{"id":58359,"date":"2017-04-20T15:00:08","date_gmt":"2017-04-20T13:00:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/?p=58359"},"modified":"2026-03-20T15:33:18","modified_gmt":"2026-03-20T14:33:18","slug":"10-things-youve-always-wanted-to-ask-an-environmental-scientist","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/story\/58359\/10-things-youve-always-wanted-to-ask-an-environmental-scientist\/","title":{"rendered":"10 things you\u2019ve always wanted to ask an environmental scientist"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\u201cHow f*cked are we, really?\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

These are difficult times to be an environmental scientist. One of the world\u2019s most powerful leaders is working to dismantle significant research institutions, and the spread of fake news has made authentic science more important than ever.<\/p>\n\n

We talked to Dr. Paul Johnston<\/a>, who\u2019s worked in Greenpeace\u2019s Science Unit<\/a> for over 30 years and founded our Research Lab<\/a>, about how to deal with climate deniers and what the future holds for our planet.<\/p>\n\n

\u00a9 Greenpeace \/ Steve Morgan<\/div>” alt=”Scientist Paul Johnston at work in Greenpeace Exeter lab, 1997.
\u00a9 Greenpeace \/ Steve Morgan<\/div>” class=”wp-image-58360″\/>
Scientist Paul Johnston at work in Greenpeace Exeter lab, 1997.
\u00a9 Greenpeace \/ Steve Morgan<\/div><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n

As an environmental scientist working for Greenpeace, what is it that you do?<\/h3>\n\n

The short answer is an awful lot of things. The variation is what makes this job interesting. In the last fortnight the science unit has looked at pesticides in food, analysed reports on carbon storage, nitrogen pollution in animal agriculture, modelled air pollution, sampled oceans looking for plastic particles, and done some analysis of hazardous chemicals in children\u2019s toys in Russia.<\/p>\n\n

We basically offer information to every campaign Greenpeace runs and try to bear witness to environmental damage through scientific research. If you had to summarise it into one topic, I\u2019d say it\u2019s \u2018environmental forensic chemistry\u2019.<\/p>\n\n

We\u2019re seeing the headline \u201cHottest Year on Record\u201d with increasing frequency \u2014\u00a0NASA data confirms this<\/a>. On a scale of 1 to 10, how worried should we be about the warming climate?<\/h3>\n\n

Very worried indeed. It merits at least an 11. We\u2019re in the grip of something that will fundamentally change the world we live in and the world our children will inherit. Sea level rise, food insecurity and extreme weather are going to reach critical proportions this century. We have the means to change this, we just need to implement them.<\/p>\n\n

What\u2019s your end-of-the-world scenario if we don\u2019t keep global temperatures below 1.5\u00baC as per the\u00a0Paris Agreement<\/a>?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n

That\u2019s tricky to predict. The world will cease to exist as we know it. We\u2019re already committed to a certain amount of change; no-one knows how much yet, but we can be sure that this new climate won\u2019t support life as it exists today.<\/p>\n\n

If you want a nightmare scenario, there\u2019ll be profound social change. Technical advances won\u2019t save us. Our ability to cope depends on how much we can afford, which will increase inequalities between communities. Those with the least will be the hardest hit. The more developed world will put up borders, there\u2019ll likely be wars over resources \u2014 it won\u2019t lead to a global human society working towards a common need.<\/p>\n\n

\"Lake
Dried out lake Aral in Siberia\/Russia. A camel is walking by a ship.
\u00a9 Greenpeace<\/div><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n

Humans are incredibly adaptable, but this will push that ability to its limit. We have evidence of climate change coinciding with the collapse of ancient civilisations in the Middle East and Mesoamerica as their land became unable to support their populations.<\/p>\n\n

It might not be recognisable to us, but life will go on. Even if we go back to first principles and evolving again, the planet will survive.<\/p>\n\n

And if we do manage to take action in time? Will the world be magically saved: will forests be replenished, will the Arctic stop melting\u2026?<\/h3>\n\n

Even if we stopped burning all fossil fuels tomorrow, we\u2019re committed to a certain level of change already. All we can hope for is to minimise the amount of change. There\u2019s no magic wand, the planet won\u2019t return to the way it was, but it might stabilise in a new state.<\/p>\n\n

If I ran out of optimism I\u2019d struggle to get up in the morning, but I still don\u2019t believe in fairy tales with a happy ending. It\u2019s either we continue as we are, and watch as everything gets worse, or we act now to try and minimise the impact on us and other species.<\/p>\n\n

What do you say to someone who doesn\u2019t believe in climate change?<\/h3>\n\n

This isn\u2019t a theory that\u2019s up for debate; it\u2019s based on lots of evidence, compiled by thousands of scientists. They\u2019re denying a body of science that stretches back to the late 1800s. Continuing to believe otherwise is delusional, simply delusional. There\u2019s no room for doubt. I kind of feel sorry for anyone who can\u2019t see that.<\/p>\n\n

What scientific concepts do people often get wrong that really annoys you?<\/h3>\n\n

It irks me when people see scientists as somehow a breed apart from regular folk; the idea that it\u2019s all very complicated and our word is God. We\u2019re human beings, prone to errors and influences and our brains have limitations too! We shouldn\u2019t take the uncertainty out of science; removing all the gaps and presenting a theory as fact sets scientists against each and just confuses people.<\/p>\n\n

The view that some scientists have that we need to manipulate the planet in order to fix it is another one that bothers me. We need to be wary of false solutions like geoengineering. I\u2019ve just read a paper that outlines plans to pump cold water into the Arctic to try and refreeze the ice-cap. It\u2019s totally mad! This old style of thinking believes the Earth operates like a machine, but that\u2019s not how natural systems operate.<\/p>\n\n

Of all the terrible things that are happening in the world \u2014 poverty, war, lack of universal education and healthcare \u2014 why is environmental protection the most important thing for a scientist to work on?<\/h3>\n\n

You can\u2019t scale importance. There are lots of things to be working on, environmental science is just the thing that\u2019s most appropriate for me personally. It reflects my interests and passions and how I would like to see the planet preserved for the future. These things are all connected. For a scientist, I think it\u2019s best to pick an area that\u2019s most relevant for you to work in.<\/p>\n\n

Environmental science is most likely to be an underrepresented field; sidelined because it\u2019s a complex subject that\u2019s inconvenient and difficult, and it doesn\u2019t bring financial rewards. You don\u2019t necessarily achieve fame by researching air pollution\u2026<\/p>\n\n

We\u2019ve not been good at protecting our environment so far, but I hope to see that change. It\u2019s a huge privilege to be a small part of this great continuum of people contributing to increasing humanity\u2019s collective knowledge about everything.<\/p>\n\n

How can we engage in a discussion about climate change or the environment without sounding too gloomy?<\/h3>\n\n

Seeing some of the changes that have already taken place in the 30 years since I started, like the London convention<\/a> to stop dumping waste at sea, the Stockholm convention<\/a> to regulate organic pollutants, and the work the IPCC<\/a> is doing to inform people about climate change \u2014 that\u2019s what brings me hope. There have always been thousands of problems but we\u2019re getting much better at identifying them and addressing them.<\/p>\n\n

We\u2019re now taken far more seriously and not laughed at for caring about biodiversity and the need to protect the natural world. We shouldn\u2019t be pessimistic that we haven\u2019t fixed the planet yet: we\u2019ve made significant progress in some areas, and that gives me optimism that we can do the same in others.<\/p>\n\n

If there\u2019s one thing that everyone could do today to help protect the environment, what would that be?<\/h3>\n\n

Just stop and think about the impact we are having on the planet and systems around us. Think about how you\u2019re living your life; how much waste you\u2019re producing, how far you\u2019re travelling, what food you eat, what you\u2019re buying \u2014 it\u2019s all significant and it can make a difference.<\/p>\n\n

Try to influence others to think the same way: put pressure on corporations, challenge retailers. There are few better ways to try and make a difference than the willingness to get out there and shout, loudly but peacefully. Most people haven\u2019t even thought about it. It\u2019s tricky to persuade people to rethink their world view, or to even think about a world view in the first place, but it\u2019s what needs to happen for us to change.<\/p>\n\n

\"Sunlight
Fiby Urskog Nature Reserve in Sweden, filled with unspoiled forest and hiking paths.
\u00a9 Christian \u00c5slund \/ Greenpeace<\/div><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n

This Saturday is <\/strong>Earth Day<\/strong><\/a> (22 April)<\/strong>, and also the inaugural <\/strong>March for Science<\/strong><\/a> \u2014 a global movement to defend the role science plays in our health, safety, economies, and governments. Apart from the obvious, why are you supporting the Science March today?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

It\u2019s heartening to see that scientists, who are renowned for sticking to the narrow confines of lab coats and never veering into politics, are feeling alarmed enough to demonstrate. Our freedom to experiment is being curtailed by funding restrictions and led by corporate interests influencing science for commercial gain. Representing vested interests is not science.<\/p>\n\n

Our duty as scientists is to go where the evidence is pointing, we have a responsibility to provide the truth. I want to see science where we pursued knowledge for its own sake. Learning and education is not a commodity, it\u2019s an investment in the public good. Science needs to serve society, rather than corporate and political interests.<\/p>\n\n

Paul was interviewed by <\/em>Chiara Milford<\/em><\/a>, an editor for Greenpeace International. Answers were edited for clarity.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

We talked to\u00a0Dr. Paul Johnston, who\u2019s worked in Greenpeace\u2019s\u00a0Science Unit\u00a0for over 30 years and founded our\u00a0Research Lab, about how to deal with climate deniers and what the future holds for our planet.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":32,"featured_media":58369,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_planet4_optimize_post_is_variant":false,"_planet4_optimize_experiment_name":"","_planet4_optimize_variant_name":"","ep_exclude_from_search":false,"p4_og_title":"10 things you\u2019ve always wanted to ask an environmental scientist","p4_og_description":"\u201cHow f*cked are we, really?\u201d","p4_og_image":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/static\/planet4-international-stateless\/2023\/02\/0790ec8a-gp0stqrc5.jpg","p4_og_image_id":"58369","p4_seo_canonical_url":"","p4_campaign_name":"","p4_local_project":"","p4_basket_name":"","p4_department":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[73],"tags":[79],"p4-page-type":[59],"class_list":["post-58359","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-social-and-economic-systems","tag-about-us","p4-page-type-story"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58359","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/32"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=58359"}],"version-history":[{"count":20,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58359\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":82285,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58359\/revisions\/82285"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/58369"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=58359"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=58359"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=58359"},{"taxonomy":"p4-page-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/international\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/p4-page-type?post=58359"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}