Knowing the Crisis Does Not Mean Changing for It: When Climate Awareness Stops at the AC Remote

The Irony of a “Knowledgeable” Person

Imagine, you’re someone who is deeply “knowledgeable” about climate change, who spends almost every day studying the issue, and brands yourself as an “agent of change,” often speaking and giving seminars for hours discussing global warming, carbon emissions, and climate diplomacy. However, when you look inside the room, you’ll find the air conditioner (AC) running all day, even when no one is in it. In response, there’s a “unique” story about a room that had been left empty for almost three months and was found to be full of mold when opened, with the AC running all the time. The occupant of the room was well-educated and certainly understood the risks. As a disclaimer, this isn’t a story about a bad person, or trying to judge anyone, but rather a story about the gap between knowledge and action. How can someone well- educated and respected act contrary to their understanding?

The answer can be found in Goldberg’s argument that discussing climate change can indeed increase acceptance and understanding of the theory or science, meaning that people who talk about it tend to believe it more. However, it’s important to note that belief is different from behavior, the more we learn and believe, the more we realize that doing so is nearly impossible, especially in the case of climate change, because we already “understand” the dynamics of climate change efforts, which “may” actually make us more pessimistic. Furthermore, Armstrong also argues that knowing about climate change does not automatically translate into action. As Goldberg points out, the two are distinct, and this is the key issue in climate communication: the distinction between “knowing” and “doing.”

The greatest paradox of our generation is not that we are unaware of the climate crisis. Rather, we are the most aware generation about the climate crisis, yet we still can’t turn off the air conditioning.

We Know More, We Do Less

There’s an interesting survey from the Yale Climate Change Communication Program, which states that global awareness and concern about climate change have never been this high, with most countries beginning to believe that climate change is real and is occurring and threatening them. However, this data contradicts the reality that According to IEA data, the number of AC is crucial and continues to increase almost every year, and this is not driven by ignorance or indifference. In countries like the United States and Japan, over 90% of households already have AC, and these countries have two of the highest levels of climate literacy in the world. This is not a new observation. Hagen argues that the media’s climate change narrative shapes public perception, but perception and behavior are two separate entities. In addition, Janković & Schultz also argue that the way climate change is communicated: through dramatic stories and constant bad news, actually produces a sense of pessimism in society.

The Psychology Behind the Gap

Based on that situation, psychologists call it a “psychological distance.” Because most people still perceive climate change as distant and unseen, fear of distant and abstract threats doesn’t always lead to action. This is in line with how the human brain responds to problems, when the problem is perceived as too big and far to solve, it can lead to increased stress, avoidance, and even inactivity, as people feel helpless, understanding but unsure what to do.

The second reason is “fear fatigue”. As Janković & Schultz point out, the way climate change is communicated, through dramatic imagery, projections of disaster, and constant bad news creates a kind of pessimism rather than motivation. This is because when we are constantly exposed to fear, whether through exaggerated narratives of disasters and warning, our emotional systems slowly shut down. Interestingly, according to reports, nearly two-thirds of people feel increased levels of stress related to the climate, but rather than encouraging action, it often leads to feelings of helplessness and hopelessness.

Addressing climate change is not just about being informed and knowledgeable, it also involves making complex decisions. Turning off the AC is no easy matter, it is a complex moral choice, especially for those living in tropical countries with relatively high temperatures. Science alone can’t solve the behavioral gap, what’s needed is a system that makes the right choice easy, and right now, in most places, that’s not happening. It goes back to Born’s point: modern climate science has created a world where nature is something we study, measure, and worry about, but no longer something we truly feel connected to.

From Awareness to Action

By writing this, I don’t assume I’m the only one who’s right and I’ve also left the AC on when I shouldn’t have, or often used my private motorcycle instead of public transportation. These aren’t simple choices, because there are circumstances where we can’t freely determine our own will. This means that in addition to studying climate change theoretically, whether through concepts, data, or other “ideal” and “utopian” concepts in the classroom, we also need open and honest discussions about climate change that encompass our own daily behavior. Sometimes we’re too preoccupied with the big things, neglecting the small but crucial things, in this case, our behavior. So, from this writing, what we need to reflect on is that knowledge isn’t just a “database” of information, it also carries with it a sense of responsibility. When we leave a room and turn off the AC, it’s not simply about saving our planet, but rather our obligation as educated, civilized, and moral individuals. We need to remember what the purpose of being educated is, being free from ignorance and providing benefits to every life, mankind, animals, and nature.

Keywords: Climate Awareness, Psychological Distance, Fear Fatigue, Climate Communication, Knowledge-Action Gap