Climate and System Change: The Elephants in the Room

Climate and System Change: The Elephants in the Room

July 6, 2025

Recent posts Overshoot and Societal Pivot Points and Man-Earth System Problems and Solutions (Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3) have examined the climate-led polycrisis and predicament humanity finds itself in, and suggested solutions. This post examines where we are currently headed, and why we are not dealing with the root problems - the recognised yet unaddressed "elephants in the room".

What are the real reasons we do not set aside sufficient climate or development funding, or sufficient environmental taxes, or sufficient long-term funds for climate and future generations, or divert existing subsidies? These are common sense actions to take, for humanity to follow the path of survival.

#BAU #ICJClimateHearings #TheHague #INC #Vanuatu #ITLOS #ECHR #COP30 #G20 #greenfinance #greenbonds #bluebonds #movethemoney #CarbonDebtSwaps #DebtforNature #ClimateAction #RightsofNature #IndigenousRights #HumanRights #ClimateLegal #EnviromentalGovernance #GlobalRestoration #ClimateChange #Conservation #Ecocide #SDGs #UNFCCC

#Water #Infrastructure #Reforestation #Regeneration #NatureProtection #Overshoot #GDP #GPI #EcologicalOvershoot #Energy #Restoration #naturalcapital #greenfinance #ClimateRisk #Collapse #Drawdown #Extraction #Equity #GlobalClimateModels #ClimateAction #Nature #RightsofNature #NaturebasedSolutions #EcosystemRestoration #GlobalRestoration #ClimateChange #Biodiversity #Conservation #Ecocide #SDGs #ClimateFinance #NPA #MarineProtectionAreas #GreenandBlueCarbon #Ocean #CarbonRemoval #Mangroves #GenerationRestoration #WaterCrisis #Regeneration #SustainableDevelopment #Survival

Elephant 1: Failed Climate Leadership

As foretold by the IPCC AR6 report, described by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres as "an atlas of human suffering and a damning indictment of failed climate leadership." Our governments and leaders have failed abysmally, in delivering real progress on climate mitigation. Years of delays around the UN process have not helped. There have been key breakthroughs, after which the world could and should have done much better.

1.1 Climate impacts are already more widespread and severe

“Thou hast seen nothing yet” ~ Miguel de Cervantes

Prolonged droughts, extreme heat and record floods already threaten food security and livelihoods. Devastating floods and storms have forced hundreds of millions from their homes over the past two decades. Wildfires are affecting larger areas than ever before, bringing major ecological changes. Crop productivity growth in Africa has shrunk by over a third since 1960. Over half of the global population faces water insecurity at least one month a year. Higher temperatures are also enabling the spread of vector-borne and water-borne diseases.

Climate change is also harming species and whole ecosystems. Animal extinctions, mass die-offs, and migrations have become normalised. The Sixth Mass Extinction has entered a new phase of ecological collapse, where rapid extinctions occur in regions that have little direct contact with people. Examples include Germany (flying insects across 63 insect reserves dropped 75% in less than 30 years), the US (beetle numbers dropped 83% in 45 years) and Puerto Rico (insect biomass dropped up to 60-fold since the 1970s). These declines are occurring in ecosystems that are otherwise protected from direct human influence. Global insect biomass has declined at a rate of 1% p.a. (although some estimates put it as high as 2.5%). It is not much of a stretch to see that this is the fate of humanity too.

Decline Drivers - A tropical forest ecosystem is finely tuned to sustain a vastly biodiverse system of creatures. Each system element is interconnected: heat, humidity, rainfall, season length, the life cycles of insects and animals. As climate changes, food supplies diminish or become available at different times, and so do the animal and insect populations dependent on them.

Whereas historically, the main drivers of species decline were:

habitat loss and land conversion (agriculture, urbanisation);
pollution (pesticides, fertilisers);
biological factors (including pathogens and introduced species)

climate change (global heating in particular) has now become the dominant driver, as a destroyer of living conditions and environmental integrity.

“The killer – the cause that’s pulling the trigger – is actually water... For insects, staying hydrated is a unique physiological challenge: rather than lungs, their bodies are riddled with holes, called spiracles, that carry oxygen directly into the tissue… They’re all surface area. Insects can’t hold water.” [Even a brief drought lasting just a few days can wipe out millions of humidity-dependent insects.] ~ David L. Wagner, University of Connecticut

“But what we see here in the preserved areas – that as far as we can tell, are free of even these destructive insecticides and pesticides – even here, the insect numbers are going down horrifyingly dramatically” ~ Winnie Hallwachs, Guanacaste conservation area

“When I arrived here [Costa Rica] in 1963 the dry season was four months. Today, it is six months”

~ Daniel Janzen, Guanacaste conservation area

1.2 We are locked into even worse impacts from climate change

Even if the world rapidly decarbonizes, GHGs already present in the atmosphere and new sources of emissions make some very significant climate impacts unavoidable. Climate change will lead to greater food insecurity, and will drive greater health and poverty challenges. An additional 350 million people will experience water scarcity by 2030. And up to 14% of terrestrial species will face high risks of extinction. Species and ecosystems will face dramatic changes as well, with inundation from rising sea levels, declines in species and large-scale die-offs of trees and species.

Even limiting global warming to 1.5 C (the missed Paris goal) is not safe for all. Every fraction of a degree of additional warming escalates the threat level - to populations, biodiversity and ecosystems. Glaciers are already disappearing around the world and will ultimately become a footnote. The Arctic, Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets are similarly disappearing at record speed, which adds to future global warming.

Physical risks are escalating as the EEI (Earth Energy Imbalance) increases - stronger storms, longer heatwaves and droughts, more extreme precipitation, rapid sea-level rise, loss of Arctic sea ice and ice sheets, thawing permafrost and more.

As feedbacks strengthen and new feedbacks appear, the probability of high-impact events and tipping points, such as mass forest dieback, increases. Such risks will compound as multiple hazards occur at the same time and in the same regions.

Droughts - As recently reported, a new NDMC paper synthesizes information from hundreds of government, scientific and media sources to highlight impacts within the most acute drought hotspots in Africa, the Mediterranean, Latin America, SE Asia and beyond. “

The Mediterranean countries represent canaries in the coalmine for all modern economies. The struggles experienced by Spain, Morocco and Turkey to secure water, food and energy under persistent drought offer a preview of water futures under unchecked global warming. No country, regardless of wealth or capacity, can afford to be complacent... This is not a dry spell. This is a slow-moving global catastrophe, the worst I’ve ever seen.” ~ Mark Svoboda, US NDMC

“Ripple effects can turn regional droughts into global economic shocks... No country is immune when critical water-dependent systems start to collapse.” ~ Dr Cody Knutson

Droughts fueled by human destruction of the environment are projected to affect 3 in 4 people by 2050. According to the UNCCD report Economics of Drought, investing in sustainable land and water management is essential to reduce their costs, which already exceed $307 billion p.a. globally. Costs can escalate due to knock-on effects of drought on different sectors – such as energy and health, and the wider economy. Drought costs tend to be underestimated due to a failure to account for the multidimensional and multiscale effects on society and the environment. The report estimates the costs of implementing nations’ national drought and related plans at an estimated US$210 billion (2016 – 2030 period).

By contrast, a nature-positive economy could generate up to US$10.1 trillion p.a. in business value and create up to 395 million jobs by 2030. Tripling investment in nature-based solutions up to 2030 could generate 20 million additional jobs.

In some regions, effective adaptation measures exist, but political, financial and social challenges hinder implementation. But in others, highly vulnerable populations and ecosystems already face or are fast approaching “hard” limits to adaptation. Where climate impacts are so severe that no adaptation measures can effectively prevent loss and damage. For example, some coastal communities in the tropics have lost entire coral reef ecosystems that once sustained their food security and livelihoods. Others have had to abandon low-lying neighborhoods and cultural sites as sea levels rise. These losses and damages will only increase as global temperatures continue to rise.

1.3 Has the Window of Opportunity for Climate Action already closed?

The window has two main elements to it – whether we can take decisive action to stop emissions (given energy’s structural role in our societies and economies) – and whether we can take decisive climate mitigation action (using Nature and climate intervention /other technologies to ameliorate the damage already done).

Given the historical lack of progress and failures to rein in fossil fuel production and consumption, yes we have already failed on the first element. But it is never too late to improve the situation.

Add in climate change impacts, strengthening system feedbacks and the SMOC reversal, and the lack of any well-financed climate action, and it looks like we have also failed on the second element. Again, it is never too late to improve our situation. Delayed action risks triggering impacts so catastrophic that our world will become unrecognizable. Changing course will require immediate, ambitious and concerted efforts to slash emissions, build resilience, conserve ecosystems, and dramatically increase finance for adaptation and addressing loss and damage.

1.4 Climate Overshoot

The Paris Agreement goals have been breached. The long-term climate reality is very different to political goals and IPCC long-term averages. We have already breached 1.5 C. A global temperature increase of 2 C above pre-industrial levels is likely 5-10 years away, based on current trends. And we are already experiencing local heatwaves (land and sea) with temperature anomalies that are multiples of 1.5 C.

The current trends, feedbacks and accelerations imply greater nonlinearity going forwards. We are still on the BAU (Stated Net Zero) path. Recent studies show that global emissions would need to be reduced sooner than 2050, to have a better chance of staying below 4 C (by 2085). Net-negative emissions, namely removal of excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and oceans, will be required to reduce the overshoot.

1.5 Ecological Overshoot

Four global systems drive the majority of ecological overshoot: Food, Built Environment, Manufacturing and Transportation.

Elephant 2: Failed Climate Financing

2.1 Failure through Design?

The closing of SB62, the Bonn Climate Change Conference, is the latest example of insufficient progress being made, despite much willingness from the majority of nations.

“I’m not going to sugar coat it – we have a lot more to do before we meet again in Belém… We need to go further, faster, and fairer”

~ Simon Steill, UN Climate Change Executive Secretary

UNFCCC Progress: The global UNFCCC treaty was created in 1992 to stabilize GHG concentrations and “prevent dangerous human interference with the climate system.” Since then, we have seen Kyoto (1997), Paris (2015) and a raft of other climate actions and objectives. But progress is too slow. True alignment and agreement are elusive. Unanimous consent imposes dilution of many of the actions that could be meaningful.
Failure through Process: Is this really the best we can do? If a company was run this way, it would be out of business long ago. A successful company implements, it is not paralysed by negotiations with its Board and shareholders. The current structure simply cannot deliver the necessary action at the speed and scale required, to ensure a safe future for humanity.
The UNFCCC process is the nexus for global climate action. In general, polluter nations are willing to take ambitious national actions. But these are not sufficient on their own. The problems arise when dealing with international commitments and cooperation. In simple terms, a "you go first" mentality must be overcome at the international level.

2.2 Financing and Responsibility Stalemates

The current refusal to provide sufficient climate finance ambition, and the failure to negotiate meaningful actions and treaties, are symptoms of the stalemate between ‘former’ colonial powers and the Global South.

On top of this, the level of collective denial amongst polluter nations (past and present) is disconnected from reality. The arguments put forward at the Dec 2024 ICJ Climate Hearings hold no weight against the seriousness of the Earth’s environmental degradation.

Unfortunately the current momentum and actions trajectory are unlikely to deliver sufficient financing, on the right terms, or change the long-term climate progression. And more system feedbacks are emerging, with combinatory potential and non-linearity. The Sixth Great Extinction has entered a new phase.

Finance for Climate Action is, for an increasing number of countries, existential finance that MUST be raised. Their plight is immediate - the canary in the coalmine, the tip of the iceberg. Unfortunately, polluting nations (past and present) appear content to consign their populations and everyone else to a hothouse Earth scenario, with 4+C scenarios by 2085-2100. This is an existential risk not just for the Most Affected Nations but everyone else.

“The world has thus reached a point of climate emergency. We face potentially unmanageable risks, already within the next decades. Our only chance is to decisively start mitigating climate change, which require massive reductions in global emissions. The UNEP Emission Gap Report, released just before COP 29 puts the task in clear numbers. Global emissions must be reduced by 7.5% per year from now on, to have a chance of holding the 1.5°C limit. This means that the task for the world, and for climate finance, is to take approximately 3 billion tons of CO2 off the global economy in 2025. It is thus necessary to mobilise climate finance now - starting at full scale in 2025 - not “by 2035” (or “by 2030” as the Third Report of the IHLEG on Climate Finance suggests). Waiting until 2030 or 2035 to deliver full scale would be inconsistent with climate science, and very likely be path to climate disaster.”

“Unfortunately, the current NCQG agreement by proposing that developed country parties at least “$300bn a year by 2035, be made up from a wide variety of sources, including public and private, bilateral and multilateral funding, including alternative sources’’ is completely inconsistent with the Paris Agreement aim and 1.5°C limit.”

NCQG Open Letter (Nov 2024) to All States Party to the Convention, Mr. Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC Secretariat, and HE António Guterres, UN Secretary-General

The above extract is demonstrative of how we are failing in the task of financing the most essential actions for humanity. To finance climate mitigation and adaptation before it is too late.

And we are failing for reasons that are all to do with legacy and maintaining advantage.

Agreement would be far easier to reach if there were no polluter legacies or colonialist legacies - can we see an obvious trade appearing for the countries concerned? Solutions for these legacies are offered in the Nature Protection in 2045 post.

In the long-term, this is about our very survival as a species – the Survival Imperative. We must take the initiative and get this done.

Elephant 3: Failed Civilisation

3.1 Failed Governance

The answer lies partly in how governments have been ‘captured’ by the prevailing systems of control and economics. And how short-termist and self-interested nations and their political classes have become.

As has been amply demonstrated by now, we are party to a short-termist economics-driven system that is perpetuated by laws, corporations, elites and governments. And at key times the economic or other logic on display can be seen to act as an override to morality and common sense.

The underlying 'religion' at work is economic power and status quo /hierarchy maintenance. The behaviour displayed at the COPs and the ICJ Climate Hearings betrays the lip service at work. As do contemporary examples of famine, genocide and other atrocities (environmental, economic or military).

Nature, life capital and ‘virtues’ are thus dominated and subjugated by the governing system of economic interests and power. We are stuck in an extractive system, one with rules that are ultimately self-destructive. An unstoppable globally-extractive machine largely running on autopilot.

Faced with accelerating climate change and Nature’s wrath, we are stuck in a failed structure and civilisation that will absolutely take us down with it. Unless we fundamentally change our laws and societies.

3.2 'Hypernormalisation' of Problems

Systemic crises (e.g. wars, human rights abuses, ecological collapse, unchecked corporatism) have become so embedded in our political and social fabric that they appear not only inevitable, but strangely “normal”.

Coined by sociologist Alexei Yurchak in reference to the final years of the Soviet Union, and later expanded upon by filmmaker Adam Curtis, hypernormalisation has gained relevance in explaining the inertia and passivity that define global responses to pressing crises. A modern condition where the dysfunctional (and often overwhelming) nature of our systems is universally recognized, yet people continue to behave as if these systems are functioning properly. Some examples:

The normalisation of conflict is evident in how societies have come to accept the existence of military campaigns in parts of the Middle East, Asia, Africa and elsewhere, with seemingly little public outcry or scrutiny. Armed conflicts drag on for years or longer, generating suffering that is reported as background noise rather than as global emergencies requiring resolution. Media narratives, political rhetoric and corporate interests frame these conflicts as fixtures of geopolitical reality, rather than addressable problems. This normalisation desensitizes populations to human suffering, civilian casualties, and the erosion of international law. These conflicts are often driven or exacerbated by struggles over resources (oil, minerals, arable land), water and territory. Future disputes over dwindling water supplies, fertile land, and pollution threaten to further entrench cycles of violence, displacement and state failure.
The treatment of marginalized groups (whether along lines of race, class, gender or ethnicity) is another hypernormalisation. Structural inequalities, systemic racism, mass incarceration and refugee / migrant crises are recognized as severe issues, but met with temporary or deferred solutions. Tangible change remains elusive. Activism is often co-opted into corporate branding or virtue gestures, reinforcing the sense that while everyone agrees the system is flawed, meaningful transformation is out of reach. Thus, cruelty and inequality persist beneath a surface of hollow consensus.
Economic and social inequalities - both within and between nations - are another hypernormalised condition. The stark and growing wealth gaps between Global North and Global South constituents, and between elites and the masses. The colonialist legacies of extraction, exploitation and underdevelopment continue to shape global trade, finance and diplomacy. Poverty, hunger and disease in the Global South are treated as unfortunate but enduring features of the world, rather than as the consequences of historical and ongoing structural violence. Inequality is normalised and efforts to address it are framed as aid, charity or incremental reform rather than systemic overhaul. Consumers are offered the illusion of choice - between nearly identical products, political candidates, or media outlets, while real alternatives are marginalized or excluded. Concentration of wealth and influence in the hands of the few is acknowledged and by default accepted – the neoliberal framework remains unquestioned. The very structures that generate inequality and insecurity are treated as immutable, natural, or “too big to change”. And those that embody yet exploit the system are those that are “too big to fail”.
Corporatism and late-stage capitalism are another example of hypernormalisation. Huge multinational corporations dominate not only economies but also political systems - shaping laws, policies and cultural norms to further their interests and power. Multinational corporations have acquired rights and protections that often surpass those of citizens and communities, enabling them to pursue profit even at the cost of public good. Through mechanisms like investor-state dispute settlements, intellectual property regimes and trade agreements, corporatism is insulated from democratic challenge. The result is ecocide and damage on a planetary scale, as corporations exploit land, water and other commons for short-term gain. The legal and political systems that should restrain such destruction instead enable and legitimise it.
And lastly, climate change is perhaps the starkest example of hypernormalisation. The scientific consensus on the existential threat posed by global warming is overwhelming, yet political and economic systems remain largely unresponsive at the scale required. Extreme weather, droughts, rising seas, mass extinctions etc. are reported with increasing frequency. Governments write policy papers, discuss endlessly at summits and pledge reductions. Yet for over three decades global GHG emissions have continued to rise, ecosystems continue to degrade, and fossil fuel industries continue to expand. The dissonance and dysfunction of global climate governance is apparent to all. The crisis is framed as urgent, yet the proposed solutions remain incremental and market-oriented, unable to challenge the deeper economic and political structures that drive environmental destruction.

The Consequences of Hypernormalisation

Hypernormalisation fosters apathy, despair, and political paralysis. It creates a culture where critique is allowed, even encouraged, but real alternatives are dismissed as utopian or impossible. The spectacle of debate, protest, and official concern obscures the absence of meaningful change. As people internalize the idea that these crises are too large, too complex, or too deeply rooted to solve, collective agency atrophies. The future is imagined not as a field of possibility but as a terrain of managed decline. The systems themselves become more fragile and vulnerable, precisely because their dysfunction is being ignored or otherwise justified.

To break free from Hypernormalisation

Recognizing the illegitimacy and artificiality of the “normal” is the first step toward dismantling the structures that sustain our problems - such as conflict, injustice, environmental destruction, corporate and international hegemony. This means rejecting the illusion of permanence that surround today’s problems, and building movements capable of imagining and demanding alternative futures.

Societies must confront not just the crises themselves but the mental frameworks that render them invisible or unaddressable. Rethinking economic systems, power relations and our relationship with the natural world with organised solidarity. Ultimately, breaking free from hypernormalisation demands courage: the courage to see clearly, to speak honestly, and to act collectively for a world beyond managed catastrophe.

“None of this is surprising. Finding new ways to privatize the commons and profit from disaster is what our current system is built to do; left to its own devices, it is capable of nothing else. The shock doctrine, however, is not the only way societies respond to crises. We have all witnessed this in recent years as the financial meltdown that began on Wall Street in 2008 reverberated around the world. A sudden rise in food prices helped create the conditions for the Arab Spring. Austerity policies have inspired mass movements from Greece to Spain to Chile to the United States to Quebec. Many of us are getting a lot better at standing up to those who would cynically exploit crises to ransack the public sphere. And yet these protests have also shown that saying no is not enough. If opposition movements are to do more than burn bright and then burn out, they will need a comprehensive vision for what should emerge in the place of our failing system, as well as serious political strategies for how to achieve those goals. Progressives used to know how to do this. There is a rich populist history of winning big victories for social and economic justice in the midst of large-scale crises. These include, most notably, the policies of the New Deal after the market crash of 1929 and the birth of countless social programs after World War II.”

Naomi Klein, in ‘This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate’

But what of our fellow nations? Will we solve the climate crisis together?

3.3 Neocolonialism

“The white man seeks to conquer nature, to bend it to his will and to use it wastefully until it is all gone and then he simply moves on, leaving the waste behind him and looking for new places to take. The whole white race is a monster who is always hungry and what he eats is land”.

~ Chiksika, Kispokotha Shawnee leader

“Sovereign debt crises in the Global South are not isolated economic mishaps — they are structural features of a global economic system rooted in colonial legacies and sustained through dependency. This working paper from the Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) challenges the narrative that current debt restructuring mechanisms, like the G20’s Common Framework or the Debt Service Suspension Initiative, can solve the crisis. These initiatives fail to address the structural roots of indebtedness, treating it as a liquidity problem rather than a deeper issue of trade imbalances, resource extraction, and economic subordination. Debt, the paper argues, is a tool of neocolonial control — used by creditor nations and international financial institutions to keep the Global South locked into roles of resource extraction and low-value production. From Haiti’s independence debt to the modern debt burdens across Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia, sovereign debt has maintained economic hierarchies established during colonialism. The paper proposes the formation of a Global South Debtors’ Coalition — a transformative platform for coordinated negotiation and collective economic planning. Learning from past coordination efforts like the Cartagena Initiative, it outlines strategies for building effective and lasting debtor alliances.”

Institute for Economic Justice (Fadhel Kaboub, Andres Chiriboga) - A Coherent Framework for Sovereign Debt and Economic Transformation: Towards a Global South Debtors’ Coalition (April 2025)

As with prior examples, neocolonial and economic hierarchies of control and the ‘law of the strongest’ have held sway for a very long time.

Characteristics of financial neocolonialism

Debt Dependence - Developing nations become reliant on loans from international institutions or nations, often accumulating unsustainable debt burdens.
Debt Conditionality - Loans are frequently tied to specific policy reforms (structural adjustment programs) which may prioritise Lender interests over the long-term development needs of the borrower.
Trade Imbalances - Global trade systems can be structured in ways that favour developed economies, leading to developing nations becoming exporters of raw materials and importers of finished goods, limiting their economic diversification and value added.
Investment Control - Foreign direct investment, while often touted as beneficial, can grant significant control over key sectors of developing economies to foreign corporations, putting profit repatriation in conflict with local development.
Currency Manipulation - Powerful nations can exert influence over exchange rates and monetary policies, impacting the economic stability and competitiveness of developing countries.

As set out in Man-Earth System Problems and Solutions – Part 1, Global South countries are still marked by the social, cultural and economic legacies of colonialism, even after independence. Home to c.85% of the world’s population and with youthful populations, many are resource-poor, economically-dependent nations.

“You have almost a system [akin to] apartheid South Africa where the minority decides for the majority, and that's still the situation on the world stage today. We don't want to be told what is right for us, we want the fault lines of the current global governance architecture to be redesigned, to be reformed, to be transformed […] we want to be part of the process to create a more equitable, a more inclusive, a multipolar global community”

~ Dr. Anil Sooklal, Deputy Director-General - MEA, Department of International Relations and Cooperation; Former South African Ambassador to the EU

Wealthy countries’ structures of control still apply to today’s world order and ‘hierarchy maintenance’. They in effect disadvantage fellow nations, but ultimately themselves.

If we fail to help fellow nations, we will not deliver the climate mitigation action needed to save everyone. To solve the climate crisis requires solving many of the legacy problems that make the crisis worse. Past emissions / carbon debts and colonialism feature strongly as part of this legacy.

The common climate solution is absolutely tied to our common fate. Only by supporting all nations can we solve the climate crisis.

"Our true nationality is mankind". “Adapt or perish, now as ever, is Nature's inexorable imperative”. ~ H.G. Wells

Of course there are many in the hierarchy who will not (never) agree to such a thing. And so the ‘you go first’ mentality continues, to everyone’s mutual detriment and demise.

Presently, 3.3-3.6 billion people are estimated to live in countries with high vulnerability to climate impacts. Global hotspots are concentrated in Small Island Developing States (SIDS), the Arctic, South Asia, Central and South America, and much of sub-Saharan Africa. Inequity, conflict and development challenges such as poverty, weak governance, and limited access to basic services like healthcare not only heighten sensitivity to hazards, but also constrain communities’ ability to adapt to climatic changes.

By 2030, extreme droughts across the Amazon are expected to spur rural migration to cities. Such development patterns shape climate inequality. They also make the ecosystems more vulnerable to climate change. Land-use change, habitat fragmentation, pollution and species exploitation all weaken ecological resilience and further amplify vulnerability.

At least 170 countries’ climate policies now include adaptation, but many have yet to move beyond planning into implementation. A gap exists between current adaptation levels and those needed, largely driven by limited financial support.

The Global South and Indigenous Peoples have much to teach the Global North when it comes to adapting to hotter climes, not just deserts and tropical regions. As global temperatures rise to 2 C then towards 3 C above pre-industrial, so our cities and towns need to adapt. Their redesign needs to robustly deal with the increasing extremes and demands of heat, humidity, drought, pluvials, water storage and supply, urban cooling and so on, with nature-based solutions increasingly taking precedence.

3.4 Legal Actions

Some three decades after the Rio Convention and Kyoto Protocol, implementing robust national climate protection and ecocide laws is something most nations still need to accomplish.

Recent post Trends in Climate & Legal Action highlights that climate change is not only a scientific or political issue, it has become an important - perhaps the most important - legal issue. The economic effects and legal consequences of the climate crisis are accelerating. We now need our legal systems to force us down the right path – against legacy energies and towards restoration and survival.

Notwithstanding the UN COP and related processes, this week’s IACHR Advisory Opinion seeks to support exactly that kind of change, ruling on the Climate Emergency and Human Rights. The Advisory Opinion builds on the Court’s 2017 advisory ruling that recognized the right to a healthy environment as a standalone human right, deepening its application in the context of climate breakdown.

The IACHR Advisory Opinion and other similar rulings (ITLOS 2024, ICJ to come) provide an alternative means / legal basis for nations to work together and take action against polluters.

The Court recognises 3 separate obligations - the obligations to respect, to protect, and to cooperate:

Obligation to respect: States must refrain from any type of behaviour that leads to further harm.
Obligation to protect: States must adopt all measures to decrease risk from degradation of the global climate system and exposure and vulnerability to climate change impacts. States must regulate major polluters, private and public, to protect human rights. Where companies fail to comply, States must stop polluting activities and demand remediation for climate harms.
Obligation to cooperate: States must respond comprehensively to the climate emergency, not just mitigation and adaptation. States must cooperate to put an end to any conduct that violates international environmental law.
Rights of/to Nature: States are under a positive obligation to adopt measures that guarantee restoration and regeneration of ecological systems, recognising local indigenous knowledge.
States must implement policies to ensure future generations will have similar development opportunities as we do now.

“States must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems” ~ Judge Nancy Hernández López, IACHR President

“The Court has declared that we are in a climate emergency that is undermining the human rights of present and future generations and that human rights must be at the center of any effective response" ~ Nikki Reisch, Center for International Environmental Law Climate & Energy

"The major carbon polluting nations – along with the multi-national corporations over which they can and should exercise control – retain the capacity to dial-back the CO2 control knob, yet in defiance of the common interest they continue along a fatal path." ~ Dr. James Hansen

Elephant 4: Failed Understandings and Relations

Whilst this is really part of Elephant 2 (Financing and Responsibility Stalemates), the hurdles for change come from better understandings and relations between peoples and Nature. From which momentous and forward-looking agreements can be reached, for the sake of all.

Addressing long-lived legacies and positionings, to be restored to balance.
Understanding Nature restoration is the only future, finance a tool for such.

These are beautifully summed up in the following ‘poetic provocation’ by Ashanti Kunene (open in a new window to view fully).

Link: Ashanti Kunene, Systemic Investing Summit 2025 (video)

Elephant 5: Further Negative Climate Developments

Threatening to upend all of our current climate mitigation efforts are new revelations / climate developments, all of which are very serious.

“We are witnessing a true reversal of ocean circulation in the Southern Hemisphere—something we’ve never seen before... While the world is debating the potential collapse of the AMOC in the North Atlantic, we’re seeing that the SMOC is not just weakening, but has reversed.”

~ Antonio Turiel, ICM-CSIC researcher

5.1 SMOC reversal

The reversal of the SMOC (Southern Meridional or Antarctic Overturning Circulation) has been detected last week. The upwelling of deep, warm, CO₂-rich waters is believed to be driving accelerated sea ice melt in the Southern Ocean.

In the long term, this process could double current atmospheric CO₂ concentrations by releasing carbon that has been stored in the deep ocean for centuries - with catastrophic consequences for the global climate. Changes to the Southern Ocean carbon cycle have been central to many past climate transitions.

Source: Hansen (2021)

“The planet is sending us increasingly clear signals that we are crossing critical thresholds... And in this case, it has done so from a remote corner of the world that is very difficult to monitor: the Southern Ocean. Thanks to satellites and cutting-edge observation tools, we can now see what was once invisible.” ~ Estrella Olmedo, ICM-CSIC researcher

And with the reversal of the SMOC already in place, one can speculate about what that means for the stability of the interconnected systems such as the AMOC, and the GMOC / Global ocean conveyor belt.

Antarctic Methane Releases

"While the climate sensitivity and importance of subsurface fluid and greenhouse gas reservoirs have received attention in the Arctic, the role of Antarctica in global methane emissions and the carbon cycle has largely been overlooked. Significant volumes of fluid and gases exist as subsurface reservoirs in the Antarctic, and geophysical surveys have identified that these intersect with hydrate, permafrost, and glacial ice systems, with connections to the coast. These subglacial fluid reservoirs contain highly saline brines enriched in trace metals, nutrients, and gases, as a result of cryo-concentration through freeze-thaw cycles and extended rock-water interaction times2,6,7. Concurrently, an estimated 21,000 Gigatons of carbon (GtC) exists below Antarctic ice sheets, with up to 400 GtC immobilised as gas hydrates and a further 400 GtC of methane in subsurface marine reservoirs"

Seabrook et al. (2023) - Emergent Antarctic seafloor seeps: A tipping point reached?

5.2 System Feedbacks and Nonlinearity

Positive Feedbacks - The balance of the hydrological cycle is being disrupted by climate change and feedback mechanisms linked to human activities. In the short-term, climate change is manifesting as a regular series of natural disasters, such that many governments and scientists have already declared a climate emergency. The severity of climate losses is a function of time - temperatures are rising as a result of fast and slow Earth system feedbacks. A number of these positive feedbacks are already occurring at a faster rate than scientists had previously predicted e.g. the disappearing Arctic ice pack, the weakening AMOC, thawing permafrost, reversal of the SMOC. As a result the risks of dangerous climate change are steadily increasing, with the Earth system tipping to a less hospitable ‘hothouse’ climate system. Both the number and impact of these system feedbacks is increasing with time.

Tipping Points - The long-term existential threat comes from tipping points. Climate tipping points occur when positive system feedbacks (from existing global warming) lead to a further jump in global average temperatures. Once triggered, feedbacks can occur without any additional anthropogenic emissions or other actions. The resulting transition may be abrupt or gradual.

5.3 Long-Term Climate Reality

Much attention is paid to whether we are 1.5 C above pre-industrial global mean temperature. But this is merely a short-term limit focused on as a "hard limit", beyond which the Earth's climate becomes increasingly precarious.

What we are currently experiencing with rising temperatures are the 'fast feedbacks' of past emissions. As we continue to produce more and more emissions, additional fast feedbacks will be added to the mix. And over time, the slower long-term feedbacks will also become relevant. The reality is that we are already going to see much much more warming, due to these slower long-term climate feedbacks. Hansen's 2023 paper Global Warming in the Pipeline discusses the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity

"Improved knowledge of glacial-to-interglacial global temperature change yields Charney (fast-feedback) equilibrium climate sensitivity 1.2 ± 0.3°C (2σ) per W/m2, which is 4.8°C ± 1.2°C for doubled CO2. Consistent analysis of temperature over the full Cenozoic era—including ‘slow’ feedbacks by ice sheets and trace gases—supports this sensitivity and implies that CO2 was 300–350 ppm in the Pliocene and about 450 ppm at transition to a nearly ice-free planet, exposing unrealistic lethargy of ice sheet models. Equilibrium global warming for today’s GHG amount is 10°C, which is reduced to 8°C by today’s human-made aerosols. Equilibrium warming is not ‘committed’ warming; rapid phaseout of GHG emissions would prevent most equilibrium warming from occurring."

The hopeful part of this extract is that equilibrium warming is not a certainty - IF there is a rapid phaseout of GHG emissions.

The BAU reality is quite different. It means that we will probably see +4°C mean temperature rise by around 2085, rising over the coming centuries.

Elephant 6: Not Listening to the Scientists

The Tragedy of the Horizon

The Short-Term versus Long-Term (see also section 3 of Societal Pivot Points and the human biases section of Climate Uncertainty and Risk) is one of the core structural problems affecting the coordinated response and prioritisation of the climate crisis above all else.

"Climate change is the Tragedy of the Horizon. We don’t need an army of actuaries to tell us that the catastrophic impacts of climate change will be felt beyond the traditional horizons of most actors – imposing a cost on future generations that the current generation has no direct incentive to fix."

~ Mark Carney, Bank of England 2015 speech

Over the years, countless warnings to leaders have come from leading scientists and scientific organisations. Warnings of climate overshoot and of the causes and consequences. Warnings of tipping points and planetary boundaries. Starting in 1972 with the Limits to Growth analysis.

6.1 Recalibration 23 Study

Nebel et al. (2023) recalibrate the 2005 ‘Limits to Growth’ World3-03 model, originally presented back in 1972. As with the updated 2021 Limits to Growth model (Herrington, 2021), they conclude that the world is far away from a stabilized world scenario, and our highly probable future is one of overshoot then collapse.

Despite 50 years of knowledge about the dynamics of collapse, we have failed to initiate a systematic change to prevent it. Despite technological advances, we also require a change in mindsets and the way we organize our society (Irwin 2015; Wamsler & Brink, 2018).

Once the global economy starts to require more energy than it can produce, it must begin contracting. Global population and industrial capabilities must contract with the falling availability of fossil fuels and resources. Thermodynamic reality means our civilization turning into a post-industrial, post-fossil fuels economy.

6.2 The ‘Plague Phase’

Humanity has never before faced a global polycrisis resulting from its overshoot of environmental limits. And this overshoot has occurred in a very short period of time - literally 4 generations of people. In just 85 years we have grown like a swarm of locusts from 2 billion to reach 8.2 billion. Today, the global climate has gone from stability to acceleration / continual warming, and is almost certain to grow far more chaotic in coming decades.

Population Overshoot - What population can the planet sustainably support?

Conservative estimates (and the Limits to Growth analysis) point towards a global sustainable population limit of 1-3 billion, lower over time. Population reduction is likely to come in phases, based on fewer births (well below replacement rate), greater mortality and disease, increased potential for major natural disasters and conflicts. Progressive climate impacts over time will create the conditions for crop failures and increasing food and water insecurity, leading to severe shortages. Local produce and resources will return as the ultimate life-supporting security.

Humanity is now approaching the peak of the 'plague phase' of a one-off global population cycle, according to Professor William Rees. In agreement with the Limits to Growth analysis, global population will crash because of depleted resources, habitat deterioration and psycho-social feedback, including possible war over remaining ‘assets,’ sometime in this century.

“The recent history of human population dynamics resembles the ‘boom-bust’ cycle of any other species introduced to a new habitat with abundant resources and no predators, therefore little negative feedback… The population expands rapidly (exponentially), until it depletes essential resources and pollutes its habitat. Negative feedback (overcrowding, disease, starvation, resource scarcity/competition/conflict) then reasserts itself and the population crashes to a level at or below theoretical carrying capacity (it may go locally extinct). Some species populations, in simple habitats, cycle repeatedly through boom and bust phases. The height of the boom is called the ‘plague phase’ of such cycles. … Homo sapiens are currently approaching the peak of the plague phase of a one-off global population cycle and will crash because of depleted resources, habitat deterioration and psycho-social feedback, including possible war over remaining ‘assets,’ sometime in this century. (“But wait,” I hear you protest. “Humans are not just any other species. We’re smarter; we can plan ahead; we just won’t let this happen!” Perhaps, but what is the evidence so far that our leaders even recognize the problem?) … Climate change is not the only existential threat confronting modern society. Indeed, we could initiate any number of conversations that end with the self-induced implosion of civilization and the loss of 50% or even 90% of humanity. And that places the global community in a particularly embarrassing predicament.

Homo sapiens, that self-proclaimed most-intelligent-of-species, is facing a genuine, unprecedented, hydra-like ecological crisis, yet its political leaders, economic elites and sundry other messiahs of hope will not countenance a serious conversation about of any of its ghoulish heads. Climate change is perhaps the most aggressively visible head, yet despite decades of high-level talks … and several international agreements to turn things around, atmospheric CO2 and other GHG concentrations have more than doubled … and, with other GHG concentrations, are still rising at record rates.”

William E. Rees FRSC, Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia

6.3 Transition Characteristics

When confronted with evidence that our collective path is unsustainable, many tend to jump to unhelpful binary thinking, framing the future in simplistic terms as “the end of the world” or “apocalypse”. Yes a sudden end to humanity is always possible (with very low probability) - we have nuclear arsenals and international conflict has been 'normalised'; global connectivity makes us more vulnerable to other disruptions - such as financial, social media, or AI-driven electronic and drone warfare targeting critical infrastructure. Nothing is certain, but it is far more likely that we will experience decades (or centuries) of progressive population, social and economic decline under the 'Energy Descent' scenario, ultimately reverting back to our pre-Overshoot state.

And more certain is that the climate will become much hotter but also more nonlinear/chaotic, as regional tipping points and system feedbacks take greater hold. There is still considerable divergence between the best and worst case scenarios. And we will still have agency to affect some of the outcomes.

As part of this we need to overcome politically-driven economic growth dogma and make serious plans for a satisficing economy - how Society will adjust to much reduced production and consumption, and a return to its fundamental hierarchy of needs.

As we work through the impacts of Energy Descent, we will need to maximize social cohesion and efficiencies, in order to maintain overall stability. The future will necessarily be more equal and equitable – the ‘everybody needs to eat and work’ model. With communities and cooperatives again forming the bedrock of their members’ needs and quality of life.

6.4 Energy Descent and Aftermath

(i) Energy and Resources Overshoot - Will we be able to reduce our planetary footprint while still pursuing economic growth?

With a 100% historical correlation between GDP and energy production/consumption, the default answer must be no. We are in a position of severe overshoot, so first we will observe peak energy /peak population and then energy descent, followed by some likely policy reforms as the world adjusts. During this phase - and with too much money chasing the same familiar opportunities - yes we may expect a form of ‘economic consolidation’ rather than continued growth. In similar fashion to how most companies have trodden water while the FAANGs / Magnificent Seven (Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Broadcom, Meta, Microsoft, NVIDIA) have dominated S&P500 growth and performance.

(ii) Energy Descent - What impact will declining availability of fossil fuels and other critical resources have on the Energy Transition and Society?

For the time being, the reality is that the clean energy transition is currently additive to global energy supply and not the replacement sought. We can expect clean energy to provide the means for a more dignified energy descent, perhaps a soft landing of sorts. As fossil fuel consumption declines, we may even have a period of cleaner technology dominance, with lower environmental and human impacts. In the best case, we may have nuclear fusion or much improved efficiency of renewable energies and storage. Nuclear fusion might yet prolong the modern age, whereas solar (and wind) are more likely to dominate our future path of energy descent and the transition to a simpler post-industrial world. And by then, we will be in the eye of the climate storm.

Assuming global electrification continues at pace and EV adoption goes mainstream, we will see electrostates alongside petrostates, with China as number one producer. Having surpassed its 2030 target (1200 GW) six years early, China has become the global renewables leader, accounting for 60% of new global capacity. Notwithstanding the self-destructive developments in the U.S.A., we may also see a brief slowdown in global CO2 emissions over the next few years. Only a brief respite however, given that there are now new / potentially proliferating natural sources of CO2 and methane release.

Today’s clean energy scale up is being accomplished with the benefit of mass industrial capabilities and fossil fuels. In an energy (and resources) descent scenario, therefore, clean energy technologies will not be reproducible on anything like the same scale. Less energy in, means less energy /product out. The maintenance of existing solar power infrastructure will take on greater importance, as will manufacture and storage of replacement stocks.

As supplies of fossil fuels and critical minerals are progressively constrained, then the energy transition will be interrupted by the radical decline in society’s overall energy and material throughput. We will need a realistic plan for energy descent, as this is the most probable scenario.

(iii) Aftermath – How will Society ultimately adapt to Energy Descent?

Energy descent may be a 100+ year process, depending on the energy portfolio and technologies / efficiencies adopted over time. Humanity will progressively have to adapt to a world without global manufacturing, mass transportation and global supply chains. The exception to this is if we can make nuclear (fusion) power and renewable energies / storage much more scalable and efficient, so that we can continue with a ‘planet-lite’ electricity-based support infrastructure - local electricity grids, internet/data networks, light industry, civil engineering, water desalination and other forms of centralised functionality. Essential infrastructure that supports the population and core needs, back within the planet’s ecological boundaries.

Society will need to decide which capabilities it prioritises and for how long. For example - communications/data, financial systems, food and product markets, medicine, agriculture and transportation. Supply will be dictated by the health of our future ecosystems, and the new politics / societal construct going forwards. Cooperatives and communes. Ecological and scientific councils. Military but without the industrial complex. This will require long-term duty-led, resources-driven forms of local government.

The likely intermediate position will be some form of BAU where we all get to witness our acceleration towards societal collapse. And depending on the nature of collapse, we might also descend into some form of ‘survival of the strongest’.

Elephant 7: Climate Interventions are Needed

Climate Interventions, often tarnished as ‘geoengineering’ are technological fixes that we might employ, to artificially or permanently change some of the heat-reflecting or heat-retaining properties of the atmosphere, land or ocean. Like Nature and Water restoration, these are proactive climate solutions that could actually save us from our current fate.

Yet the current mood music is of course negative - the precautionary principle must apply, we must fully test the technologies prior to deployment, and so on. We must not become bogged down by science policy and risk management, when what is truly required (for the Survival Imperative) is a solutions and urgency perspective. We are in a new era where actions are essential, especially as the central plans A and B are not at all on course, and are being actively blocked and weakened by opposing forces. Politics has trumped climate science successfully for decades – to have more of the same would be catastrophic.

We are unlikely to reach a point of climate stabilisation, and yes there are ecological and economic risks involved with climate interventions. But lest we forget, we are bearing these risks in any case. Climate interventions and Nature Restoration are our pro-active climate solutions. We need to pursue them will all speed and support, in the time remaining. Many climate interventions involve little testing risk. And some are very promising. As we countenance the worsening reality of our situation over time, we may well be obliged to give these a better shot.

7.1 Solar Radiation Modification

Technological interventions to reduce incoming solar radiation, termed solar radiation modification (SRM) can compensate for our ‘overshoot’ of global-mean temperature and the additional system energy retained as a result of the Earth Energy Imbalance (EEI). SRM is a group of technologies designed for large-scale climate interventions that aim to cool the planet by enhancing the reflection of sunlight back into space directly or as infrared radiation. They include stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), cloud brightening (targeting low-latitude clouds), cirrus cloud thinning (high-altitude clouds) and surface brightening, among others.

Deposition directly into the stratosphere might be a viable and fairly inexpensive approach, although more work needs to be done to reach consensus on methods.
The method envisages the deposition of sulphate particles (possibly titania or alumina particles) into the stratosphere, to scatter solar radiation back into space, in effect simulating the cooling effect that occurs after major volcanic eruptions.
These interventions would result in masking some of the global warming that results from climate change. Indeed they already have done so – sulphur-based emissions in shipping have been keeping temperatures lower for decades, until the recent changes in shipping emissions law.

SRM technologies are the subject of intense debate around whether it might provide a means to tackle global warming and the devastating impacts of climate change. At best, they would reduce warming from solar radiation, while not directly addressing GHG concentrations and ocean acidification. There is also no international legal framework to govern SRM deployment as yet, whereas many agreements and laws exist for interventions and activities affecting the atmosphere and the seas.

• Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) is the most widely considered SRM technology. Although the results vary considerably, models show that global cooling is possible with SAI - similar to surface cooling after a large volcanic eruption. Uncertainties remain as to quantities required and deployment strategies. Uneven interhemispheric injection can lead to large climate impacts, as can the abrupt onset or cessation of SAI. SAI is reversible on a timescale of a few years, and any masked warming from SAI would reappear after a few years.

• Cloud brightening (CB) and marine cloud brightening (MCB) would increase the reflectivity of shallow low-level liquid clouds, mainly in marine environments. Significant methodological and technological challenges need to be overcome before deployment. Current credibility is affected by significant uncertainties in aerosol-cloud-radiation interaction knowledge, and mixed assessments of efficacy and impact. The short lifetime of the injected particles could allow the use of CB for limited periods and regions.

• Cirrus cloud thinning (CCT) and mixed-phase cloud thinning (MCT) are less robust due to even greater uncertainties than for CB. CCT and MCT operate in the terrestrial rather than the solar radiation spectrum and so in principle, could better counteract some aspects of GHG forcing. However, the technology for application is not yet mature and the seeding not well controlled. CCT and MCT are reversible on timescales of days to weeks and so could be deployed on a regional and temporary basis.

• Space Mirrors (SM) for solar dimming have been extensively studied in climate models, confirming the potential cooling effect. Concepts for the possible design of sunshades range from dust derived from moon rocks or asteroids to a swarm of reflective disks or mirrors, potentially combined with space solar generation. Studies to date conclude that the technology is far from available, and would be very expensive. The advent of space solar may offer new perspectives going forward.

• Surface brightening (SB) would increase the surface albedo, similar to CB. Studies to date suggest SB is unlikely to be able to counteract global warming on a large scale. At local scales, however, deployment techniques are relatively straightforward.

7.2 DC and CCS

DC (Direct Capture)

DC methods aim to remove existing carbon from the atmosphere or oceans, thereby generating “negative emissions”. Despite the technological gulf between delivery and ambition, DC methods are strategically very important and are increasingly seen as core to our future climate future.

DAC (Direct Air Capture) methods draw CO2 directly out of the atmosphere for storage or use in fuels and industrial applications. DAC is costly as the equipment and installations are still bulky and costly, and the DAC base yield (CO2 concentration in the air) is low (430 parts per million). Several firms are developing and operating DAC plants.

DOC (Direct Ocean Capture) methods remove dissolved CO2 from seawater for storage or re-use. DOC methods are based on a range of electrochemical processes. Our oceans currently absorb c.25% of all CO2 emissions and 90% of the excess heat those emissions cause. As such they are a richer source of carbon than the atmosphere.

DOC is still in early development stages but is very promising. Proponents use acidification / electrodialysis of seawater, powered by renewable energies to capture CO2 near the ocean surface. The ocean then naturally draws down additional CO2 from the atmosphere to rebalance. The net result is the removal of excess CO2 from the atmosphere via the ocean, without adding anything to the ocean. The process creates no waste and requires minimal land and no fresh water. The DOC base yield is much higher than DAC - seawater contains 150 times more CO2 than the atmosphere, making DOC more efficient and lower-cost. This provides for an inherently scalable and efficient way to remove atmospheric CO2 (via the ocean).

And if deployed with desalination and/or alkalinisation processes, it is possible to produce facilities that generate several benefits. In particular, Ebb Carbon focuses on organizations that process water, including aquaculture farms, desalination plants, coastal industry plants and ocean research labs. As seawater flows through these facilities, Ebb’s technology separates it into acidic and alkaline solutions. The alkaline solution is then returned to the ocean, where it binds CO2 to form bicarbonate, a stable form of CO2 storage. The Ebb process also helps to lower ocean acidity, another key climate mission.

CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage)

Deploying CCS at a power plant or industrial facility typically involves a 3 stage process: capture, transportation, and storage.

Capture - Several different technologies can be used to capture CO2 at the source (the emitting plant/facility). They fall into three categories: post-combustion carbon capture, pre-combustion carbon capture, and oxy-fuel combustion systems.
Transportation - Once the CO2 is captured, it is compressed and deeply chilled into a fluid and transported to an appropriate storage site, usually by pipelines and/or ships and occasionally by trains or other vehicles.
Storage - Once transported, the CO2 is injected into geological formations, where it is stored long term. Storage sites used for CO₂ include former oil and gas reservoirs, deep saline formations and coal beds.

The CCS sector continues to underdeliver on the volume of carbon storage required to meet net-zero targets. To reach this goal, ‘CCS tech’ must first become commercially operable at scale. And large-scale storage sites must be identified.

Gigatonne CCS - Giant Saline Aquifers Suitable for CO2 Storage - Open aquifer storage sites offer the potential to store vast volumes of CO2, orders of magnitude greater than some of the current pioneer projects in Northwest Europe. Regional seismic datasets provide the information to find these sites and characterize them.

Example – Spekk Formation, North Sea

7.3 Other Climate interventions

Deposition of other particles that could interact with GHGs and neutralise them directly, would be another approach. Along these lines a photocatalytic approach for non-CO2 GHGs has been proposed

This approach proposes to reduce the effects of non-CO2 GHGs (methane, nitrous oxide and halocarbons) by means of a photocatalyst (simple metal oxides like MgO, ZnO, cheap TiO2 derivatives and zeolites), without the need to capture and store.
Photocatalysis of methane oxidizes it to CO2; nitrous oxide can be reduced to nitrogen and oxygen; and halocarbons can be mineralized by red-ox photocatalytic reactions to acid halides and CO2. Such approach works at pilot plant scale but has yet to be scaled up.
Subject to further research, the natural extension would be to disperse aerosolized photocatalysts directly into the stratosphere.

8. Conclusion - System Design Changes

There is a 40-billion-ton elephant in the room.

As we approach this year’s #COP30 in Brazil, and its call for a Global Mutirão, a number of changes will probably be required, to support real change:

A new ‘existential’ COP format – where States now appreciate the true gravity of the situation (human extinction level threat) and can more properly weigh short-term revenues/ prosperity / legacies against long-term fatality / extinction. A reform of the UN COP process is necessary for the Survival Imperative. To make the progress that is absolutely needed happen, we must step outside of the progress-constraining box - there is no alternative.
A ‘super majority’ of the Most Willing Nations must now forge ahead with new formats for taking climate action. Setting the example and the global and regional frameworks - for the laggards to adopt later on. Greater positive momentum and new rules and organisations must be implemented by nations now, instead of endless negotiations.
Global fiscal and financial infrastructure to fully support climate financing and action (Global restoration and protection of Nature; mitigation, adaptation, loss & damage etc).
Much stronger legal and fiscal changes to persuade States, fossil fuel and industry actors to curtail emissions and pollution directly at source (production sites, new wells, decarbonisation and circularity of operations).

As set out in recent post Nature Protection in 2045, this calls for the introduction of:

Structural Financing Systems that defeat the Stalemate: New Environmental Taxes and Funds, with as much funding and scale as possible. An easier way to accomplish the 'automatic' or structural public funding amounts needed - while directly taxing the harmful activities and asset bases built up from past pollution. And redirection of existing subsidies. Providing the structural means for Climate Mitigation Action and Restoration Action at scale, and more automatic funding where it is needed. To include Carbon Liability Funds, Loss and Damage Funds, Environmental Protection Funds, and many more Funds for Future Generations.
Greater legal actions and national laws that are enforced against polluters - to rein-in and stop environmentally-destructive activities at national and corporate level. Governments can and must discipline corporations, branches and subsidiaries that fall under their jurisdiction. As part of this, the recent IACHR ruling and the widespread introduction of new national ecocide laws is very welcome.
National GPI and similar measures – The global system must begin the system pivots towards circularity and ‘agnostic growth’. Economic system metrics should reflect what we are doing in the real world, with a move away from GDP. Whereas GDP perpetuates the economic myopia of growth on a finite planet, GPI reminds us regularly that we have already peaked and are in decline, and urgently need to fix the problem. Global GPI per capita peaked in 1978. For the Survival Imperative, we must dramatically reduce our planetary overshoot and return within the ecological carrying capacity of the planet.
Partial solutions to the current crisis are planet-wide restoration and climate intervention approaches. Fast implementation of these may yet bring ameliorative change on the scale required.

The Survival Imperative

“If we keep going as we are, we will arrive at a post-industrial future via catastrophe and suffering. Nature will break down to the point where it can no longer support the existing human population. Human social systems will implode amid a mad scramble for power and survival. Our species may not outlive this unravelling. That’s the worst-case outcome.”

“It is entirely possible that humanity itself is an evolutionary mistake—that intelligence is of only marginal usefulness in long-term survival, and that its over-emphasis puts our species on a glidepath to extinction. Intelligent animals like crows and raccoons are opportunistic critters, and it’s easy to admire their cleverness. Our species’ abilities with tools and language have given us cleverness to shame any raccoon. But might that hyper-amplified cleverness qualify us for a Darwin Award?”

“Ultimately, the human enterprise must shrink to sustainable levels, which will entail much smaller human populations, massively reduced material consumption, economies oriented around care and regeneration rather than consumption and competition, a reorientation of collective worldviews more aligned with mutualism, and a far more equitable distribution of wealth.”

Richard Heinberg – Author & Senior Fellow, Post-Carbon Institute

An organised movement and response to hypernormalisation and its increasingly damaging impacts. Namely (i) the normalisation of conflict ; (ii) the treatment of marginalized groups; (iii) economic and social inequalities; (iv) corporatism and late-stage capitalism; (v) the resistance to climate action; and many more.
With Earth's sinks currently exhibiting reduced capacity, and more surprises coming through (SMOC reversal, methane release, marine heatwaves, water deficits, cloud feedbacks etc.), all credible solutions must be funded and prioritised now - to buy as much time as possible.
The BAU path to ecological destruction is already set. The global transition to clean energy must move faster still - clean energies need to crowd out fossil energies in the 2030s. We have reached an inflection point - Nature is sending us some increasingly alarming warning signals. We must protect and restore Nature in all its forms, with designated Protected Areas and robust enforcement thereof. Nature Restoration is of particular importance as it is (i) a scalable and near-term climate change mitigant; (ii) a counter to continued ecological destruction / land-use change; (iii) a solution for carbon drawdown and hydrological cycle changes.
All solutions must be funded and prioritised - renewable energies, nature protection and restoration, nuclear energy (including fusion/ SMR), climate interventions, with an 'all of the above' approach to mitigation. We need to achieve real results by 2030, with a view to realistic closing of most of the NZE gap in the 2030s.
Global cooperation and innovation are necessarily part of this scaling up, as are addressing legacies. Unsustainable energies, resource extraction and industrial production have led to the destruction of ecosystems and habitats, deforestation, climate change, the global waste and pollution legacies. Displacement of communities, conflicts and socio-economic tensions have tended to accompany much of this development activity. The inclusion of Nature and ecosystem services will be a positive force for equity among nations, with hybrid economies backed by the value of Nature. It will necessarily need to be supported by technological solutions that foster true (ecological) sustainability, such as global mapping (and valuation) of biodiversity and ecosystem services.
Major financial transitioning can be expected, as our existing financial systems adjust to (i) increasing climate transition / mitigation costs; (ii) the costs of soaring environmental damages and adaptation; and (iii) rebalancing of debt and nature obligations from expanded international carbon debt swap, funding and investment sectors.
All nations will be grappling with the same legacy risks and the search for workable solutions. Debt fuels demand in good times but also creates economic vulnerability in worse times. Economies can collapse when the twin risks of debt and energy volatility crystallise at the same time. In such a scenario, we can expect that debt cancellation and swaps / debt transformation will become commonplace.
And ultimately a structural solution will be needed as part of this trend - a Global Environmental Funds and Taxes system - in order to achieve greater structural supplies of Nature Positive funding.
From a future perspective, this may be seen as medicinal. It will force nations to become longer term and more cooperative in outlook, as they seek to adapt to the new world where (i) Nature Restoration and Natural Capital resilience become the prime objectives; (ii) resource extraction is in decline; (iii) economic activity becomes further polarised; (iv) the short-termist socioeconomic model is displaced.
Businesses and the financial sector in particular will come to understand and own up to long-known but unaddressed climate risks. Future risk pricing will become an epicentre of the green financial transition - as we move away from existing finance and fund real world risk mitigation and adaptation solutions.
In the process Nature (and its ecosystem services) will become a balance sheet item. Providing surety of future value through regeneration (there is no alternative) and a viable transition away from extractive economics.
With rising debt levels and distress across the world, societal integrity and safety nets will over time become policy priorities once more. The leveling up of nations and populations - the common prosperity of nations - may yet become a consensus amongst all countries. A transition to satisficing, balance and global community is long overdue.

Illustrative Example of Future Finances - UK

Welcome to the new Energy Central — same great community, now with a smoother experience. To login, use your Energy Central email and reset your password.