ABC News wants you to air your imaginary environmental report

Want pragmatism? Then try "Climate Change In Our World" -- put together by British environmental and meteorological offices -- which shows us medium-case climate scenarios for the future to encourage level-headed preparation for what's to come.

But that's boring, no? If you want the drama of worst-case scenarios that evoke fear and panic, you have to turn to the U.S. -- and even better, to U.S. television.

"Earth 2100," a 2-hour ABC News special set to air this fall, will show how "the 'perfect storm' of climate change, resource depletion, and population growth could converge with catastrophic results." And in case the scary science isn't doom and gloom enough, ABC wants you to imagine and create an even scarier scenario -- on video.

For this "massive online game" that'll be "played" in stages until the "Earth 2100" show airs, ABC doesn't want the boring pragmatic stuff. You're to "imagine the unimaginable," then create a video "report" about it and send it to ABC. These videos "will be woven into an evolving web-based story, and the best ones will be used as the spine of the network primetime show."

First round: What will 2015 look like? ABC sets out a basic scenario for filmmakers to work from, and it doesn't sound good: We're still in Iraq, still not doing much as a nation to address climate change, still building more coal-fired power plants. Closer to home, "wildfires are raging out of control in Colorado and Southern California leaving thousands of people homeless."

Inspired? Make a video "report" and send it in by June 9. The scenarios that emerge from those videos will then be used to create the basic scenario for 2050, and so on for 2070 and 2100.

Just to be clear, despite my poking fun, I'm not saying "Earth 2100" will be a bad show necessarily. It's quite possible that doom and gloom scenarios may spur people into action, though they tend to leave me rather disillusioned and lethargic. It's just that I found "Earth 2100" rather humorously over the top, finding out about it right after trying out the sedate British "Climate Change In Our World." Both are about looking to 2100, both about spurring people to action. But the vastly different approaches seem rather symbolic of the differences I often see between the U.S. and U.K.