banner
logo
black cross ✖



The climate emergency 2025

For more details via infoboxes: hover, click or double-click on any highlighted text


Global temperature chart
If we care about the world:
1. We should treat climate change as an emergency:
  • mankind has changed the climate
  • the scale of harm being done makes continued burning of fossil fuels morally indefensible
  • action on climate change has not gone according to plan
  • governments have not acted in line with their commitments to urgent action
  • the global total of CO2 emissions has continued to rise
  • the rise in global temperature is now approaching the 1.5°C limit
  • extreme weather events are increasing.
2. We should aim to understand:
  • the science of climate change
  • the urgency of action on climate change - the rapidly dwindling carbon budgets
  • what should have happened: agreement of a plan to reduce emissions in line with the climate science and commitments given in the Paris and other agreements - and compliance with that plan
  • what has gone wrong, why policy making has been so poor:
    • understating the urgency of action, and advocating of inadequate policies - i.e. climate urgency denial - exacerbated by groupthink and other cognitive biases
    • failures across society: by government scientists, politicians, the media, climate campaigners, climate sceptics, businesses, the legal system, other organisations, and individuals
    • fragmentation of climate advocacy leading to chaotic and inconsistent policy proposals
  • what options do we have now: implement organised radical change, or have disorganised radical change forced upon us by a deteriorating climate.
3. We should take action:
  • improve decision making by having an honest discussion of the options based on the science:
    • apply scientific rigour to the policy making process
    • take steps to avoid optimism bias, overconfidence, groupthink, and denial
    • stop advocates of climate action contradicting the IPCC and each other
  • rational collective action across society: urgent radical reduction in emissions across all sectors, a rapidly increasing carbon tax, closure of most airports within months
  • disseminate accurate information
  • take personal action
  • challenge what is out of line with the science.

This document aims to be a summary of the science on climate policy making, written for those who feel that decisions should be taken on the basis of facts and fairness.

1. Why be very concerned about climate change and take emergency action

Mankind has changed the climate
  • average temperatures are higher, and there are more storms, floods, heatwaves and wildfires
  • the effects are cumulative and irreversible with current technology
Coral reef bleaching
Photo: ©The Ocean Agency/Ocean Image Bank
The scale of harm being done makes continued burning of fossil fuels morally indefensible. This includes
  • climate deaths - e.g. each year's CO2 emissions from the UK will result in around 150,000 climate deaths
  • climate refugees
  • loss of biodiversity, e.g. coral reef blanching.

Action on climate change is very urgent but has not gone according to plan:
  • in the
    Paris Agreement
    countries made commitments to limit global warming to well under 2°C (often taken to mean 1.7°C), and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C
  • this means ending the use of fossil fuels
  • the scientific advice was that these commitments require
    "rapid and far-reaching transitions"
    throughout society
  • but governments have not acted in line with the promises given - actions are completely at variance with the speed of change needed.

The climate has continued to deteriorate
  • the global total of CO2 emissions has continued to rise
  • in developed countries, emissions are not falling fast enough
  • the global temperature rise (longer term average) reached around 1.3°C in 2024 - and at its current rate will reach 1.5°C in 2030, and 1.7°C in 2036.
  • extreme weather events are increasing
  • the risks of catastrophic tipping points are steadily increasing.

Governments cannot be trusted on important questions
  • they have a poor record of decision making
  • in the UK, there is a recurring pattern of wasting billions of pounds on ineffective policies and ignoring effective policies

There is much concern about catastrophic errors in decision making
  • the UN Secretary-General has warned: "Some government and business leaders are saying one thing - but doing another. Simply put, they are lying."
  • despite the global temperature rise being likely to reach the Paris agreed limit of 1.5°C in 2030, governments continue to talk about Net Zero 2050 as if this is an acceptable timescale
  • climate protesters who are very aware of the situation are very vocal and not deterred by long prison sentences.

Read more at carbonindependent.org/183.html

2. The key points on climate change that should be understood

The science of climate change
  • global temperatures have risen steadily as mankind has added CO2 to the atmosphere
  • the unacceptable level of climate deaths, climate refugees, biodiversity loss and sea level rise

The urgency of action on climate change
UK carbon budget chart for net zero 2050
  • the global
    carbon budget
    for 1.5°C runs out in 2030, and even sooner in developed countries, e.g. the UK's fair carbon budget for a 50% chance of limiting global warming to 1.5°C runs out in 2027 - see chart and document 177
  • this means radical changes in lifestyles for many until renewable alternatives are developed, if temperature targets are to be met

What should have been done by governments and wider society
There should have been agreement on a plan to rapidly eliminate fossil fuels in line with the climate science and commitments given in the Paris and other agreements, - and compliance with that plan.

What has actually been done
There have been many declarations of a climate emergency, but planning has been of non-emergency policies, and there has been little action.

What has gone wrong, why policy making has been so poor
It is crucial to understand what has gone wrong, why policy making has been so poor, so that effective action can now be planned:
  • there has been no general discussion of the extreme urgency of action due to the imminent exhaustion of a fair carbon budget - 2027 in the UK for compliance with the 1.5°C commitment - and there has been no general discussion of the implications of radical change e.g. the closure of most airports within a few months
  • instead, the urgency of action has been grossly understated - inadequate government timescales (such as Net Zero 2050) have dominated discussions and have been little challenged - with inadequate policies being advocated and planned
  • this seems to be not just misunderstandings but a form of
    climate denial
    , termed implicatory climate denial - exacerbated by groupthink, overconfidence and other cognitive biases
  • there has been a general failure across society: by government scientists, politicians, the media, climate campaigners, climate sceptics, businesses, the legal system, other organisations, and individuals
  • the evidence is that it is not a sporadic problem, nor is it a conspiracy of oil companies or billionaires - instead there has been a widespread failure of decision making - see document 189: Climate inaction and delay: Shambles or conspiracy?
  • climate campaigners have contributed to the climate denial by understating the size and urgency of changes needed, with fragmentation of climate advocacy efforts - leading to chaotic, inconsistent and inadequate policy proposals.

What choices do we have now
  • our current lifestyles are unsustainable, and so radical change is coming one way or another - we can choose to organise radical change, or have disorganised radical change forced upon us by a deteriorating climate.
  • whether to continue with inadequate non-emergency policies or treat climate change as the highest priority i.e. as an
    emergency
  • whether to continue with the target of limiting global warming to 1.5°C or to accept that the system has failed and consider a higher limit of e.g. 1.6°C.

Read more at carbonindependent.org/184.html

3. Action needed

There needs to be an honest discussion of the options based on the science of climate change and the science of policy making.
Flawed decision making needs to be corrected, in decision makers in government, in advocacy groups, and across society
Despite appearances, the squares marked A and B in the optical illusion are
actually the same shade of grey!
Attribution: Edward H. Adelson: Checker shadow illusion
Things that appear to be obvious are not necessarily true (as in the illusion). People tend to jump to conclusions on the basis of limited information, and then resist altering that conclusion regardless of further information, and to distrust or even vilify those saying otherwise.

Wrong conclusions can result from to groupthink, overconfidence, selective recall and other cognitive biases, and this can be further complicated by psychological denial.

The process of science has evolved to reduce wrong conclusions by reducing the influence of cognitive biases and denial e.g. by the use of placebo controls in drug trials to negate optimism bias. The same efforts to avoid bias and denial need to be applied to policy making.

This is not merely evidence-based policy making, since it is easy for decision makers to find some piece of evidence that fits with their preferred course of action and ignore the rest. Instead, there is a need to apply the full rigour of science to the policy making process - which could be termed science-based policy making. This means: honesty, transparency, pooling of evidence, acceptance of fallibility, aiming for a consensus of reasonable people, including external scrutiny of decisions, and using shared decision making (SDM) so that all parts of society are involved.

Face up to the difficult decisions on the speed of change
Facts and fairness dictate that it is emergency (not routine) action that is needed - and that the choices for the UK include a linear pathway to Net Zero 2030 for a limit of 1.5°C, or Net Zero 2035 for 1.6°C, requiring respectively 20% or 10% annual cuts in CO2 emissions.

Advocate rational collective action across society
  • reduce fossil fuel use very rapidly, including a massive programme of insulation, ending leisure aviation within months, much reduced vehicle mileage, and restructuring of the food supply.
  • a rapidly increasing carbon tax.

Disseminate accurate information
  • explain that current affluent lifestyles are unsustainable, and will end one way or another
  • explain the promises made in the Paris Agreement and the choices that the UK has to make.

Take personal action
Be part of the solution rather than part of the problem. Reduce fossil fuel use as fast as possible.

Challenge what is out of line with the science
  • challenge inadequate government action, and challenge misinformation - whatever the source
  • stop advocates of climate action contradicting the IPCC and each other, e.g. Friends of the Earth's endorsement of the UK Government's Net Zero 2050 timescale.

Read more at carbonindependent.org/185.html

Started: 14 Nov 2024
Last updated: 7 Nov 2025     Page No: 166