Ableism and Climate Change
by Keely Savage
Ableism is defined as the discrimination of and prejudice against people with disabilities (Britannica). It is built into almost every aspect of our society, including the way we tackle climate change. The term ‘eco-ableism’ exists to express that; it is “ableism from environmental activists who fail to take into account those that are less able or privileged than them” (Wright). It can
present itself consciously or subconsciously, through trends, projects, and policies. Disabled voices have been left out of the conversation for too long. Because of this, policies and trends regarding climate change do not account for the needs of disabled people.
An example of how disabled voices are left out of the conversation is the anti-plastic-straw trend that surfaced in 2018. In that year, plastic straws made up 7.5% of plastic waste in the U.S. (Allen et al). The trend began from concern over the lives of sea turtles. Reusable alternatives for plastic straws, like glass, metal, and silicone straws, became very popular. Restaurants and other stores, such as Starbucks, began implementing plans to phase out their use of plastic straws (Danovich).
One tweet from that year stated “My waiter asked ‘Now, do we want straws OR do we want to save the turtles?’ and honestly we all deserve that environmental guilt trip” (Danovich). Honestly, we don’t all deserve that guilt trip. For many people, disabled or not, plastic straws are not always avoidable. Even if you had purchased a reusable straw or two, you might have left it at home on accident, or didn’t bring it with you because you hadn’t planned on stopping for drinks. In that case, you might pick up a plastic straw out of convenience. For many disabled people, plastic straws are necessary for drinking. Plastic straws provide flexibility, which is not present in the glass, metal, and silicone alternatives, and the hardness of glass and metal straws can pose a safety risk. In addition to that, cleaning reusable straws is a difficult task for some disabled people (Danovich). So, guilt-tripping can make disabled people feel like they aren’t doing enough—that because they aren’t able to participate in a trend that they are in the wrong. But how can you be in the wrong when you’re using a necessary tool for daily life?
Marlee Townsend, a political science major at The University of Alabama at Birmingham, discusses “convenience items”—that is, items which are convenient for non-disabled people, but are critical for disabled people. This can include pre-cut foods, hygienic items like baby wipes, and disposable plates, cutlery, and plastic straws. As she puts it, “convenience items are any item that saves time/energy at the expense of extra waste and often a higher price tag.” Disabled people may have mobility impairments or chronic pain which prevent them from performing basic tasks that non-disabled people often take for granted. That can include cutting and preparing food, taking showers, or drinking beverages (Townsend). In regards to plastic straws, Townsend notes that the flexibility of straws is critical for a safe drinking angle and that bacteria collection in reusable straws can be dangerous to people with autoimmune disorders.
Dune Ives, executive director of the Lonely Whale Foundation, helped begin the initiative to reduce plastic straw waste. The initiative was meant to get people thinking about their everyday consumption of plastic products and thinking about green alternatives to simple items. “It wasn’t a mandate and we didn’t take anything away from anyone. We simply posed a challenge
that encouraged individuals to embrace their own agency” (Ives). It was good intention by Ives, but the execution by the public brought to light an ongoing battle. When initiatives like this are introduced to the mainstream public, that last part of Ive’s statement becomes very important: individual agency. Outright bans on products have not been and will not be the best solution. Instead, individuals should focus on their personal ability. If you can afford to, make the swap for more sustainable products, but absolutely do not guilt or shame other people for their inability to do the same. Personal ability also extends to holding businesses and manufacturers accountable. This is especially important since businesses and manufacturers are designing the products used by the public and since they contribute the most to waste production. Individuals have the ability to
change the way products are made and consumed, which can make environmentalism more accessible to everyone.
In an interview with NPR, Darby Hoover, senior resource specialist for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that “The key is breaking habits. Is something a habit because you truly need it or because you got used to doing it that way?” (Danovich). When considering sustainability trends such as the plastic straw trend, it is important to ask whether bans are affecting people who truly need that resource, not just people who have grown accustomed to
that resource.
Accessibility for disabled people is not just limited by availability of items, but also cost. Sustainable products are typically more expensive, which can pose a challenge for disabled people who already have high expenses for accessible housing, medical bills, and living aids (Townsend). In addition to that, disabled people exist within an economic disparity. They have lower rates of employment, with only 38.8% of disabled individuals employed compared to 78.6% of non-disabled individuals; lower yearly earnings, with a gap of over $7,000; and they are more than twice as likely to live in poverty, with 25.9% of disabled individuals living in poverty compared to
11.4% of non-disabled individuals (Paul et al). This financial disadvantage makes it extremely important to find solutions that make products and services more affordable. Townsend suggests that encouraging the innovation of products is a way to work towards that goal.
Aside from being left out of sustainability trends, disabled people are also heavily impacted by the real effects of climate change and related policies. Climate change has resulted in more severe hurricanes, floods, and cyclones, and as we progress into the future they will continue to worsen. A letter from Science magazine lists three concerns regarding climate change and its
effects on disabled populations: (1) disabled populations have limited access to knowledge, resources, and services, meaning they are ill-equipped to handle emergency situations; (2) compromised health may make people more vulnerable to extreme events, ecosystem loss, and infection; and (3) people with disabilities are more likely to struggle with evacuations or
migrations. The letter references Hurricane Katrina as an example. In 2005, the storm disproportionately affected 155,000 people with disabilities, including people with visual and physical impairments and learning disabilities (Kosanic).
More recent examples of the effects of climate change on disabled communities include the 2019 planned power outages in California and the intense bushfires in Australia during the 2019-20 season. PG&E rolled out temporary power outages across California during a period of high wildfire risk, affecting the elderly and individuals with disabilities and complex health conditions. Important medical equipment such as mobility chairs, respiratory devices, and refrigerators for medicine had to be powered using backup generators. The company provided charging stations in some locations to assist customers with high needs, but coverage was not wide due to lack of resources. Any time the outage lasted longer than a day, people ran the risk of losing power, and thus access, to life saving devices (Collins).
The intense bushfires in Australia saw the destruction of a massive amount of land, taking with it homes, wildlife, and human lives. Emergency preparedness and evacuation became a concern for everyone, but especially for the disabled and elderly. Evacuation for disabled people is more difficult and time consuming due to mobility impairments and the need for assistive
equipment, meaning they are more likely to get caught in the fires. Bushfire survivors and disability directors have called for greater support for vulnerable people, including the creation of a register of all at-risk individuals. Another suggestion is for giving at-risk individuals advanced
warnings which would allow them to evacuate ahead of the masses (Shine). Education and preparedness programs are needed to provide adequate emergency information to disabled people. This would place them at less risk during natural disasters. Emergency response programs also need improved resources to provide disabled people with access to necessary medical equipment during those times.
When it comes to climate change, the majority of disabled people share a similar opinion: they care about the environment, but they feel excluded, shamed, and expendable. Their needs are oftened deemed unimportant or secondary to the goal of sustainability trends and they are often an afterthought in emergency situations.
For people like me who depend on those products, it feels like a knife in the gut to be shamed for choosing your own health over environmental welfare. That knife twists when it is made apparent that the health of persons with disabilities comes second to the health of marine animals. I care about sea creatures just as much as the next person does – maybe even more – but hear me out: the rights of persons with disabilities should be prioritized over the rights of sea turtles.
Townsend
Not every initiative is going to be possible for every individual, for more reasons than just ability—think age, finances, region, etc. If we can create alternative solutions to accommodate those reasons, then why is it so hard to accept that disabled people are asking to be included, too? The simple answer: ableism. Townsend’s solution for inclusivity is to make environmentalism more accessible. It sounds easy, but it actually requires a lot of work from everyone. Disabled people can not and should not be expected to carry the conversation—it is exhausting, both physically and mentally. Non-disabled people need to do the work to fill in the gaps; that means listening to disabled communities and activists, actively working to create inclusive solutions, and self-educating. A lot of well-intentioned efforts result in unintended harm. Knowing how to navigate environmentalism and sustainability means that disabled and other marginalize communities will begin to feel less of the burden. It means less guilt and shame for disabled people, and more collaboration and pride in what can be accomplished.
