystems, which are World Heritage listed, so they're of universal scientific and cultural value, we were seeing areas that are usually lush and moist areas that are, you know, waterfalls and mosses and ferns, actually ignite, just to give you an idea of how dry and hot it was. So watching the areas that I love disappear before my very eyes, and literally working on the IPCC report, as these events are unfolding, it became basically unbearable, to be a witness and to not say something.

And so that's really where I feel I started to become more vocal as a commentator and started to speak out more, I guess, in a personal way. And because I think a lot of scientists feel afraid of the very thing that you said, Panu, which is that people will consider us to be irrational or unprofessional, or this sort of thing. But, then when you speak to these people, at conferences, over a cup of tea, they'll tell you how they really feel about it. And so, with my writing, I've actually found that I've had quite a few colleagues contact me and say, Thank you. Thank you for actually doing the work that you're doing and being brave enough to share your emotional response because I feel that too.

And you know, maybe it's also a gendered thing in terms of this. Science is very dominated by men. And as women, there's about, for example, in IPCC in the working group I was involved in, about 25% of us were women. So it is a very male dominated area. And I'm not passing judgment around that. All I'm saying is that there are different ways of relating, and I guess women can sometimes be a bit more open about their emotional response.

And so, for me, it feels like a really important part of an authentic conversation that we need to have and that were having anyway behind closed doors, in terms of whether people are going off to see therapists or talking to their friends and colleagues. And the truth is, when you speak to people who are on the front line of say, recording ecological changes in our landscapes, they're coming back from their field trips and weeping in their offices, because they're realizing that they're seeing changes that are a one way street, that they see it, there are some areas that will not recover. And we're seeing that in parts of Australia already right now. So I think I've just shone a light on something that already exists, it's there. And I'm just trying to give some voice to that. And to provide us with a language to be able to speak about it. Again, we're talking about science being this sort of universal language.

But it's also sometimes when we're talking about the realm of emotions, that's usually the realm of, I guess, psychologists, social scientists, people who aren't really involved in the physical sciences. And so I've been very inspired by some of that literature. And also just people I know from those areas who try and think about ways to bridge that gap. Because I feel like it's the missing link, to be honest. Because unless we have an emotional response to the changes that we're seeing in the world, then that's not going to drive any kind of personal action, or inspire anyone to get political or to change their consumer or their voting behavior. And so we have to care about this. And that's so I term it in my book “connecting the head and the heart.” Yeah. So actually having an emotional response to the very real and frightening reality of climate change. And all the statistics that you'll often hear.

Doherty: Yeah, this echoes very strongly what Susanne Moser, one of our guests, talked about. [She is a] pioneering kind of climate communications person and had the same story—that people would come up to her and say, you know, “How do you cope? How do you make it” and basically hearing it from behind the scenes. So, it's really glad that people like you and Susi are able to bear witness and speak out. So you've got this book, and you pulled this together And you took a risk with it. And it's out there in the world. Now, you've been speaking: what's been your journey since then? So this must have been a rite of passage for you. You know, have there been any surprises or any insights as you've shared this message around?

Gergis: To be honest, I've been really blown away by the positive response. And also from people I usually wouldn't expect to hear from. So you mentioned earlier, the Psychology for a Safe Climate Group here in Australia. The founder reached out to me and I actually did an event for them recently, which was very well attended. And it was just really heartening to see a group of professional psychologists wanting to engage in this topic, and ask me questions and try to find a shared understanding of how we move forward. So for me it's just really inspiring to feel like, once we get our professional psychologists and other people who understand, I guess, the human condition, much better than scientists like me -- because as a scientist, my skill runs out pretty quickly at that point. And we need to use the full diversity of our communities and all those different knowledge bases, and sort of rise to the challenge in their collective way. So for me, I've been really thrilled that psychologists have been reaching out to me, which is really fantastic.

But all sorts of people… in my book, I also speak a lot about trying to rehumanize the conversation and I make a special call out to creatives. So the art sector, to really think about ways that they can use their platforms, as musicians, as writers, as you know, visual artists, or filmmakers to try and help people make those emotional connections because sometimes it might be an artwork, a photograph, a song that helps shift someone's idea about something. If you think about the Vietnam War, it was that image of that napalm bombing with the young girl running burnt, that really galvanized public opinion about taking an anti-war stance. And that was a very powerful image. So all of the conversation and words that had been spoken up until that point didn't matter. What mattered was really people having an emotional response to then take to the streets. And that resulted, I guess, in the social license being removed for the continued aggression and all that sort of thing happening.

So, I feel a similar thing in terms of the creative arts sector having a really, really important role to play right now, which is helping people connect with their emotional selves and thinking about ways to help us connect in a deeper way. Because I believe that once we do make that connection and understand that climate change isn't about the numbers on a graph, it's about the people and places we love, and protecting those places, I think everything shifts. And so I think art is really well placed to do that, because art is where we reflect, where we find ourselves, where we make sense of where we've come from. It helps us contextualize our history, our presence. And that's where we go to process. And so I really feel there's a very strong role for the artistic community, alongside the usual suspects of policymakers and all those other people that we already talk about, or renewable energy experts.

But I really wanted to, in this book, open the conversation up to many different types of people. So it isn't the usual suspects having the usual conversation. And you know, talking about renewable energy policy isn't particularly inspiring for a lot of people. It's really important. But people want to talk about cultural aspects of what it is to be human at this moment. And we are holding a global grief collectively right now. And what does that mean? What does that mean to be living through the most profound moment in human history? I think there's endless answers to that question. But these are things that we need to talk about. And we need to talk about them in nuanced ways that bring in lots of different voices to help us understand this moment.

Pihkala: Thanks a lot for that, that's very profound … more and more, my own research work this spring has been orienting around ecological grief and climate grief, continuing some of the earlier work and thinking about local and regional manifestations, the relationship between those and the global dimensions. So I think it's very complicated as you say that, when people encounter local or regional ecological losses, there is a resonance with the global situation.

There is one study about reef grief, as they put it, around the Great Barrier Barrier Ree. But, the role of arts, as you say, I think is very, very profound and, and also, as an effort to engage with complex emotions, like guilt, for example, or various kinds of kinds of sadness. And there's a lot of scholarship in Environmental Humanities and communication about what kinds of images would be useful for different people in different places. And sometimes, guilt inducing images can also be used for not so ethical purposes. And sometimes they can lead people to become more active and it all seems quite complicated, indeed.

But the basic idea of different people working together and the creative arts, that I think is very important, echoes some of our conversations with Daniela Molnar, for example in an earlier episode. But how about yourself? Would you like to share something about the methods you use to cope yourself? I know that that's something people need to develop in order to stay with the trouble and these difficult subjects.

Gergis: Yes, sure. So for me, as I mentioned earlier, my love for the natural world is what drove me to be a scientist. So when everything starts to get very difficult and hard for me, I step back, I try and take time off work, and I go into nature. So whether that's along the coastline where I live, where I've got beautiful access to beautiful beaches and the ocean, that's really a calming place for me. And I also love the subtropical rainforests near where I live. So I try and get out into nature, go camping. And just remember that I'm just another creature on the planet at this particular moment in time. And try and enjoy just being a human in a body. Because sometimes in the work that I do, you can become very cerebral, very locked up in your mind. And I think it's important to physically get back in your body. So for me that is either swimming in the ocean, it's going on a long trek, or some kind of hiking or anything to just remind myself of the fundamentals. That really, that I'm a part of nature, and it's a part of me.

And also, I guess it's also putting myself in the way of beauty and that is going to an art gallery or listening to beautiful music or reading poetry or just literature and reminding myself that humans are really capable of beautiful things as well. And so oftentimes, when we talk about climate change, it's often a very, it can be a dark and doom and gloom conversation and a bit of a degenerative narrative rather than this regenerative moment that we also face, which is an opportunity that is here is that we can finally learn to live sustainably on the planet, if we choose to remove the social license for the continued exploitation of fossil fuels. And that has to be done everywhere, but I do believe that it's happening. It is happening around the world. It's not happening quite fast enough. But, the social movement we need does exist. So whether it's Greta Thunberg, and her school strikers, and the millions of people around the world who care about this. You can't say that it's just an environmental issue for a particular interest group. It's all of humanity.

And this concept of global citizenry is something that I really had the lived experience of when I was working as an IPCC author, whereas literally sitting at the table, and there's someone there from Pakistan and Mexico, and Colombia, and Israel, and France and the US. It was such a diverse group of people. And to be there representing my country of Australia, it was a real privilege, but it's also realizing that people care about this everywhere around the world. And there is a very altruistic element in humanity that exists. Sometimes we can get overly focused on the dark and the negative, but there's also a force that is pushing back against those darker forces. And that is all of those people around the world who have woken up and want to create a better future. And I think when you do connect with that, that becomes inspiring for me. So sometimes I'll find it in literature. Other times I find it in music, I find it in all sorts of different places. But I think I need to remind myself that there's still goodness in humanity.

I sometimes think about my IPCC colleagues or I think about the nurses and doctors in our COVID-19 wards all around the world who were trying to keep society open and people alive. And all the people that go out and fight wildfires in really ferocious conditions. And these are people you know …you can't say there isn't goodness in humanity. It's just that it coexists. The dark and the light coexist. And I guess it's this moment that we find ourselves in where we either choose which side of history you want to be on. And so when I step back, I can see that but when I'm sometimes deep in it, it's hard to see. And so I think perspective really helps. And so for me, it's about sometimes stepping back and thinking about myself as a human in a broader context outside of my professional identity as a scientist.

Doherty: Yeah. So listeners can take this, and this is a theme that has come up before. It's a paradox. Immersing in some of these difficult, troubling issues also brings us together with like-minded people. And it reminds us that we're not alone. And that's what I've heard from other people on the IPCC: that camaraderie and that sense of special global fellowship that comes with this work, I think, is really powerful. If only we could get the public into those rooms temporarily to feel it. I think that would be really neat. It doesn't unfortunately come across in the IPCC reports. What we need is something like a documentarian would do behind the scenes, kind of, you know, a really nice artistic story of that. But it is something for all for listeners to take in. Like, just because you open yourself up to this, there's a lot of unexpected things that will buoy us and strengthen us, that camaraderie and things like that.

And then I just want to do one quick thing. I think a key part of your mission is this idea of, I guess, changing the social license, the term “social license” is probably not something listeners are familiar with. So I have an idea of what you mean, but it might be helpful for you to briefly just define that, because I think part of your mission is, is evolving that or changing that.

Gergis: Yeah, that's a good question. So, I guess the people that we elect to represent us whether it's at the local level, or the state level or the federal level, in some way need to reflect our values. And so for instance, as Australians – I’ll use an Australian example, if we care about the continued destruction of the Great Barrier Reef, then we need to actually say to our politicians and people in power, who have the potential to do something about this, that this is no longer socially acceptable for us. So really, it's really saying that we no longer approve. We can't actually stand back and bear witness to that and be okay with that. So for me, it's really thinking about this sort of collective values. And collectively, whether we vote in or out particular representation at that political level, makes all the difference.

And in Australia, we had our federal election last where we actually had a landslide in terms of a progressive government that basically showed that people want to do things differently. So, although we had been a real outcast in the global community in terms of our very weak Paris Agreement targets and our commitment to reducing our emissions, a lot of Australian said that is not good enough. So that's what I mean when I say social license is basically the green light or not, to allow our politicians to behave in a certain way. And so that's basically how I suppose social tipping points happen.

So when enough of a critical mass actually cares about something you can actually change the course of history in that way. And it turns out, you only really need about 25% of a population to do that. It doesn't need, like 80%, or some other really high number. So when I came across that research, which I do talk about in my book, Humanity’s Moment, it's one of those things that made me feel like this is actually achievable. So once you get your 25%, you get your critical mass, and the rest of the society will go with the progressive element. And so that's true of anything. And it's no, it's not to say that these victories are a done deal, and that they are set in stone. Just like civil rights and gender equality, sometimes it's three steps forward, and two steps back, but we're inching our way towards something that is better than the past. And I think that is true of the sustainability or the climate crisis we find ourselves in right now. It's the same idea that we're going to have imperfect victories along the way, but that shouldn't stop us from disengaging or zoning out and saying, “Well, what I'm doing is not making a difference” or anything like that. Because it's that collective, you know, accumulated impact that will really make a difference. And when we have people standing up all over the world, which we are seeing, then I think that's how the world changes.

And that's why I think that we will look back at the 2020s as a really profound moment in our history, I consider it the most profound moment, because it's really in terms of the carbon budget, we have to reduce emissions by 50% by 2030, to be able to avert the worst aspects of climate change. So what happens now really matters. And so the people alive today are really going to determine the course of the future of humanity. And that's a huge thing to say. But it's also, I hope, a galvanizing thing to think about, because what you do really matters. At this moment, every single person around the world, it really, really matters.

And so from a scientific perspective, what the IPCC is saying is that we want to avert the worst aspects of climate change. And, in fact, we can do it. So I just talked about the 50% reduction, we can do that with existing technologies that exist today and deploy them. And so it's achievable. So when we hear these really negative narratives coming from vested interests, this is where people start to get confused, or they start getting overwhelmed.

And for me, it's one of those things that I really hope that if we start thinking about a more regenerative narrative and a positive frame for the future --that's not to say, it's all going to be fantastic, it's going to get worse before it gets better 100%. But it's still worth fighting for, and there is so much worth saving. And so from my perspective, every fraction of a degree of global warming that we avoid, is really, really vital. And that is really the take home message of the IPCC’s work is that we want to try and minimize the amount of warming to minimize the amount of damage and so it's a profound moment. It's a huge moment.

Doherty: Well said, I feel inspired listening to you! This is why I enjoy the podcast because we have these conversations. I get to meet inspiring people like you too also, it's really great. Well, we're coming to the end of our time. Obviously, we could always do more. But this has been a great introduction into your work. Panu, do you want to think about some closing comments or ideas here?

Pihkala: Yes, warm thanks, Joelle for all that and that points towards many important climate emotions or attitudes and virtues. Moral outrage, for example, something which is sometimes called Climate Anger, but it may not capture the whole breadth of having this sense of injustice and the determination which can come with it. And that's something I see happening in Australia also that people are understandably fed up with certain policies. And so that kind of climate moral outrage seems to be operating and that's very important. Emotional energy as we have been talking about in this podcast also. But once more warm thanks for joining us and all the best for the very complex and multifaceted work you are doing.

Gergis: Thanks very much. It's been my pleasure.

Doherty: Yeah. So the emotions, also elevation, I feel this emotion of elevation. I'm inspired. I mean, I am lucky that I have this podcast and things that I'm doing. So I get some wind in my sails. And I know others are still finding their pathway. But, that's okay. You know, like Joelle says, there are all the answers and all the tools are available. They're here for us. So we're going to wrap it up. We have our lives. It's late evening for me here in Portland. So I'll take care of my daughter and get her ready for school in the morning and all that sort of stuff. Panu, what’s your day look like for you? You've got the early morning.

Pihkala: Yes, this is one reason why we haven't had Australian guests before because the time zones make it slightly tricky. But as with many complex problems, they are not impossible. So now I have the day ahead of me. The kids are leaving for school right now. And I'm going to work with climate emotion research. And how about you Joelle? What's the rest of the day like for you?

Gergis: It's nearly 3 pm here. So I'm finishing up just a little project I was working on. So just some paperwork on that. No, but thanks, guys for making the time to include me in your important ongoing discussion. And it's nice to have an Australian voice. I think sometimes we just hear from the same people. And so thank you for the opportunity.

And this is a little taste of what it's like to try and do an IPCC meeting. So imagine now 15 People from all over the world. So often sometimes it'd be two am for me or six in the morning, and all that sort of stuff. So it's really difficult when we try and do these international collaborations, but I hope it is fruitful and worthwhile.

Doherty: Me too. I think it is. Well, Joelle, keep up your good work. And I wish you best of luck on your book tour and future work and we'll put some links to your writings on our show notes. And you all listeners, take care of yourselves. You can find us at climatechangeandhappiness.com. You can see all our past episodes. You can support our podcast through our Patreon. And all of you and listeners be well and take care.

The Climate Change and Happiness Podcast is a self funded volunteer effort. Please support us so we can keep bringing you messages of coping and thriving. See the donate page at climatechangeandhappiness.com.