Latest news with #AmazonRainforest
Forbes
7 hours ago
- Business
- Forbes
Are Country-To-Country Deals The Future Of Climate Finance?
This aerial view shows a degraded area of the Amazon rainforest, near the Koatinemo indigenous land, ... More in Para state, Brazil, on June 12, 2025. (Photo by Carlos FABAL / AFP) (Photo by CARLOS FABAL/AFP via Getty Images) The path to COP30 in Brazil has begun with preparatory talks in Bonn, Germany, where climate finance remains the central issue. Negotiators are working to find financing mechanisms that will help developing nations adapt to climate change and transition to cleaner energy sources. To draw new monies, climate discussions must evolve—from offsetting emissions elsewhere to reducing carbon pollution at its source. The U.S.'s absence from these mid-year talks might hint at how tough the road ahead will be. At COP29 in Baku, wealthy nations pledged to provide vulnerable countries with $300 billion annually to help them recover from climate-related damage. But they haven't even met their $100 billion yearly goal at COP21. And the Trump Administration, which withdrew from the talks altogether, has already made it clear that it has no intention of honoring those commitments. In a conversation, Rachel Rose Jackson of Corporate Accountability didn't mince words: 'The Global North has absolutely no intention of delivering this debt. There is little evidence that carbon markets have led to proven and lasting emissions reductions. They are a dangerous distraction from real solutions. Corporations must be legally required to reduce emissions at source—they can't self-regulate their way to climate responsibility.' The need for money is staggering. The UNFCCC concludes that developing countries must raise $6 trillion by 2030 to fulfill their promises under the Paris Agreement. Yet many wealthy nations continue to lean on a patchwork of carbon markets—tools that allow them to finance rainforest preservation while continuing to emit greenhouse gases at home. Former U.S. climate envoy John Kerry put it bluntly: 138 countries, responsible for less than 1% of annual CO2 emissions, are at the mercy of just 20 nations that account for 80% of the total. The voluntary carbon market (VCM) has long been a go-to option for the developed world—a cheaper, politically safer path than direct contributions to emerging economies. While the industry is working hard to revamp its procedures, the model faces mounting scrutiny. A review by Corporate Accountability found that 39 of 50 VCM projects lacked environmental integrity; the remainder were problematic or unverifiable. In short, buying offsets is easier and cheaper than making emissions cuts. I've served as the Coalition for Rainforest Nations editor, concentrating on sovereign carbon credits issued by countries, not private interests. Erosion Of Faith TOPSHOT - An Indian man takes a shower as water leaks from a pipeline in New Delhi on June 6, 2017. ... More - Temperatures are hovering around 45 degrees Celsius (113 degrees Fahrenheit) in the Indian capital, with the cooler monsoon season still weeks away. (Photo by MONEY SHARMA / AFP) (Photo by MONEY SHARMA/AFP via Getty Images) As faith has eroded, so has value. Nature-based offset prices have plummeted from $10–15 per ton just a few years ago to $3–$6 in 2024–2025. Major buyers like Nestlé, Gucci, and Shell have exited the market, citing concerns over reputational risk and questionable methodologies. The Global South feels hopeless. Will these nations ever be compensated for protecting tropical forests that absorb carbon emissions— produced mainly by the Global North? Reform efforts are underway. The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market has introduced a two-phase vetting system focused on governance and scientific rigor. The goal is to rebuild trust and distinguish high-integrity credits that could attract renewed investment. 'No one can guarantee it will be perfect,' Nat Keohane, a senior adviser to the council, told me. 'But we can help the market and build confidence.' If successful, the council believes the VCM could scale to $20 billion–$50 billion annually by 2030; carbon credit prices could be $25 to $30 a ton. Used wisely, these funds could help preserve rainforests, support green transitions, and provide new revenue streams to developing nations committed to protecting carbon sinks. Carbon credits are not a silver bullet—but they can provide near-term capital as countries and companies decarbonize. Their role is inherently transitional, especially in hard-to-abate sectors like heavy industry or cloud computing. I reported on Microsoft, which holds a majority stake in OpenAI and relies on extensive server farms. To offset those emissions, it is investing in reforestation projects in Panama. However, this gaping void presents a new opportunity for both the developed and developing worlds to devise new techniques for attracting carbon finance. A more promising approach is for the wealthier nations to engage in bilateral pacts. These country-to-country deals are carried out under Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement. This provision allows nations to fund climate projects abroad and count the resulting emissions reductions toward their climate goals, provided that strict rules are followed to prevent double-counting of the same carbon credit. The Clock Is Ticking The Scarlet Macaw, Ara macao, is a large, colorful parrot found from Mexico to Brazil. This flock ... More was photographed in Costa Rica. (Photo by: Jon G. Fuller/VW Pics/Universal Images Group via Getty Images) Switzerland has signed carbon credit cooperation agreements with Ghana, Peru, Thailand, Morocco, and Vietnam. Sweden is working on the entire African continent through its Energy Agency and in partnership with the UN Development Program. Specifically, it is funding a $28.2 million initiative to help Kenya meet its climate goals. 'Kenya pursues progressive environmental policies and has set ambitious climate goals, but needs financial support to accelerate its climate transition,' says Sweden's Ambassador to Kenya, Caroline Vicini, in a release. Other countries are exploring alternative paths. Ecuador, Belize, and Gabon are restructuring national debt in exchange for conservation. Norway and Germany, meanwhile, are bypassing carbon markets altogether and making direct payments for forest protection. Norway alone has pledged $1 billion to Brazil's Amazon Fund and to Indonesia, with payments tied to verifiable emissions reductions. Still, the question remains: can these new financing mechanisms scale fast enough? For poorer nations, this is not a matter of convenience but survival. Carbon markets, bilateral agreements, and direct aid offer potential pathways; however, the urgency demands that they be ratcheted up now. Panama's Minister of the Environment, Juan Carlos Navarro, told me that climate change presents the ultimate accountability dilemma: it's everyone's responsibility, which means no one is truly accountable — not even the United States, the world's second-largest CO2 polluter. The stakes could not be higher. Climate change is already reshaping our world from supercharged hurricanes to sweeping wildfires and historic floods. For the poorest nations, climate finance is not a luxury—it is a lifeline. These countries did not create the crisis. But they are counting on the rest of us to help solve it, requiring innovative tools to lure carbon finance.
Forbes
a day ago
- Business
- Forbes
What Being Wealthy Means In Brazil
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and Christ the Redeemer at sunrise. getty Who wouldn't want to head to a place that Lonely Planet describes as "one of the world's most captivating places.... a country of powdery white-sand beaches, verdant rainforests and wild, rhythm-filled metropolises"? But what does being wealthy in Brazil mean? From average salaries and cost of living to net worth and visa options for digital nomads, understanding Brazil's economic landscape can help you decide if this South American colossus is the right place for your next adventure. From the Amazon rainforest to the iconic beaches of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil offers a kaleidoscope of experiences—including one of the modern world's wonders, Christ the Redeemer, an Art Deco statue of Jesus designed by French-Polish sculptor Paul Landowski. What's more, from João Gilberto and Gilberto Gil to the bossa nova and from the modernist painter Tarsila do Amaral to street artists Otavio Pandolfo and Gustavo Pandolfo, Brazil's culture is as vast as its landscapes and regions. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the average household net-adjusted disposable income per capita in Brazil is approximately $12,924 per year. This is significantly lower than the OECD average of $30,490 and far below the U.S. average of $51,147. However, income inequality remains a significant challenge, and salaries can vary significantly between regions. Since January 1, 2025, Brazil's minimum wage has been R$ 1,518 per month, which translates to approximately $274 per month today, highlighting the significant difference between those earning the minimum wage and the average. Being Wealthy In Brazil—Brazil's Cost Of Living As the fifth-largest country in the world, after Russia, China, Canada, and the U.S., and because the country occupies half the landmass of the continental South American region, Brazil's economy is the largest in South America. It is the world's largest exporter of soybeans, raw sugar, and coffee, but its wealth distribution is highly concentrated. As a consequence, Brazil has the highest income inequality in the region, with average wealth falling near the middle of the pack. The cost of living in Brazil is relatively low compared to the United States, but it varies significantly depending on the city. According to Numbeo, the monthly living costs in Brazil are much lower than in the U.S., the U.K., or many countries across Europe. The cost for a single person per month, not including rent, is as follows: Switzerland: $1,659 France: $1,200 U.S.: $1,166 Germany: $1,139 Ireland: $1,112 U.K.: $1,095 Canada: $1023 Japan: $927 Italy: $905 Latvia: $874 Greece: $832 Malta: $801 Spain: $731 Thailand: $650 Mexico: $637 Portugal: $592 Philippines: $573 Brazil: $466 In comparison, the cost of living in Brazil is roughly half that of the U.K., and when rent is considered, the cost of living is even lower. Rent is approximately 75% less in Brazil than it is in the U.K. Comparing Brazil to the U.S., everything is more expensive in the U.S.—the cost of living is 127% and rent 177% higher. Rent can be up to 400% higher than in parts of Brazil; restaurants are 175% higher, and groceries are 146% more expensive than in the U.S. Being Wealthy In Brazil—The Top 10% And Average Net Worth In Brazil, the household net wealth is considerably lower than the OECD average of $323,960. That combines the total value of a household's financial and non-financial assets, such as money or shares held in bank accounts, the principal residence, and other similar items. In Brazil, the average household net wealth is $95,092. In the U.S., the average household net worth is $684,500. Brazil's wealth distribution is highly unequal, as is its salary. According to Statista, in 2023, the top 10% of earners in Brazil earned an average of $1,363 per month before taxes. That's more than 12 times the average income of the bottom 50% of the population. In Brazil, 83% of people say they know someone they can turn to in time of need, compared to 94% in the U.S. When asked to rate their general satisfaction with life on a scale from 0 to 10, Brazilians gave it a 6.1 grade on average. In contrast, Americans rated their general life satisfaction at 7. The OECD average is 6.7. Being Wealthy In Brazil—Getting A Golden Visa Or A Digital Nomad Visa Since 2022, Brazil has offered a visa for digital nomads, requiring freelancers to earn at least $1,500 per month to qualify or prove that they have at least $18,000 in a bank account. It is valid for one year and can be renewed once. They must be working for a foreign employer (with a work contract) or own a company with clients based abroad. For those with a high net worth seeking a more permanent solution, Brazil offers a visa for individuals who invest a minimum of $140,000 in property or businesses in various regions around the country. Brazil's golden visa grants temporary residence with a path to nationality within four years, allows dual citizenship, and requires holders to spend 14 days in the country every two years. Please note that as of April 2025, Brazil has reinstated the visa requirement for all U.S. visitors, regardless of the duration of their stay—an e-visa is also available. Being wealthy in Brazil is about more than just financial stability—it's about embracing a lifestyle rich in culture and natural beauty. It offers a golden visa opportunity and a digital nomad visa and an accessible cost of living compared to the U.S., making it more attractive than ever to visit. MORE FROM FORBES Forbes Portugal Golden Visa: Government Plans To Enhance Incentives By Alex Ledsom Forbes The Five Safest Countries In The World, Per 2025 Global Peace Index By Alex Ledsom Forbes What It Means To Be Wealthy In The Philippines By Alex Ledsom
Forbes
2 days ago
- Forbes
Travel Just Got Riskier: How To Stay Safe In A Dangerous World
How do you travel safely at a time like this? getty Deborah Kaminetzky was canoeing through Peru's Amazon rainforest last week when the bombs started falling in Iran. She wondered about her return trip to the U.S. "I've discussed ways to get back to the U.S. should airspace be closed down," she says. The leading contender: Booking a cheap cruise through the Panama Canal and coming home by sea. Her backup plan wasn't paranoia, even though the Middle East is far away from South America. It was preparation. Days earlier, Iran's bombing had escalated global tensions, potentially throwing trips like hers into disarray. Kaminetzky, an IT project management consultant from Woodmere, NY, says she felt safe in South America, but the prospect of returning to the U.S. with the world on edge puts her on edge. "I'm watching the skies," she adds. Travel isn't as safe as it used to be It's not your imagination. Travel just got a little riskier. A U.S. State Department worldwide advisory now urges Americans to exercise increased caution abroad. Rising crime, protests, and retaliatory threats have turned once-benign destinations into potential flashpoints. "Yes, travel is more dangerous right now," says John Gobbels, chief operating officer of Medjet, a medical transport and security response program for travelers. But dangerous how ? In the past, many destinations had specific, well-known risks that travelers could prepare for, according to Frank Harrison, regional security director for the Americas at World Travel Protection. "Today, the risks are more complex," he adds. "They're often layered, ambiguous, and harder to spot. This makes travel potentially more dangerous, especially for those who are unaware of these evolving challenges." What are travelers afraid of? Nearly half (47 percent) of travelers surveyed by Squaremouth expect flight delays and disruptions to be worse this year than in years past, signaling growing concern ahead of the busy summer season. "Growing unpredictability is fueling anxiety among travelers," says Squaremouth spokesman Ned Tadic. The latest Global Rescue Summer 2025 Traveler Safety and Sentiment Survey finds over 80 percent of travelers say they are either "very concerned" (28 percent) or "somewhat concerned" (55 percent) that instability could still affect travel through the end of 2025. "While the ceasefire has brought a measure of relief, it has not fully restored traveler confidence," says Global Rescue spokesman Bill McIntyre. Where are the new danger zones? I asked security experts, insurers, and seasoned globetrotters to help identify the dangerous places for travelers. Their advice: Rethink where you go, how you get there, and what you buy. Don't go here. There are a few Middle East destinations that shouldn't be on your list now, according to Gobbels. He recommends avoiding the Gulf states, including Oman, UAE, Qatar, and Bahrain. Obviously, Israel and Iran are off-limits during any conflict. He's also concerned about conflict erupting between Taiwan and China. If things take a turn for the worse there, you might want to reroute your trip to Hong Kong. Level 4 "Do Not Travel" countries, such as Iran, Russia, and Haiti, are no-gos, but Level 3 spots like Egypt also warrant scrutiny. "Even Level 2 countries have Level 4 zones," he warned, citing India's border with Pakistan. The touristy areas. Valerie Bowden, a frequent traveler who runs an outsourcing agency, says it's not just the country, but also the location. For example, the anti-tourism protests in France make touristy areas particularly vulnerable. She's avoiding popular museums in Paris this summer. "I've never been more hesitant to travel as an American than I am now," she adds. (And don't forget Spain, where they're squirting tourists with water pistols.) Even the borders can be dangerous. Rob Housman, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney and national security expert, says many travelers are getting snagged at the border, coming back into the United States. His advice: Disable biometric identification on your phone. "That way, the CBP can't use your eye or finger to access your phone," he says. He says the government has been reviewing users' social media, and you could get detained if you've posted something objectionable. Housan also recommends using privacy apps for email and other communication, which are more difficult for agents to access. How do you travel safer this summer? But experts say you can still travel this summer without incurring unnecessary risks. Monitor your whole itinerary. Arthur Harris, a security consultant, just rerouted clients from Dubai to Frankfurt after Gulf airspace closures stranded passengers. He says it's important to review your entire itinerary for security vulnerabilities. Check for connections in major hubs that could be vulnerable, such as Abu Dhabi, Dubai or Doha. "Watch your entire itinerary — not just the destination," he stressed. "A connection in a shutdown zone can wreck your trip." How about travel insurance? War or acts of war have generally been excluded from coverage for standard travel insurance policies, according to Terry Boynton, president of Yonder Travel Insurance. "And since the war and conflict in Israel have been ongoing since 2023, any claims related to those events likely won't be covered." Pro tip: If you're heading somewhere with growing tensions or just feeling uneasy, purchase a plan with 'cancel for any reason' benefits. "It lets you cancel for reasons outside the standard list and still get some of your money back,' says Wendy Stahl, travel insurance product director at AXA Partners US. Get help. A travel advisor can help you monitor your trip and recommend changes you need to make for a safer trip. Your travel insurance policy can also help. For example, Allianz Travel Insurance has a mobile app called Allyz with destination-specific safety and security alerts that will warn you about known risks at your destination. The app and the alerts are free for anyone to download and use. "When travel is unavoidable or catastrophe strikes while you're traveling, there are ways to mitigate your safety risk and ensure you're able to continue with your trip or return home when it's safe to do so," says Daniel Durazo, a spokesman for Allianz. Speaking of insurance, is it too late to get coverage if you've already booked your trip? Not necessarily, says Will Nihan, president of Travelex Insurance Services. 'If you've already booked your trip, it's not too late to purchase travel insurance with coverage for events such as terrorism," he explains. "However, you must purchase your policy before the event becomes foreseeable to be eligible for coverage. It's a good practice to review the policy details thoroughly before you buy to understand any limitations.' When should you bail out on your trip? I asked several travel experts when they'd cancel a trip. The consensus: If the State Department declares your destination a Level 4 "Do Not Travel" country. If an airspace closure at your destination lasts more than 48 hours. If there's no safe way to reroute you through a different airport, land, or sea route. But don't be too trigger-happy with a cancellation, advises Leigh Matthews, a therapist in Barcelona who has worked with thousands of nervous travelers. "My advice is to separate media-driven fear from actual risk assessment," he says. "Check government travel advisories for your specific destinations, not general news coverage. If you're genuinely concerned, adjust your itinerary rather than canceling entirely. Psychological preparation and having backup plans reduce anxiety more effectively than avoidance." My advice on traveling during an uncertain time I'm on the road constantly — in fact, I'm writing this on a plane between Okinawa and Seoul — and I think a certain amount of anxiety is to be expected at a time like this. But I've heard all kinds of overly cautious advice. For example, some experts have told me to avoid Turkey and Cyprus, which is absurd. Cyprus is on my itinerary in a few months, and I visited Turkey last fall. Another thing I've noticed: A lot of travelers are trying to invoke their own fears and new State Department warnings to get a refund on a nonrefundable airline ticket. But that's not how it works. An airline has to cancel your flight for you to be eligible for a refund, or you can file a claim on your "cancel for any reason" travel insurance policy, if you have one. All of which brings me to my advice, which is to stick to your plans. You'll know when it's too dangerous to travel. The airport will close, your hotels will shutter, you won't be able to rent a car. Don't let tourism protests deter you, because if you're reading this story, I can already tell you that you're not one of those tourists. You'll be fine. "It's important to remember that no travel destination is entirely safe," says Susan Sherren, founder of luxury travel agency Couture Trips. A proactive mindset is essential in today's unpredictable travel climate. Oh, and what about Kaminetzky, the IT consultant from New York? She got back to the States just fine. Apart from a brief delay, her flight home was uneventful. No one interrogated her at the airport. And she's already planning her next vacation — to a safe destination, of course.
The Independent
2 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
Brazil strikes deal with Musk's Starlink to curb criminal use in the Amazon rainforest
Brazil's Federal Prosecutor's Office announced Friday a deal with Elon Musk's Starlink to curb the use of its services in illegal mining and other criminal activities in the Amazon. Starlink's lightweight, high-speed internet system has rapidly spread across the Amazon, a region that for decades struggled with slow and unreliable connectivity. But the service has also been adopted by criminal organizations, which have used it to coordinate logistics, make payments and receive alerts about police raids. It's the first agreement of its kind aimed at curbing such use following years of pressure from Brazilian authorities. Starlink, a division of Musk's SpaceX, will begin requiring identification and proof of residence from all new users in Brazil's Amazon region starting in January. The company will also provide Brazilian authorities with user registration and geolocation data for internet units located in areas under investigation. If a terminal is confirmed to be used for illegal activity, Starlink has committed to blocking the service. The deal is for two years and can be renewed. Illegal gold mining has contaminated hundreds of miles of Amazon rivers with mercury and disrupted the traditional lives of several Indigenous tribes, including the Yanomami. Starlink, which first arrived in the region in 2022, has enabled criminal groups to manage mining operations in remote areas, where logistics are complex and equipment and fuel must be transported by small plane or boat. 'The use of satellite internet has transformed the logistics of illegal mining. This new reality demands a proportional legal response. With the agreement, connectivity in remote areas also becomes a tool for environmental responsibility and respect for sovereignty,' federal prosecutor André Porreca said in a statement. Illegal gold miners and loggers have always had some form of communication, mainly via radio, to evade law enforcement. Starlink, with its fast and mobile internet, has significantly enhanced that capability, Hugo Loss, operations coordinator for Brazil's environmental agency, told The Associated Press in a phone interview. 'They've been able to transmit in real time the locations of enforcement teams, allowing them to anticipate our arrival, which seriously compromises the safety of our personnel and undermines the effectiveness of operations,' Loss said. 'Cutting the signal in mining areas, especially on Indigenous lands and in protected areas, is essential because internet access in these locations serves only criminal purposes.' Jair Schmitt, head of environmental protection for the agency, said what's also needed is tighter regulation on the sale and use of such equipment. The AP emailed James Gleeson, SpaceX's vice president of communications, with questions about the deal, but didn't immediately receive a response. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
The Guardian
5 days ago
- Science
- The Guardian
‘This is a fight for life': climate expert on tipping points, doomerism and using wealth as a shield
Climate breakdown can be observed across many continuous, incremental changes such as soaring carbon dioxide levels, rising seas and heating oceans. The numbers creep up year after year, fuelled by human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. But scientists have also identified at least 16 'tipping points' – thresholds where a tiny shift could cause fundamental parts of the Earth system to change dramatically, irreversibly and with potentially devastating effects. These shifts can interact with each other and create feedback loops that heat the planet further or disrupt weather patterns, with unknown but potentially catastrophic consequences for life on Earth. It is possible some tipping points may already have been passed. Dr Genevieve Guenther, an American climate communications specialist, is the founding director of End Climate Silence, which studies the representation of global heating in the media and public discourse. Last year, she published The Language of Climate Politics: Fossil Fuel Propaganda and How to Fight It, which was described by Bill McKibben as 'a gift to the world'. In the run-up to the Global Tipping Points conference in July, Guenther talks to the Guardian about the need to discuss catastrophic risks when communicating about the climate crisis. The climate crisis is pushing globally important ecosystems – ice sheets, coral reefs, ocean circulation and the Amazon rainforest – towards the point of no return. Why is it important to talk about tipping points? We need to correct a false narrative that the climate threat is under control. These enormous risks are potentially catastrophic. They would undo the connections between human and ecological systems that form the basis of all of our civilisation. How have attitudes changed towards these dangers? There was a constructive wave of global climate alarm in the wake of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on 1.5C in 2018. That was the first time scientists made it clear that the difference between 1.5C and 2C would be catastrophic for millions of people and that in order to halt global heating at a relatively safe level, we would need to start zeroing out our emissions almost immediately. Until then, I don't think policymakers realised the timeline was that short. This prompted a flurry of activism – Greta Thunberg and Indigenous and youth activists – and a surge of media attention. All of this converged to make almost everybody feel that climate change was a terrifying and pressing problem. This prompted new pledges, new corporate sustainability targets, and new policies being passed by government. This led to a backlash by those in the climate movement who prefer to cultivate optimism. Their preferred solution was to drive capitalist investment into renewable technologies so fossil fuels could be beaten out of the marketplace. This group believed climate fear might drive away investors, so they started to argue it was counterproductive to talk about worst-case scenarios. Some commentators even argued we had averted the direst predictions and were now on a more reassuring trajectory of global warming of a little under 3C by 2100. But it is bananas to feel reassured by that because 3C would be a totally catastrophic outcome for humanity. Even at the current level of about 1.5C, the impacts of warming are emerging on the worst side of the range of possible outcomes and there is growing concern of tipping points for the main Atlantic Ocean circulation (Amoc), Antarctic sea ice, corals and rainforests. If the risk of a plane crashing was as high as the risk of the Amoc collapsing, none of us would ever fly because they would not let the plane take off. And the idea that our little spaceship, our planet, is under the risk of essentially crashing and we're still continuing business as usual is mindblowing. I think part of the problem is that people feel distant from the dangers and don't realise the children we have in our homes today are threatened with a chaotic, disastrous, unliveable future. Talking about the risks of catastrophe is a very useful way to overcome this kind of false distance. In your book, you write that it's appropriate to be scared and the more you know, the more likely you are to be worried, as is evident from the statements of scientists and the United Nations secretary general, António Guterres. Why? Some people at the centre of the media, policymaking and even research claim that climate change isn't going to be that bad for those who live in the wealthy developed world – the UK, Europe and the United States. When you hear these messages, you are lulled into a kind of complacency and it seems reasonable to think that we can continue to live as we do now without putting ourselves, our families, our communities under threat within decades. What my book is designed to do is wake people up and raise the salience and support for phasing out fossil fuels. [It] is written for people who are already concerned about the climate crisis and are willing to entertain a level of anxiety. But the discourse of catastrophe would not be something I would recommend for people who are disengaged from the climate problem. I think that talking about catastrophe with those people can actually backfire because it'll just either overwhelm them or make them entrench their positions. It can be too threatening. A recent Yale study found that a degree of climate anxiety was not necessarily bad because it could stir people to collective action. Do you agree? It depends. I talk about three different kinds of doomerism. One is the despair that arises from misunderstanding the science and thinking we're absolutely on the path to collapse within 20 or 30 years, no matter what we do. That is not true. Second, there's a kind of nihilistic position taken by people who suggest they are the only ones who can look at the harsh truth. I have disdain for that position. Finally, there's the doomerism that comes from political frustration, from believing that people who have power are just happy to burn the world down. And that to me is the most reasonable kind of doomerism. To address that kind of doomerism, you need to say: 'Yes, this is scary as hell. But we must have courage and turn our fear into action by talking about climate change with others, by calling our elected officials on a regular basis, by demanding our workplaces put their money where their mouth is.' You need to acknowledge people's feelings, meet them where they are and show how they can assuage their fear by cultivating their bravery and collective action. The most eye-opening part of your book was about the assumptions of the Nobel prize winner William Nordhaus that we'll probably only face a very low percentage of GDP loss by the end of the century. This surely depends on ignoring tipping points? The only way Nordhaus can get the result that he does is if he fails to price the risk of catastrophe and leaves out a goodly chunk of the costs of global heating. In his models, he does not account for climate damages to labour productivity, buildings, infrastructure, transportation, non-coastal real estate, insurance, communication, government services and other sectors. But the most shocking thing he leaves out of his models is the risk that global heating could set off catastrophes, whether they are physical tipping points or wars from societal responses. That is why the percentage of global damages that he estimates is so ridiculously lowballed. The idea that climate change will just take off only a small margin of economic growth is not founded on anything empirical. It's just a kind of quasi-religious faith in the power of capitalism to decouple itself from the planet on which it exists. That's absurd and it's unscientific. Some economists suggest wealth can provide almost unlimited protection from catastrophe because it is better to be in a steel and concrete building in a storm than it is to be in a wooden shack. How true is that? There's no evidence that these protections are unlimited, though there are economists who suggest we can always substitute technologies or human-made products for ecosystems or even other planets like Mars for Earth itself. This goes back to an economic growth theorist named Robert Solow, who claims technological innovation can increase human productivity indefinitely. He stressed that it was just a theory, but the economists advising Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s took this as gospel and argued it was possible to ignore environmental externalities – the costs of our economic system, including our greenhouse gas pollution – because you could protect yourself as long as you kept increasing your wealth. Except when it comes to the climate crisis? Yes, the whole spectacle of our planet heating up this quickly should call all of those economic assumptions into question. But because climate change is affecting the poor first and worst, this is used as evidence that poverty is the problem. This is a misrepresentation of reality because the poor are not the only ones who are affected by the climate crisis. This is a slow-moving but accelerating crisis that will root and spread. And it could change for the worst quite dramatically as we hit tipping points. The difference between gradual warming and tipping points is similar to the difference between chronic, manageable ailments and acute, life-threatening diseases, isn't it? Yes. When people downplay the effects of climate change, they often represent the problem as a case of planetary diabetes – as if it were a kind of illness that you can bumble along with, but still have a relatively good quality of life as long as you use your technologies, your insulin, whatever, to sustain your health. But this is not how climate scientists represent climate change. Dr Joelle Gergis, one of the lead authors on the latest IPCC report, prefers to represent climate change as a cancer – a disease that takes hold and grows and metastasises until the day when it is no longer curable and becomes terminal. You could also think of that as a tipping point. This is a fight for life. And like all fights, you need a tremendous amount of bravery to take it on. Before I started working on climate change, I didn't think of myself as a fighter, but I became one because I felt I have a responsibility to preserve the world for my son and children everywhere. That kind of fierce protectiveness is part of the way that I love. We can draw on that to have more strength than our enemies because I don't think they're motivated by love. I believe love is an infinite resource and the power of it is greater than that of greed or hate. If it weren't, we wouldn't be here. Tipping points – in the Amazon, Antarctic, coral reefs and more – could cause fundamental parts of the Earth system to change dramatically, irreversibly and with devastating effects. In this series, we ask the experts about the latest science – and how it makes them feel. Tomorrow, David Obura talks about the collapse of coral reefs Read more
