The Stern review, in 700 dense pages full of graphs and data, is a model of transformative thinking. Using standard economic tools and methods, and in ways that other mainstream economists could understand, Stern made three key, and at the time radical, conclusions: that the costs of inaction on the climate were greater than the costs of action; that the climate crisis was a market failure; and that economic growth was compatible with cutting greenhouse gas emissions. (...)
Today, Stern says, if he were re-doing the review, he would place more emphasis on the role of nature, as the collapse of biodiversity around the world is a key economic and national security threat that has been grossly underestimated, and neglected as a result. (...)
The results are plain to see: governments refusing to act, markets over-valuing fossil fuel companies, investors punishing businesses that dare to prepare for a low-carbon world. Many insurance companies, supposedly the enforcers of probity in capital markets, are alleged to knowingly be fudging their figures to massage climate risk away, as the Guardian revealed this month.
Earthâs climate system is moving deeper into uncharted territory. We present the 2026 update of planetary vital signs that track the state of Earthâs climate system, alongside indicators of the human activities driving ongoing change. Of 16 climate-related indicators, seven are currently at record extremes. Several indicators also show evidence of accelerating trends or abrupt shifts, raising concerns about increasing climate instability, interacting feedbacks, and the growing risk of crossing critical tipping points. Human activities, particularly fossil fuel combustion, remain the dominant drivers of these changes. Despite the worsening trends, encouraging signs of societal changes are emerging, including the rapid expansion of renewable electricity and battery storage, although progress remains far below the scale and speed needed to stabilize Earthâs climate system. Rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, effective adaptation, ecosystem protection, and transformative societal change remain essential to reducing climate risks and securing a more resilient and sustainable future.
XPRIZE Carbon Removal aimed to tackle the biggest threat facing humanity - climate change. It took place over the course of four years, launching on Earth Day 2021 and concluding during Earth Week 2025.
The grand prize winner and runner-up teams, representing solutions across four countries, each successfully removed more than 1,000 net tonnes of CO2 in the final year of the competition, meeting XPRIZEâs bold demonstration requirements, the first step towards scaling sustainably to remove billions of tonnes globally.
XPRIZE Carbon Removal aimed to tackle the biggest threat facing humanity - climate change. It took place over the course of four years, launching on Earth Day 2021 and concluding during Earth Week 2025.
The grand prize winner and runner-up teams, representing solutions across four countries, each successfully removed more than 1,000 net tonnes of CO2 in the final year of the competition, meeting XPRIZEâs bold demonstration requirements, the first step towards scaling sustainably to remove billions of tonnes globally.
have you looked at the data?
because if you have...
Thank you for posting this. It is a rational, data-driven look at how we should approach the climate change problem. Yes, humans are driving the current upswing in global annual average temperature. Yes, it can be solved if we admit that we are responsible and can adopt alternative energy policies. Yes, if we donât take action soon weâre fucked.
As someone who commuted to NYC every day for a dozen years (85 miles each way) before work-from-home was a thing, I'm a huge proponent of improving public transportation, and reducing the number of cars in metropolitan areas. I think everyone from DC to Boston should be able to hop on a train and go between those two in clean, comfortable, reliable, affordable trains. It should be so easy, that nobody ever wants to drive in or through NYC ever again.
This is a really interesting study after 4 months of congestion pricing in NYC. I put it here (global warming) because I wasn't sure where to share it... but this is a win/win done correctly. Fewer emissions will only be possible if people can move as they need, when they need, in relative comfort and ease.
Fewer cars. Faster travel. Less honking. And some questions we still canât answer.
This is exactly how tax incentives should work. Want less of something bad for our society? - make it expensive. Want more of something? - make it cheaper. It's obvious. What is strange is the rich people that will fight it in the name of hording their stash. But even they should be on board. trump should want congestion pricing 10X what it is. It wouldn't materially impact him at all, he would just pay it (or find a way to skirt it, probably paying more to skirt it than it would just to pay it), and he would have the roads all to himself and his billionaire pals.
