Must read on the 1.5C debate. Joeri Rogelj and Lavanya Rajamani -- A straightforward, well argued case for the continued (even increasing) relevance of “1.5°C” as a goal even if temperatures start to exceed 1.5°C www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...
Got a minute?
Ted Nordhaus says its time to Defund the COPs. www.breakthroughjournal.org/p/defund-the.... I've tried to take him seriously, to pretend that he's worth reading, even though he's delirious with self regard. But I give up. The man is just straight up a creature of the right
So the Breakthrough bros are now the "abundance folks"? As if we had to buy all the crap that comes out of Breakthrough if we think the Abundance arg has something to recommend it?
John Fetter of the Institute for Policy Studies recently asked me for my views on Climate Debt. This video, in which I tried to diplomatically suggest that there might be better frames, is the result. I seem to be getting old, but this is still pretty coherent. www.ecoequity.org/2025/12/clim...
Time for my annual masochistic review of COP post morta. First one I "liked" is by Dyke and Rockstrom. theconversation.com/the-world-lo...
Note: "The best science can offer today, is a future where peak warming reaches 1.7°C before returning to within 1.5°C in 75 years."
Check out Inequity, Inequality, Inaction, the new report fm the Civil Society Equity Review, just released in Belem. State of the debate work on global climate justice, and quantitative fair shares work to boot. Here's a good summary: www.ecoequity.org/2025/11/ten-...
#FairShares #ClimateJustice
Tech along will of course not save us. We also need real and robust international cooperation. Not bloody likely at this level of extreme inequality. So interesting to see this amazing *international* study of support of various redistributionist strategies. See www.nature.com/articles/s41...
Indeed. Though the truth is that the tech revolution, crucial though it may be, is not enough. We also need cooperation, and it is impossible at this level of inequality.
Check this out. High quality international polling on various redistributionist strategies, from Nature Human Behavior:
The First Politically Viable Wealth Tax? In California? No climate angle yet, but who cares. We'll get to that soon. For now, see prospect.org/2025/10/23/u...
This looks to me like a *definitive* critique of, not just offsets, but any market-based scheme that is not based on the rock solid verification of credit quality. Am I wrong? www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/news/carbon-...
Dave Roberts is right (again). Also, this is USEFUL work. There are so many details to keep straight. Best to keep our eyes on the BIG ones
Let's be clear: billionaires are driving the climate crisis.
Despite contributing the least to climate change, it's people living in poverty who are disproportionately affected. The richest 1% emit as much carbon pollution as the poorest 5 BILLION people.
PollutingElite.earth
#PollutingElite
The Drawdown Solutions Explorer is pure Awesome. Seriously, look at it. Even you cynical bastards
🚨New research🚨Rich countries can unlock $6.6 trillion for climate action by ending fossil fuels handouts, making polluters pay, defunding wars, taxing the super rich. There’s no shortage of $$ for action. It’s just in the wrong hands.
#FixtheFinance
➡️ Read more: oilchange.org/we-can-pay-for-it/
I know Adam Tooze writes too fucking much. But I'm very glad I read this. The funny thing is that it makes me feel better to know that the US is not, alone, going to write the story of the future. Which -- admit it -- we sometimes fall into thinking. adamtooze.substack.com/p/chartbook-...
💰 Taxing the super-rich could solve many of our climate and inequality problems. But there are many myths around a tax on the millionaires and billionaires.
💡 Test your knowledge and share your score with us! #TaxTheSuperRich
Lovely piece in Crikey. My question is why performative fatalism is so popular?
See Jonathon Porritt: "The IPCC: Can it regain its credibility?" My read is that we can still achieve 2C if all goes well, but of course it's not. I'm not a fatalist -- far from it -- but check out his list of the likely impacts of 2C of warming. www.meer.com/en/91051-the...
On another front, climate law, a huge event just finally went down. The International Court of Justice just released its Advisory Opinion on the Obligations of States in respect to Climate Change, It was a somber event, and quite affecting to watch. webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1c...
Read Wen Stephenson’s (@learning2live.bsky.social) Learning to Live in the Dark. Lots of us have intermittently ruminated on the climate catastrophe, and its meaning, but Wen has done so with sustained attention, and fruitfully. His thoughts are useful, and sometimes even consoling.
Here's a timely reminder.
#TaxTheRich
Killer opinion piece: On a Dying Multilateralism by Walden Bello, in Foreign Policy in Focus. "Is it possible to move towards a new, more participatory system of multilateralism without bringing forth a post-capitalist system of economic, social, and political relations?"
fpif.org/requiem-for-...
The climate talks are in trouble, and it is not their fault. Point your finger at the global elites -- especially those in the Global North -- who are able to find money for their militaries, but not for climate or justice. Here's CAN press release from Bonn: climatenetwork.org/2025/06/26/b...
Did you love Robinson's Ministry for the Future but think it was maybe a wee bit too optimistic? What about Markley's great The Deluge? Did you think *it* was too optimistic? If so, you had best read Tim Winton's Juice. It's the climate future, and there are scores to be settled. Great book.
Is the "abundance" debate over? I hope not, because I just read this terrific piece in The Nation on how the Abundance folks and we (left) populists need each other. Really worth reading. See www.thenation.com/article/poli...
