top of page

NEWS

This past week, Clearwater Innovation members Kyle Tianshi and Leanne Fan were youth keynote speakers at SEMICON West, a renowned semiconductor technology convention in San Francisco. Speaking as the keynote during the Industry Awareness and Impact session was a significant opportunity for our organization, which hopes to increase environmental awareness among corporations.


“According to the IPCC, around 71% of all carbon emissions are produced by just 100 companies,” said Kyle during the presentation.


Other industry experts also agreed that corporations held significant weight on the potential success of efforts to reverse the current trends of climate change. Mike Byer, a representative for Nikon, an optics company, said that the biggest challenge to environmental activism in the future will be corporations that seek profit over environmental protection. Others recognized that profit-driven corporations were unlikely to sacrifice revenue for the sake of protecting the planet. In our speech, we emphasized environmental policies and regulations like California Senate Bill 253 as a potential solution to the problem of corporations, but also acknowledged that more cooperation between corporations would ease the process of protecting the environment.



Clearwater Innovation also encourages environmental garage lab research, which Kyle described as “students [using] their creativity towards solving… environmental issues.” Kyle and Leanne both described their garage lab experiences while further explaining the efforts of several other garage lab scientists, three of whom were winners of the $10,000 US Stockholm Junior Water Prize.


Finally, we described different efforts Clearwater Innovation as participated in for the purpose of raising awareness about the global water crisis. Not only have we partnered with ASML and the Barrio Logan Science and Art Expo to encourage companies and youth alike to learn more about the water crisis, but we also partnered with local organizations to conduct art contests to encourage young students to illustrate the consequences of the water crisis.


Our participation in SEMICON West was a unique platform for our organization to branch out and further these aims at a large scale. The convention, noted for its focus on the latest developments and innovations, brought together a significant number of industry leaders. Even major players in the industry such as ASML that did not have exhibits at the convention still sent representatives to network with other industry leaders and view the latest innovations in the sector. Additionally, companies like UPS that traditionally did not have connections with the semiconductor industry attended and presented at the conference.


Further, the convention had a breakfast networking event dedicated to environmentalists attending the conference. Our team pitched our vision and mission statement, received positive criticism and encouragement from environmental leaders, and met like-minded youth environmental activists, including last year’s youth keynote speaker, Anandika Carthikeyan of non-profit Keep the Bay Beautiful.


In the future, we hope that our efforts to cooperate with corporations can continue for the better of the environment. “We’ll definitely be continuing our efforts to increase public awareness of environmental issues and advocate for sustainable policies,” Kyle said. “This partnership with SEMICON is hopefully just the beginning as we work on increasing our impact.”


Watch the full keynote speech below:


As a competitor on the national high school Public Forum debate circuit, I spend many hours each month poring over the pros and cons of various policy topics, ranging from right-to-work laws to student loan debt forgiveness to US military presence in the Arctic. In February 2024, the focus was an environmental hot topic: banning single use plastics in the United States.


When I initially began my research, I was impressed by the wealth of knowledge about plastic pollution that had accumulated over recent years. But upon closer inspection, I started to realize that many environmental websites were virtually identical, and not in a good way. Take the below graphic from plasticoceans.org; while there are useful facts about the global plastic crisis, the numbers are taken without context, citations only occur sparingly, and it illustrates its points with stock images of people and trash cans.



Compare this to the aesthetic, well-cited design of a pro-plastic website like RKW Manufacturing. The below graphic includes citations for specific statistics, in addition to a polished bar graph (RKW, 2022). This issue is not only limited to the debate around plastics for high school debaters; rather, it is pervasive throughout the entire climate change issue. It’s not surprising, then, that a PBS poll from 2022 finds a 9% decrease in the amount of Americans concerned about climate change’s impacts (PBS Newshour, 2022). It’s important to identify the causes of this trend and potential solutions in hopes that civilians take the issue of climate change seriously. 



I’ve found that this problem is not only concentrated in bad websites but also more broadly in the climate and environmental rhetoric used in the media. The language used to describe the climate change problem doesn’t connect with many civilians. A poll conducted by the Pew Research Center suggests that people often deem claims of climate change consequences as exaggerated (Funk et al. 23). Whether or not this is justified, it should be a sign to scientists that civilians are not especially concerned with doomsday messaging. It desensitizes the issue (since people receive large warnings with very few tangible results), causes an audience to become skeptical of the large claims, and puts people into denial about the progress they can achieve on their own. 


Finally, there is a lack of clarity in the world of environmentalism. Although common sense tells us that our individual contributions to emissions and pollution are not the reason global climate change occurs, we’re constantly hammered by environmental websites telling us to recycle, save water and energy, and pick up our trash at the beach (Smith 2022). 


I think we’ll need to see shifts in the attitudes of three groups of people if we want to shift the trajectory of climate advocacy. First are the scientists. Science can’t speak for itself. The research that scientists conduct, as essential as it is to solving this climate crisis, is too complex to be easily digested by the layperson–or it simply takes too much effort on the part of the layperson to understand. We cannot persuade the general public by handing them 50-page studies with dozens of figures and jargon-filled paragraphs.


This is where the second group of people comes in: the explainers of science. Not only should the explainers strive to be appealing to those with less scientific knowledge, but they should also make sure that their headlines are backed by science. For example, take the news story: ‘Plastics killing up to a million people a year, warns Sir David Attenborough.’ While this is an attention-grabbing headline, and Sir David Attenborough does make great documentaries, he certainly didn’t conduct this study. And does the study even claim what he quotes? The study states: “Between 400,000 and 1 million people die each year in developing countries because of diseases related to mismanaged waste.” Not only is the statistic not even specifically concerned with plastic, but the diseases are only related to the waste and may not be directly caused by it. An endorsement from someone like Sir David Attenborough is great, but it could be utilized to a far more substantial effect if paired properly with sound scientific studies. Further, ensuring that images like the plasticoceans.org graphic are posted with proper citations and formal design choices in mind can go a long way in bringing more positive attention to environmental efforts. 


Not only this, we need to shift away from the apocalyptic messaging commonly used to describe climate change. While many see these cataclysmic claims as appeals to fear, it feels much more plausible (and relatable) to link climate change to localized impacts that still affect day-to-day life. In the same way that people often care more about local news on city tax rates than about international foreign policy, making messaging more personalized, prevalent, and relatable for different demographics could be more persuasive. This might also clarify the individual’s role in solving a global problem. Although counterintuitive, departing from the “inevitable doomsday” messaging about climate change could actually motivate more people to put their best environmental foot forward. 


Finally, there’s us–the people! While it’s great to change our everyday environmental practices when we encounter a well-cited and credible explanation for doing so, it’s also important to be skeptical of arguments that have been poorly made and numbers that have been accidentally manipulated. For example, the aforementioned number that Sir David Attenborough quotes should be approached with skepticism, since the study is being taken out of context. Recognizing this and doing enough self-research to educate ourselves is crucial for a better environmental activism movement.  


Environmental practices are important. Human activities are having a serious effect on our environment, and our current climate path is troubling at best. But maybe this problem isn’t just rooted in the quantity of carbon emissions we produce, but also in the minute, everyday ways that environmental ideas are communicated to the public. It’s a difficult thing to do. In many ways, I’ve found Public Forum debate to be about much of the same rhetoric–and across the board I’ve realized how small shifts in how issues are framed can generate outsized increases in persuasiveness.


Citations


Funk, Cary; Pasquini, Giancarlo; Spencer, Alison; Tyson, Alec. “Why Some Americans Do Not

See Urgency on Climate Change.” Pew Research Center (blog), August 9, 2023.


PBS News. “Many in U.S. Doubt Their Individual Impact on Fighting Climate Change,” August


Plastic Oceans International. “Plastic Pollution Facts | PlasticOceans.Org/the-Facts.” Accessed


Pombinho, Miguel, Ana Fialho, and Jorge Novas. “Readability of Sustainability Reports: A

Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Literature Review.” Sustainability 16, no. 1


rkw-group.com. “Benefits of Plastic,” June 14, 2022.


Smith, Allison. “Why Don’t Donors Give to Environmental Nonprofits?” June 9, 2022. 


Tollefson, Jeff. “UN Climate Reports Are Increasingly Unreadable.” Nature, October 12, 2015.

bottom of page