Connect with us

Published

on

I don’t know about you, but since work from home started in earnest, meetings seem full of check-in questions. Don’t get me wrong, I like them. One of my favorites that comes up regularly is, who was your favorite teacher? Answers always feature people whose love and passion for their area of expertise shine through in their teaching.

Working with Marie Fargo, our Instructional Resources Coordinator, to plan a new K-2 climate change resource, I was reminded of this phenomenon. As we brainstormed ideas that connect climate change to K-2 standards, I found myself filled with memories of warm summer days in my Grandma’s flower garden, watching the hens and chicks spreading out into the pebble-covered path and the sounds of my grandfather and uncles lamenting the weather and attempting to plan that year’s corn crop. These fond memories made me focus on topics like crop production and farming, pollination, and climate change. Unsurprisingly, I prefer to focus on these topics; they make me feel warm and nostalgic, are central to my being, and are impacted by climate change.

Teachers’ best work happens when their personal interests and professional expertise align and they have the resources and support to put theory into practice.

  1. You need support on how to teach climate change:

Educators tend to shine when they teach about things they love and when they have support. It’s no wonder that many teachers only spend 1-2 hours a year on climate change — a subject that has and continues to be dominated by narratives of loss, sadness, guilt and culpability. Further limiting teacher’s interest in teaching climate change are the flurry of politically charged narratives and perceived lack of support for teaching the topic in anything that isn’t science. 

I applaud and marvel at the teachers who have been teaching climate change for decades. We see you. However, most teachers find themselves among the majority of Americans who believe in climate change and think it should be taught in school but just aren’t sure how or where to start. This gap isn’t a result of the teachers not doing the work. It’s more systemic than that. The systems teachers use to learn about key subjects and ways to incorporate those topics into their practice are lagging behind. 

  1. You need access to quality teaching materials that center local climate change challenges and solutions:

To teach climate change effectively, teachers need access to quality, local teaching materials, time to adapt and implement them, and ongoing support to continue the work.

Several polls have shown that educators don’t teach about climate change because they feel uninformed about it or that the science is out of their depth. Furthermore, if educators feel under-supported by their administrators in their effort to teach climate change, they are far less likely to do so.

There are many states and school districts addressing teachers’ concerns and filling needs with innovative and scalable models of climate change education. The Wisconsin Climate Education Hub was created to provide educators with quick, easy access to high-quality instructional resources to support the state’s requirement for environmental education. They are now working with Wisconsin educators to create new instructional materials centering Wisconsin-based issues and solutions. An example closer to Climate Generation’s home is in Saint Paul Public Schools (SPPS). The facilities team leads the SPPS Sustainability Program, which provides teaching materials to educators, guidance on how to jump in to support their district’s climate action plan, and supports students to lead action projects at their schools.

  1. You need ongoing training:

Not knowing where to get support or what materials to use to incorporate climate curriculum into your plan can be exhausting. On top of that, it can be tiring to not be connected to a community of other educators and mentors going through the same challenges you are.

Each year, Climate Generation hosts our Summer Institute for Climate Change Educationregistration for our 19th year has just opened! At the Summer Institute, educators connect to a vast network of climate change professionals. They are inspired to learn new connections to the subjects they teach and to fill their virtual tote bags with instructional materials and curriculum. Professional development events, like a Summer Institute, reinvigorate educators, but they don’t solve some of the major challenges they face trying to transform their teaching practice.

Teachers need that reinvigorating spark from an event, and they also need sustained support for the long-lasting passion. It’s well known that people remain excited for about 2 weeks after a professional development event. Rather than one-off events for support, teachers require a mixed bag of options that extend throughout the year. Educators who engage in 50 or more hours of professional development from workshops, online communities, personal research, instructional coaching, and peer-to-peer working groups are far more likely to change their practice and find the support they need to sustain the change.

This is why Climate Generation offers the Teach Climate Network and regional education support. The Teach Climate Network provides year-round professional development opportunities for K-12 and nonformal educators through: monthly webinars, regular working groups, and a monthly e-newsletter with tips and tricks on teaching climate change. Our regional education work supports educators through facilitated curriculum coaching, communities of practice, and paid working groups. This year, in collaboration with our Talk Climate Program, we also offered a unique Inspiring Stories project to help educators find their personal connection to climate change.

To ignite change in how we teach about climate change, we need to help educators find their passion for climate change education. We must replace the overly simplistic narratives we’ve become accustomed to with stories of love, compassion, enthusiasm, and strength.

Teaching about climate change and moving people to take action on climate change doesn’t require a deep understanding of the greenhouse effect. To those of us teaching climate change day in and day out, we’ve learned that climate change resilience and adaptability, or the ability to bounce back from climate change impacts, is what communities need to understand and respond to the climate crises they are facing now.

There are many ways to teach about climate change that uplift the people power behind climate change solutions and center a just transition to a brighter, safer, and more equitable future. We suggest teaching activities that engage people on a personal level, weave in some hands-on exploration of climate change facts, and support action-based projects in their local communities. I encourage you to join our Teach Climate Network to get access to the many opportunities we offer to build your climate education practice.

Teaching about climate change and its connections back to farming makes me feelcloser to my family. You can read my climate story on Climate Generation’s Blog. I’m keeping my family traditions alive by continuing to learn how to best steward and tend the earth in an unpredictable future. Teaching others how to do so helps me build my community and welcome others into my world.

Lindsey Kirkland

Lindsey Kirkland supports on-going climate change education programs for K-12 educators and public audiences. As the Education Manager, she also develops a vision for and provides strategic coordination for programs focusing primarily on professional development for teachers and informal educators. Lindsey is adjunct faculty at Hamline University and supported the development of their Climate Literacy Certificate, a contributing author of NSTA’s Connect Science Learning journal, and an active member of Climate Literacy and the Energy Awareness Network (CLEAN) and the North American Association of Environmental Education (NAAEE) Guidelines for Excellence writing team. Lindsey has served as an environmental educator with the AmeriCorps program the NJ Watershed Ambassadors, worked as a naturalist and education program coordinator for the NJ Audubon Society, and assisted in program development for museums, universities, and new nonprofit organizations in the United States and Australia. Lindsey holds a BS in Environment, Conservation and Fisheries Sciences from the University of Washington in Seattle, WA and a MEd in Science Education from Rutgers University in New Brunswick, NJ. In her spare time, Lindsey enjoys spending time with her husband and her son.

The post 3 reasons why you are burnt out teaching climate change, and how to sustain your spark appeared first on Climate Generation.

3 reasons why you are burnt out teaching climate change, and how to sustain your spark

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Analysis: UK no longer top UN Green Climate Fund donor after latest aid cut

Published

on

The UK is no longer the top contributor to the UN’s flagship Green Climate Fund (GCF), after the government announced that it only intends to honour half of its most recent pledge.

Amid wider cuts to its climate aid for developing countries, the UK informed the GCF in May that it will reduce its commitment for the 2024-27 period to £815m ($1.1bn).

In doing so, the Labour government is drastically cutting a Conservative pledge of £1.62bn ($2.16bn), hailed by former prime minister Rishi Sunak’s government as “the biggest single funding commitment the UK has made to help the world tackle climate change”.

This “record” pledge also meant the UK became the top GCF funder, after the Trump administration withdrew $4bn in pledged US funds in 2025.

Now, the UK follows the US in becoming the second major donor to cancel substantial funding, leaving aid experts concerned that other developed countries will follow suit.

As the chart below shows, the UK’s total past and promised contributions to the GCF have now dropped below those of Germany, France and Japan.

GCF pledges by top 10 donors. Dark bars indicate pledges from the initial resource mobilisation in 2014
GCF pledges by top 10 donors. Dark bars indicate pledges from the initial resource mobilisation in 2014 and the first replenishment round in 2019, while light blue bars indicate pledges from the second replenishment round in 2023. Source: NRDC GCF pledge tracker.

The GCF is the largest dedicated UN climate fund and is seen as a vital way of raising grant-based climate finance for developing countries. It oversees more than $20bn worth of funding across 354 projects and programmes.

Developed countries, such as the UK, are obliged under the Paris Agreement to provide climate finance. One of the main ways to do this is through specialised climate funds, such as the GCF. 

However, despite countries committing to increase their climate finance over time, progress in scaling up GCF contributions between funding rounds has been gradual.

With its now-revoked £1.62bn pledge in 2023, the UK was among the donors that had increased its GCF pledging compared with the previous 2019 funding round.

The latest reduction means the UK will now provide around 45% less funding than it did during the 2019 round. This is the biggest reduction between rounds by any major donor, apart from the US.

In an email to the GCF board, reported by the Financial Times, the fund’s executive director Mafalda Duarte said the UK’s actions were “expected to have a material impact on the delivery” of the fund’s projects.

According to the newspaper, Duarte noted that the move came as the UK cuts its overall aid budget in order to “invest more in addressing growing security threats”.

In March, the UK government announced plans to spend “around £6bn” of its aid budget on climate projects in developing countries over the next three years.

Carbon Brief analysis suggests that this spending amounts to roughly halving the UK’s annual climate finance, when accounting changes and inflation are factored in.

The post Analysis: UK no longer top UN Green Climate Fund donor after latest aid cut appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Analysis: UK no longer top UN Green Climate Fund donor after latest aid cut

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Federal Budget must give Aussies a ‘fair shake of the sauce bottle’: Greenpeace

Published

on

SYDNEY, Tuesday 12 May 2026 — Ahead of tonight’s Federal Budget, the following statement can be attributed to David Ritter, CEO of Greenpeace Australia Pacific:

“As the Albanese government hands down the budget, it has an obligation to both look after households today, and to set Australians up for a flourishing future.

“The government has an opportunity to give Aussies a fair shake of the sauce bottle by taxing gas corporations fairly, accelerating the clean, affordable renewable solutions we already have, backing its own nature law reforms with appropriate funding and by protecting our oceans, forests and climate from polluting gas projects.

“The massive swell for fairly taxing gas corporations shows the public mood has permanently shifted; most Australians rightly do not accept that gas corporations like Woodside and Santos should make obscene war profits, while everyday people face soaring bills, and natural wonders like Scott Reef are threatened by reckless gas drilling projects. 

“The global energy shock has exposed the dangers of our dependence on coal, oil and gas, and made clear that our future security and prosperity is in clean, affordable and homegrown wind and solar power.

“This must be a budget to benefit Australians, not gas corporations.”

Greenpeace Australia Pacific’s 2026 Federal Budget expectations can be found here.

–ENDS–

Notes:

Greenpeace has spokespeople available for interview before and after the budget announcement, including experts who can speak on Australia’s climate and emissions, the gas tax, Woodside’s Browse project, Labor’s new nature law, and our renewable future.

Media contact:

Kimberley Bernard on +61407 581 404 or kbenard@greenpeace.org

Federal Budget must give Aussies a ‘fair shake of the sauce bottle’: Greenpeace

Continue Reading

Climate Change

‘A new low’: Greenpeace responds to Woodside’s flawed emissions reduction and renewables modelling

Published

on

PERTH, Tuesday 12 May 2026 — In response to Woodside’s Browse economic modelling released yesterday, the following comments can be attributed to WA Campaign Lead at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, Geoff Bice:

“Greenpeace has analysed Woodside’s report on the polluting Browse gas project against independent modelling of WA’s energy system and emissions, and found glaring holes in the case made for the project.

“Woodside has reached a new low by modelling WA’s emissions reduction and energy transition pathway based on wildly expensive and risky decarbonisation options simply to justify its reckless Browse development at Scott Reef, initially rejected by the WA Environmental Protection Authority on environmental grounds.

“The WA Government cannot allow climate policy to be directed by climate vandals like Woodside. The clearest way to get WA’s emissions down is by setting clear emission reduction targets, which Greenpeace continues to call for.”

Key points from Greenpeace’s analysis of Woodside’s modelling follow:

  • Gas is the most expensive form of available electricity generation, according to the CSIRO; IEEFA also found that Browse gas would be about four times higher than the current average production cost of domestic gas in WA.
  • Direct air capture (DAC): The model assumes WA will be able to capture 6.9Mt of CO2/year by 2050. Worldwide, the current total volumes captured are 0.01 Mt CO2/year. DAC is currently priced at a minimum of $USD-400/tonne with many estimates ranging higher. Even reduced to $200/tonne, the cost per year of the volumes modelled becomes a staggering $1.38 billion, or $34.5 billion by 2050.
  • Carbon dumping, or carbon capture and storage (CCS): The model requires 40 times the amount of sequestration that occurred last year at WA’s only CCS operation on Barrow Island (32.4Mt compared to 1.3Mt). Barrow Island CCS has consistently failed to meet requirements and last year alone cost $344m (at 265 AU$/tCO2). At those prices the Woodside modelling results in a cost per year by 2050 to be $8.6 billion.
  • Woodside’s Pluto gas facility has been supplying less than 4% to the WA market, far short of the 15% required under the WA domestic gas reservation policy. 
  • Woodside includes $1.6 billion payable via the Offshore Petroleum Levy. The Levy was implemented to offset offshore decommissioning costs to the taxpayer but is set to expire in 2030 — 3 years before the Browse field is proposed to come online.

-ENDS-

High res images and footage of Scott Reef can be found here

Media contacts:

Emma Sangalli on 0431 513 465 or emma.sangalli@greenpeace.org

Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org

‘A new low’: Greenpeace responds to Woodside’s flawed emissions reduction and renewables modelling

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com