Searching for the term “climate fiction” on Amazon today returns over 1,300 results.

You can also search for 'Dinosaur Erotica' on Amazon and get results.

There's a hook for every reading taste on Amazon.

I feel I should thank you for doing that particular bit of research so I never have to.

Once you've seen it, you can't unsee it

Velociraptors need love too.

I thought you were making this up. What are these books about?

Of course, some climate fiction comes from a denialist perspective, with the noble hero trying to save a doomed America from a vast socialmalistic conspiracy to, uh, cut pollution, move us away from centralized and foreign-dominated energy sources, and toward individual and local resilience based on subversive distributed energy systems and tyrannical cooperative local economies instead of patriotic freedom guns and liberty gold. Or something.

I'm sure that the poor sales of most denialist climate fiction comes from the aforementioned conspiracy rather than the laughable plots, tedious dialogue, and endless pages of Randian-style exposition.

Why do you deny reality? No warming in over 17 years. CO2 is NOT a pollutant. Water vapor is a more abundant and influential GHG. Data manipulated to fit the agenda. AGW is a religion at best.

You need better news sources. The last decade has included 8 or 9 of the hottest years on record. The only controversy left is among laymen.

It's not that new. John Christopher was writing post-climate-change apocalypses in the 60's and 70's. Davir Brin published "Earth" in 1990.

And "Stand on Zanzibar" won the Hugo in 1969.

Or Niven and Pournelle's Fallen Angels.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

Ah, I was thinking about John Brunner! "The Sheep Look Up" ranks up there with Silent Spring in forming my view of the world.

Yes! Also Jagged Orbit and Shockwave Rider.

And Nature's End.

It's call propaganda.

No warming in almost 19 years. Record Antarctic sea ice.
Recovering Arctic sea ice. No studies show an increase in the number or severity of droughts or floods. New record each and every day for the longest length of time since a major hurricane has hit the US. Violent tornado numbers trended down since the mid 1970s. Tropical cyclone accumulated energy index also trended down.

The earth is greening and crop yields are up because of the increase in CO2. Plants grow faster and stronger and are more water efficient and drought tolerant with more CO2.

now that is some imaginitive fiction. you aren't even a good denier, you should leave the arguing to the adults.

True. If only some of these people would do some actual research. And in general, things like "Merchants of Doubt" should be required viewing.

deniers are impervious to facts. I've tried cornering them by asking, "what would you consider convincing data and a convincing source of that data?" the answer is inevitably "nothing" and a denier who is angry that i am trying to "trick them". I wouldn't care if they were the lunatic fringe, but they're like a virus of stupidity and fear. Things get worse every year and their numbers grow stronger and as a population, we do nothing. I feel trapped on a sinking ship and my ship mates are madly pulling apart the boat while the captain keeps pushing firther out from shore.

I mostly try not to think about it anymore (this was the area my education was in) as I feel we've made our decisions and have already done terrible damage without the slightest hesitation and are still rushing full steam ahead. It's a dead issue. It doesn't matter anymore.

They children will grow up and realize than in many cases the cure is worse than the disease.

I feel the climate debate at the moment is still avoiding the elephant in the room: Overpopulation. Because the reality is the best thing an individual can do for the environment is not have children. And while fertility rates are highest in countries where the carbon footprint is smallest, dynamically this is not so: Poor people strive to be rich, and in doing so will expand their carbon footprints in all the ways we (the rich) already have. 7 billion of one species this far up the food chain is simply too many.

And yes, this IS a plug for my book, which deals with exactly these issues in a Margaret Atwood-esque way: smarturl.it/hyd

And it is the major factor that has been conveniently ignored. All the plans to address climate in any number of ways are rendered moot in a world that grows to more than 11 billion humans. What carbon tax is going to deal with that footprint? Then the even more absurd groups that regard this as something we need to be plan on supporting with increased production of everything, all while preserving their inalienable human rights and economic opportunity.

Not a single mention of Kim Stanley Robinson? MAJOR FAIL, NOOB!

We need to start thinking of a way to geoengineer a solution to the sun's eventual demise.

We've got a billion years to worry about that. Meanwhile, human civilization faces an existential threat over the next century from waste CO2 of its own making.

A shot at climate reality, Pinatubo II, publishing this Wednesday.

https://0urnearfuture.wordp...

What can be more fantastical than the world we actually live in -- needing a second earth to maintain man's growth and greed while many people really believe a second world is coming -- our due for belief in tales? We are writing this together -- dreaming of Mars missions while making a second Mars under our feet. Techno pods to our salvation. Paul's Jesus and the rapture to boot it all up. We have been fools for jettisoning ourselves from paradise. Writing earth out of the word portraits of man apart, united with the upper god.

Surprised there's no mention of Frank Herbert's 1965 "Dune".

Can't speak for whether any of the named titles are any good, but can say fiction can shape the attitudes of affected youth: in my day anti-war books like Catch 22, Seven Days in May, Dr. Strangelove, and nuclear warnings like On the Beach, not to mention anti-shut-up-and-take-the-boss-for-granted novels like 1984 and Brave New World left a generation with something to think about into their old ages.

It's too bad they made The Day After Tomorrow into a movie. Nature's End by the same authors was better in every way, and would have made a much better movie.

This is just a rehash of the post-apocalyptic shlock sci-fi of the 70s and 80s. Instead of unnamed natural catastrophes or nuclear war as the cause, writers are now plugging in Climate Change as the cause. Climate Change, a super-flu like Captain Tripps or Zombies; it's all the same basic story.

I would recommend State Of Fear by Michael Crichton.

Sure. When I want a good dose of climate change fiction, I just proceed over to Watt's Up With That. They even have a sense of irony, as confirmed with their current promotion of a book called "Climate Change - The Facts".

"A new literary genre". . . would this qualify as an exemplar?

http://fictionaut.com/stori...

or this?:

http://fictionaut.com/stori...

Genre identification counts for something, but so does sub-genre identification: this guy seems content to call his stuff "science satire", maybe he doesn't have academic or journalistic credentials.