Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Culture

The U.S. Open Climate Protest Was Annoying. It Also Worked.

Why I changed my mind about the disruption to the tennis tournament.

A tennis protest.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

For a protest to work, it has to be understood.

By this metric, the protesters who interrupted the women’s singles semifinal of the U.S. Open on Thursday night — including one man who glued his bare feet to the floor of Arthur Ashe stadium — had, at least at first, failed. More than 10 minutes into the protest, even after Coco Gauff and Karolina Muchova had left the court to wait out the interruption, retired tennis legend Chris Evert, commentating for ESPN, wondered what the people yelling wanted. “Maybe they’re drunk,” she mused.

Once the protesters’ purpose (and shirts reading “end fossil fuels”) became clear, I couldn’t help but be confused. This U.S. Open has been a famously miserable experience for players and spectators alike, thanks to stifling temperatures that have driven players to take cold showers mid-match and shove courtside tubes blowing cold air down their shirts. The impacts of climate change on tennis couldn’t be clearer than they already are, I figured. Why force the players and spectators to feel those impacts for longer by interrupting a match?

So I came into work on Friday feeling fully opposed to the protest. “Those shirts are going to do it,” I sarcastically texted a friend. “We fixed climate change, everybody.”

And then I saw the Coco Gauff video.

“I believe in climate change,” Gauff said at a press conference after the match. “I 100% believe there are things we could do better.”

Extinction Rebellion, the group behind the protest, said in a press release they weren’t trying to protest against the sport of tennis or even against the emissions that had brought players and spectators to the tournament — instead, they wanted to bring people’s attention to the urgency of climate change.

Gauff’s reaction proves they succeeded. Before the protest, players had complained, often, about the heat. Daniil Medvedev, winner of the 2021 U.S. Open and third seed in the men’s draw this year, turned to a camera at one point during his match against Andrey Rublev to mutter a warning that a player would die. The weather was top of mind for everyone. But climate change? Up until the Gauff interview, the phrase had barely, if ever, come up.

The protestors were annoying (“kick them out,” spectators chanted as police and medical personnel tried to figure out how to remove the man who had glued his feet to the ground; “[expletive] right off, glue boy,” I texted my friend). But for players like Gauff, who at 19 years old is only just at the start of her career, the threat of climate change is too real to ignore, and far more disturbing than a momentary interruption of play.

“Moments like this are history-defining moments,” Gauff said after the match. “If that’s what they felt they needed to do to get their voices heard, I can’t really get upset at it.”

Yellow

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
AM Briefing

Exxon Counterattacks

On China’s rare earths, Bill Gates’ nuclear dream, and Texas renewables

An Exxon sign.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: Hurricane Melissa exploded in intensity over the warm Caribbean waters and has now strengthened into a major storm, potentially slamming into Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Jamaica as a Category 5 in the coming days • The Northeast is bracing for a potential nor’easter, which will be followed by a plunge in temperatures of as much as 15 degrees Fahrenheit lower than average • The northern Australian town of Julia Creek saw temperatures soar as high as 106 degrees.

THE TOP FIVE

1. Exxon sued California

Exxon Mobil filed a lawsuit against California late Friday on the grounds that two landmark new climate laws violate the oil giant’s free speech rights, The New York Times reported. The two laws would require thousands of large companies doing business in the state to calculate and report the greenhouse gas pollution created by the use of their products, so-called Scope 3 emissions. “The statutes compel Exxon Mobil to trumpet California’s preferred message even though Exxon Mobil believes the speech is misleading and misguided,” Exxon complained through its lawyers. California Governor Gavin Newsom’s office said the statutes “have already been upheld in court and we continue to have confidence in them.” He condemned the lawsuit, calling it “truly shocking that one of the biggest polluters on the planet would be opposed to transparency.”

Keep reading...Show less
Red
The Aftermath

How to Live in a Fire-Scarred World

The question isn’t whether the flames will come — it’s when, and what it will take to recover.

Wildfire aftermath.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

In the two decades following the turn of the millennium, wildfires came within three miles of an estimated 21.8 million Americans’ homes. That number — which has no doubt grown substantially in the five years since — represents about 6% of the nation’s population, including the survivors of some of the deadliest and most destructive fires in the country’s history. But it also includes millions of stories that never made headlines.

For every Paradise, California, and Lahaina, Hawaii, there were also dozens of uneventful evacuations, in which regular people attempted to navigate the confusing jargon of government notices and warnings. Others lost their homes in fires that were too insignificant to meet the thresholds for federal aid. And there are countless others who have decided, after too many close calls, to move somewhere else.

By any metric, costly, catastrophic, and increasingly urban wildfires are on the rise. Nearly a third of the U.S. population, however, lives in a county with a high or very high risk of wildfire, including over 60% of the counties in the West. But the shape of the recovery from those disasters in the weeks and months that follow is often that of a maze, featuring heart-rending decisions and forced hands. Understanding wildfire recovery is critical, though, for when the next disaster follows — which is why we’ve set out to explore the topic in depth.

Keep reading...Show less
The Aftermath

The Surprisingly Tricky Problem of Ordering People to Leave

Wildfire evacuation notices are notoriously confusing, and the stakes are life or death. But how to make them better is far from obvious.

Wildfire evacuation.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

How many different ways are there to say “go”? In the emergency management world, it can seem at times like there are dozens.

Does a “level 2” alert during a wildfire, for example, mean it’s time to get out? How about a “level II” alert? Most people understand that an “evacuation order” means “you better leave now,” but how is an “evacuation warning” any different? And does a text warning that “these zones should EVACUATE NOW: SIS-5111, SIS-5108, SIS-5117…” even apply to you?

Keep reading...Show less