The Climate Crisis

“...I’ve learnt that no one is too small to make a difference.”

– Greta Thunberg

Learn about the climate crisis on my website and my Substack.

At PAH, we welcome debate and respectful disagreement! If you would like to respond to any ideas in this article, you can submit your response here.

Climate change is a complex global issue, one that is often shrouded in confusion, mystery, and misinformation. In an age when everyone is unsure of the distinction between reality and fantasy, it is crucial to fight to expose the former. There are countless layers of facts and fallacies to be unpacked when it comes to this climate science and solutions, and this article cannot claim to cover all of them. However, it does reveal some of the most important and undisputed scientific truths, as well as the author’s take on some cultural controversies.

The first truth is this: climate change is an existential threat on a scale humanity has never seen before. In and of themselves, the wildfires, rising seas, and storms would be enough to constitute an emergency. However, as Greta Thunberg has stated, “the climate crisis is… a symptom of a much larger sustainability crisis.” (The Climate Book, page 3). Our systems of manufacturing, transportation, energy, agricultural, government, decision-making, and much more are fundamentally flawed. Climate change is not simply a change in climate – it is a change in life as we know it. It is a climate crisis.

Climate change is defined as “long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns” (What Is Climate Change? | United Nations). This term has been demonized, but climate change and the climate crisis cannot be used synonymously. At its root, it is not carbon dioxide or heat that makes the climate crisis so dangerous: as fixated as we are about those things, the world has actually been hotter and more plentiful in CO2 in the past (A Graphical History of Atmospheric CO2 Levels Over Time). There is something unique about anthropogenic (“human-caused”) climate change that makes it a threat.

Despite their differences, climate change and the climate crisis operate according to the same science – a science that is often murky and misrepresented in the public eye. The warming of the earth is caused by atmospheric insulation that allows heat from the sun to be trapped instead of dissipating. This is able to happen due to greenhouse gases (GHGs), which are heat absorbing compounds in the air. The primary GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), and chlorofluorocarbons, but many others exist (Causes - NASA Science). This is the “greenhouse effect,” another major misunderstanding within climate science. The greenhouse effect is not to blame for the climate crisis – in fact, it is essential to life surviving and thriving. The greenhouse effect and GHGs are a crucial part of natural climate change, and have fluctuated over millions of years. 

Another aspect of climate science that must be clarified is the distinction between weather and climate. The observant reader may have noticed that the term “global warming” has not been used as a synonym for the climate crisis. This is because, although the targets and terrors associated with the climate crisis all include degrees of planetary warming, this is an average. That is what climate is. Weather, on the other hand, occurs at a particular place at a particular time. The climate crisis causes weather to be more extreme in many cases, but that weather is not always hotter. As environmental and labor economist R. Jisung Park states, “there may in some places paradoxically be more frequent days that feel unusually cold because, as the world warms, the jet stream can weaken, leading to periodic collapses that permit arctic air to travel farther south than usual… [this can create] confusion, and opportunistic showmanship that feeds on it.” (Slow Burn pg 32).

A similar, and equally critical, facet of climate science is the concept of non-linear feedback and feedback loops. According to the World Wildlife Fund, “[w]hen sufficient changes accumulate over time, they can push the system beyond a critical threshold—called a ‘tipping point’—into a completely new state. This drastic transformation happens abruptly, and triggers cascading feedback loops that accelerate the process, often leading to irreversible changes in the system.” (Understanding Climate Tipping Points | WWF). This means that regular heating from business as usual could lead to irregular, even exponential harm. This phenomenon is reinforced by the various feedback loops that exist in nature. Feedback is a way for nature to stabilize its state (negative feedback, in which the product reduces the stimulus) or accelerate important processes (positive feedback, in which the product increases the stimulus). An example of a positive feedback loop caused by anthropogenic climate change is the melting of Arctic ice: as ice melts, the surface area able to reflect heat back into the atmosphere decreases, which further heats the ground surrounding ice, melting it more, and so on. Another example of feedback loops and tipping points also comes from the Arctic: 

The world’s permafrost contains an estimated 1,500 gigatonnes of carbon, about twice as much as the atmosphere. As permafrost thaws, its carbon is broken down and released into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide or methane. Those greenhouse gases warm the planet further, melting more permafrost in a potentially catastrophic cycle. (Could microbes, locked in Arctic ice for millennia, unleash a wave of deadly diseases?).  

A major tipping point that must be acknowledged is the world’s “carbon budget." This is the amount of carbon dioxide that the atmosphere can hold. We do not know exactly how much time we have until we exceed this quantity, but every bit of CO2 that is (or is not) contributed matters.

This is all to say: it is a mistake to condemn climate change for the crisis we face now. There are various components of anthropogenic climate change – from its artificial source to its rapid pace – that make it such a  threat.

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, which is widely accepted as the origin of the climate crisis, humanity has rapidly filled up its carbon budget. Essentially every innovation of the 18th and 19th centuries was powered by the miraculous discovery of fossil fuel deposits, most prominently coal. The name fossil fuels stems from the fact that these substances were composed of the fossilized remains of creatures and plants from millions of years ago (“fossils”), and they could be burned to produce energy (“fuels”). After hundreds of years of using fossil fuels as our primary energy source, the GHGs released have caused the average global temperature to increase at a faster pace than any other point in earth’s recorded history. Currently (as of 2023), 82% of global energy still comes from fossil fuels, which means that GHGs continue to accumulate in the atmosphere and the climate crisis continues to accelerate (Fossil Fuels Accounted for 82% of Global Energy Mix in 2023 Amid Record Consumption: Report).

This accumulation of GHGs causes an unprecedented increase in global temperatures, which triggers innumerable not-so-natural disasters. The frequency and intensity of extreme weather events has increased, including “[r]ecord-breaking heat waves on land and in the ocean, drenching rains, severe floods, years-long droughts, extreme wildfires, and widespread flooding during hurricanes” (Extreme Weather - NASA Science). These major changes threaten wildlife across the globe by making their habitats uninhabitable and depleting them of necessary resources. According to the World Wildlife Fund, “up to 14% of species face a very high risk of extinction at 1.5°C of warming. At 3°C of warming, that number could rise to as much as 29% of species” (The effects of climate change on Wildlife | WWF). 

Humans are far from immune to these impacts: indeed, we are significantly harmed by the climate crisis just as other creatures are. The climate crisis is considered a “threat multiplier, undermining and potentially reversing decades of health progress” by “increasing the risk of deaths, noncommunicable diseases, the emergence and spread of infectious diseases, and health emergencies” (Climate change). The health impacts of anthropogenic climate change range from heat stroke to exacerbation of heart disease to unfamiliar illnesses. One of the most prominent examples of this is the microbes trapped in the Arctic permafrost, which many professionals predict will cause unprecedented suffering in the near future. According to the UN Environment Programme,

The Arctic, which spans 14 million square kilometres across eight countries, is covered by a layer of thick permafrost, a frozen mixture of soil, rocks, ice and organic material. However, the Arctic is warming four times faster than the rest of the globe, with thawing permafrost potentially setting free ancient bacteria and viruses, experts say. According to a study in the journal Environmental Sustainability, an estimated four sextillion microbes – that’s a four with 21 zeros – are released annually due to thawing permafrost. 

Some researchers are especially worried about the thawing of long-dead Arctic animals, whose bodies may house dormant microbes. 

… 

As warming opens the Ar[c]tic to shipping, mining and other industries, Hinwood says that could put more people in close proximity to thawed permafrost and its resident microbes.

The climate crisis also impacts society in more indirect ways, by interrupting manufacturing, agricultural and food supply, clean water and sanitation access, and the stability of the world economy.

What is truly tragic is that these impacts are far from being equally distributed. “3.6 billion people already live in areas highly susceptible to climate change. Despite contributing minimally to global emissions, low-income countries and small island developing states (SIDS) endure the harshest health impacts. In vulnerable regions, the death rate from extreme weather events in the last decade was 15 times higher than in less vulnerable ones” (Climate change). This appalling inequality applies on a global, national, and sub-national level. For example, the small South Pacific island country of Tuvalu does not have a single point that is more than 4.5 meters above sea level, and that figure rapidly decreases as glaciers melt and water expands with the heating atmosphere. In 2021, the minister of Tuvalu gave a speech, emphasizing the fact that “we are sinking,” and asking for aid (Tuvalu minister to address Cop26 knee deep in water to highlight climate crisis and sea level rise). Another case is Pakistan, which has been suffering from horrific flooding for years, and reports to need approximately $16 billion in aid (Pakistan: Flood Damages and Economic Losses Over USD 30 billion and Reconstruction Needs Over USD 16 billion - New Assessment). Possibly the most vulnerable region is Africa, which contains the least developed economies of the world but suffers the most from droughts, floods, storms, and lack of food. For example, the country of Chad is one of the lowest emitters in the entire world, but has recently been the most affected by natural disasters (Climate Change in Chad: Challenges and Opportunities in: IMF Staff Country Reports Volume 2024 Issue 336 (2024)). Despite their horrifying climate impacts, these regions are minimal contributors to the climate crisis: as of 2024, Tuvalu emits less than 0.01% of global emissions; Pakistan 0.47%; the entirety of Africa just 3.89%; and Chad less than 0.01% (Share of global CO₂ emissions).  

Within the United States, inequality is clear in that minority communities often experience disproportional negative effects. For example, “[i]n a study of 108 urban areas nationwide, the formerly redlined neighborhoods of nearly every city studied were hotter than the non-redlined neighborhoods, some by nearly 13 degrees” (Racist Housing Practices From The 1930s Linked To Hotter Neighborhoods Today). This is primarily due to heat becoming trapped in certain types of infrastructure (particularly concrete) and being emitted from vehicles, a phenomenon known as “urban heat islands” that is more frequent in communities with highly concentrated buildings and crowded streets. Marginalized communities are often disadvantaged economically, which means they have less advanced technology, less spaced out infrastructure, and less green spaces to offset GHG emissions.

Inequality does not just span over space, but over time as well: to truly understand the truth about the climate crisis, historical context is critical. As has already been revealed, the climate crisis differs from climate change in many ways, one of which is that the crisis is not purely a scientific phenomenon. It is in fact deeply cultural, and inextricably intertwined with ethnicity, religion, and power. The climate crisis stems from two beliefs that are ingrained in Western culture: the idea that natural resources were granted by God for the sole purpose of exploitation, and the idea that certain groups of people are fundamentally superior to others. Throughout past centuries, there are several stark examples of these concepts being used to justify acts of violence, including the Doctrine of Discovery, the Transatlantic Slave Trade, and the Industrial Revolution (which also happens to be the beginning of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions). These historical events occurred because of ideas of racial, ethnic, or religious supremacy, and they set the stage for the “climate supremacy” (and the demand for “climate justice”) that exists today.

Climate supremacy is the ongoing perpetration of the climate crisis by a very small minority, and, by analyzing the historical and current emissions data in the graphs below, it is clear who these “climate supremacists” are.

Not only is climate responsibility vastly unequal, but climate supremacists refuse to admit it – climate accountability is still severely lacking. Big Oil has continuously (and most often successfully) used various tactics to redirect blame for the climate crisis. In the past, flat-out denial of climate science was the most common. However, from the 1980s onward, climate change became less disputed in the academic world, and so they tried to deflect blame onto individuals instead. The most prominent example comes from “British Petroleum, [which is] the second largest non-state owned oil company in the world.” The corporation “hired the public relations professionals Ogilvy & Mather to promote the slant that climate change is not the fault of an oil giant, but that of individuals.” It “[f]irst promoted and soon successfully popularized the term ‘carbon footprint’ … [and] unveiled its ‘carbon footprint calculator’ in 2004.” (Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed. Keep them on the hook | Rebecca Solnit | The Guardian). 

Of course, it is true that individual actions culminate into significant greenhouse emissions. Virtually every action that one takes, particularly in the Global North, adds a tiny bit to the world’s ever-shrinking carbon budget. However, it is still not the fault of everyday people. As Greta Thunberg has repeatedly said, “[w]e cannot live sustainably in an unsustainable world” (The Climate Book, pg 426).

The logical conclusion of this revelation is that we must transform the world to be sustainable. There’s good news and bad news when it comes to our chances of achieving this. The bad news is that some of the damage we have done is irreversible. The warming that has already occurred is nothing short of alarming: according to NOAA, “[t]he 10 warmest years in the historical record have all occurred since 2015” with 2026 exceeding the pre-industrial average by 1.34 degrees Celsius (Assessing the Global Temperature and Precipitation Analysis in 2025 | News | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)). Already, the climate crisis has cost humanity a significant amount: in a study of 185 extreme weather events between 2000 and 2019 that were attributed to anthropogenic climate change, “[t]he net statistical value of life cost … [is] $431.8 billion” and “net $260.8 billion of economic damages.” (The global costs of extreme weather that are attributable to climate change | Nature Communications). If we continue to increase emissions at the current rate, the planet could warm up to 4 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels (Predictions of Future Global Climate | Center for Science Education). Even if we curb emissions and keep them constant at the current levels, that figure would still be 2.6 degrees, an unacceptable overshoot of the Paris Agreement goals (CAT Thermometer | Climate Action Tracker).

However, although some warming and some impacts are already guaranteed, the good news is that we have not yet passed the point of no return. According to NOAA,

If all human emissions of heat-trapping gases were to stop today, Earth’s temperature would continue to rise for a few decades as ocean currents bring excess heat stored in the deep ocean back to the surface.  Once this excess heat radiated out to space, Earth’s temperature would stabilize. Experts think the additional warming from this “hidden” heat are unlikely to exceed 0.9° Fahrenheit (0.5°Celsius). With no further human influence, natural processes would begin to slowly remove the excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and global temperatures would gradually begin to decline.

It’s true that without dramatic action in the next couple of decades, we are unlikely to keep global warming in this century below 2.7° Fahrenheit (1.5° Celsius) compared to pre-industrial temperatures—a threshold that experts say offers a lower risk of serious negative impacts. But the more we overshoot that threshold, the more serious and widespread the negative impacts will be, which means that it is never “too late” to take action. (Can we slow or even reverse global warming? | NOAA Climate.gov) 

How do we do this? As the Union of Concerned Scientists states, “[c]utting carbon is the only long-term solution for avoiding climate impacts.” Greenhouse gases, mainly CO2, are what caused the climate crisis, so mitigating the worst impacts will require reducing them drastically. This means reaching net zero by 2050 (preferably much earlier), which will require transforming our way of life on every level.

When it comes to the nitty gritty, hard facts about solving climate change, there are three (and potentially four) essential components: a price on carbon, international cooperation, transformations in every sector (particularly the highest emitting ones, such as electricity and transportation), and possibly a Green New Deal. (Climate Solutions)

Every person can contribute to these changes by being “green consumers” and “green citizens.” The former encompasses the environmentally friendly tips and tricks that are typically advertised. These habits are valuable for a few reasons: 

1. The first is that because the climate crisis is approaching a tipping point in which we exceed the atmosphere’s carbon budget, every emission matters. If everyone chose to follow sustainable practices in their everyday lives, a meaningful quantity of CO2 could be offset.

2. Another reason is that money has a major influence on corporate actions. If individuals refuse to endorse companies that source their products from fragile tropical rainforests, or buy vegan substitutes instead of carbon-intensive animal products, or boycott AI because of the environmental impact of data centers, a difference can be made.

3. A final reason is for the moral reason of one’s actions reflecting their values. Even if a quantitative difference is not made, choosing the moral high ground and showing people that you value climate action in every decision you make can be very inspiring. It can be a way to mobilize more support for the climate movement, which is extremely important.

Knowing these things, here are some daily actions that anyone can (and, debatably, should) take for the climate crisis:

• Recycle

• Compost

• Pick up litter

• Turn off the lights

• Don’t leave the water running

• Take shorter, cooler showers

• Use reusable water bottles

• Use cloth napkins instead of paper towels

• Use cloth diapers instead of disposable ones

• Use electronics instead of paper

• Avoid disposable cutlery

• Don’t waste food

• Eat less animal products

• Install solar panels on your home

• Install a heat pump in your home

• Walk, bike, carpool, or use public transport

• Drive an electric vehicle

• Buy second-hand clothes

• Donate items instead of throwing them away

• Support local businesses 

As important as sustainable habits are, they should only be pursued to a point where they do not interfere with the more important individual action: “green citizenship.” This means fighting the perpetrators of climate change alongside others and demanding that major changes be made. Grassroots mobilizing and organizing is not only incredibly powerful, but incredibly necessary: it is generally accepted that 25% of the population must be a part of a movement in some capacity for it to truly make systemic change.

No one should be expected to dedicate their entire life to climate advocacy, but everyone can take a few moments to Serve, Educate, and Advocate (SEA). Here are some of the best actions to start with:

• Learn about the climate crisis through books, articles, podcasts, and people

• Talk about the climate crisis and educate others whenever the opportunity arises

• Email or call your legislator to urge them to support climate policies

• Vote in favor of candidates with strong climate platforms

• Create or sign a petition for climate legislation 

• Join a grassroots movement and help them campaign

The more one learns about the climate crisis, the more hopeless it can feel. It is easy to fall into despair, but this must be avoided at all costs. Now is not the time to lament: now is the time to fight. The sooner systemic transformations occur, the more likely it is that our planet will be livable in the future. Yesterday might be gone, but we can act today to preserve tomorrow.