At last, a newspaper prepared to publish CO2 emissions on a daily basis, though unfortunately on the weather page (Why our daily weather forecast now includes a carbon dioxide count, 5 April). What is happening to the climate, and the CO2 emissions causing this, are not related to the weather.
The economic section is where CO2 emissions should appear, alongside economic indicators like GDP and stock market prices. This is where the relationship between how we think wealth is generated and the costs of doing so should be made transparent. The thoughtful introduction of a few more headline indicators such as inequality, population numbers for humans/pollinators/dolphins/tigers, forest cover and deaths from air pollution on the same page would make the Guardian a genuinely progressive and even a transformative newspaper.
Sara Parkin
Principal associate, The Sustainability Literacy Project
• It’s great that the Guardian will publish a daily record of carbon dioxide levels, but the place for this is not the weather page. Weather is outside our control. Carbon dioxide levels are our responsibility – the inexorable rise should be (daily) front-page news.
Donald Smith
Haddington, East Lothian
• It is good that you are recognising the climate emergency by posting the daily levels of atmospheric CO2 which are still rising. However, as reported in February, there have been even sharper rises in methane in recent years. Methane and nitrous oxide are much more potent greenhouse gases in the short term, and scientists do not understand the source of these alarming increases. Please would you also report daily methane and nitrous oxide levels as a reminder that urgent action is needed to cut the emissions and levels of these gases too.
Dr Andrew Boswell
Norwich
• I’m delighted to read that the Guardian will now include a carbon dioxide measure as part of its daily forecast. However, as George Monbiot has been saying for years, we urgently need to change the language we are using to discuss the climate situation.
The term “climate change”, still being used in your newspaper in this article, gives an inaccurate and far too benign impression of the situation. The terms “climate breakdown” or “climate crisis” are much more accurate. Please consider reviewing the language used in your newspapers when discussing this issue.
Susanna Riviere
London
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters
• Do you have a photo you’d like to share with Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and we’ll publish the best submissions in the letters spread of our print edition
