28/04/2025

The Climate's Breaking Point: Coral Bleaching, Heatwaves, and a Warming World - Lethal Heating Editor BDA



The world’s climate is entering a more dangerous and less predictable phase. 

Three powerful and interconnected issues—an unprecedented global coral bleaching event, alarming new research on abrupt temperature swings, and record-shattering heatwaves across South Asia—have captured the world's attention, each revealing the intensifying effects of human-driven climate change.

First, Earth's coral reefs are enduring what scientists are calling the most extensive bleaching event in recorded history. Between 2023 and 2025, around 84% of coral reef ecosystems have suffered significant bleaching, according to new data1

Fueled by higher-than-normal ocean temperatures, this crisis is decimating critical marine ecosystems that support biodiversity, coastal protection, and millions of livelihoods. 

Coral bleaching occurs when stressed corals expel the algae that provide them with energy and colour, leaving them ghostly white and vulnerable to death. While bleaching events have happened before, the scale, duration, and severity of this episode mark a terrifying new chapter.

Abrupt temperature swings

Meanwhile, a groundbreaking study published this week in Nature Communications has revealed that abrupt temperature swings—where conditions flip dramatically from extreme heat to extreme cold—have been happening far more often and are projected to worsen as the planet continues to warm2

Analyzing six decades of weather records, researchers found that more than 60% of the Earth's surface has experienced increased volatility between 1961 and 2023. 

Factors such as the waviness of the jet stream, intensified evaporation, and changing soil moisture levels are making temperature transitions sharper and less predictable. These violent swings are particularly threatening for agriculture, public health, and infrastructure, as populations have less time to adapt to the sudden changes.

Growing climate instability

This theory of growing climate instability has a tragic, real-world manifestation: the brutal April 2025 heatwave that scorched India and Pakistan. 

Temperatures in Pakistan's Sindh province neared 49°C (120°F), while New Delhi sweltered under a relentless 40°C (104°F) heat3. A recent analysis from the ClimaMeter group concluded that this particular heatwave was made up to 4°C hotter than similar events would have been before 1987, attributing the majority of this intensification to human-caused global warming. 

Natural variability, the study found, played only a minor role. For millions living across South Asia—where limited access to air conditioning and clean water is a daily reality—the difference between a survivable heatwave and a deadly one is measured in single degrees.

What ties these stories together is not just their extremity, but their speed. 

The climate is lurching

The climate is not simply changing—it's lurching. From coral reefs dying en masse to farmers watching crops fail in days rather than weeks, the rhythms of the natural world are accelerating toward disruption faster than models predicted.

And yet, amid the chaos, there are signs of hope. 

New energy solutions are scaling up. Global emissions, though still dangerously high, have begun to flatten in some regions4. Climate movements are winning stronger environmental protections. 

Feedback loops

However, scientists warn that without rapid and sustained action—especially by the world's largest economies—the tipping points we are now seeing could cascade into feedback loops too large to control.

April 2025 may be remembered not just as another grim month of climate news, but as a call to confront a stark choice: intensify our mitigation efforts or prepare for a world increasingly shaped by irreversible extremes.

Footnotes
  1. "2023–2025 global coral bleaching event" - Wikipedia
  2. "Sudden flips from hot to cold temperature come with climate change, says study" - Financial Times
  3. "Climate change largely responsible for April 2025 heatwave in India and Pakistan, study finds" - Climate Fact Checks
  4. "5 ways we're making progress on climate change" - Vox

27/04/2025

The Climate Pope: How Francis Became a Global Voice for the Planet - Lethal Heating Editor BDA



When Pope Francis stepped onto the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica in 2013, few could have predicted that this Argentinian Jesuit would become one of the world’s most influential voices on climate change. 

But over the past decade, Francis had done exactly that—positioning the Catholic Church not only as a spiritual authority but as a force for environmental justice.

📜 Laudato Si’ — A Wake-Up Call to the World

In 2015, the pope released a groundbreaking encyclical called Laudato Si’, or “Praise Be to You". It was more than a religious document—it was a bold and beautifully written plea to humanity to care for “our common home”.

Francis didn’t mince words: environmental destruction is a moral crisis, and the poor—who contribute least to climate change—are suffering the most because of it.

“The destruction of the environment is an offense against God, a sin that endangers all human beings, especially the most vulnerable.”
Source: Laudato Si’ Action Platform
🌐 Influence Beyond the Church

Francis’s message struck a chord beyond Catholic circles. His voice carried into United Nations halls and global climate conferences. Some analysts believe his leadership helped sway public and political opinion in favour of the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement.

He even invited oil executives to the Vatican, urging them to transition toward sustainable energy. In 2023, he addressed the COP28 climate summit and reminded world leaders that the clock is ticking:

“The future of us all depends on the present that we now choose.”
Source: Vatican News
🔄 Laudate Deum: A Follow-Up with Urgency

Eight years after Laudato Si’, Pope Francis doubled down with another powerful statement: Laudate Deum, released in 2023. This time, he focused even more directly on human-caused climate change and the systemic barriers that prevent real action.

He called out the failures of international summits and demanded real accountability—not just more words:

“We are in the same boat… but some of us are steering it, and others are bailing water.”
Source: Vatican.va
🙏 A Legacy Rooted in Care

What makes Pope Francis’s approach unique is how he connects the dots between faith, science, social justice, and environmental responsibility. He’s not just saying “plant trees”—he’s saying our spiritual health is tied to the health of the Earth and its people.

As climate threats grow more urgent, Pope Francis has become a rare voice of moral clarity. And even as questions about his eventual successor loom, his message is clear: caring for the planet isn’t optional—it’s sacred.

Links

26/04/2025

The Heat Is On: How Climate Change Is Stealing Australia’s Endangered Wildlife - Lethal Heating Editor BDA




A koala clings to a charred gum tree. Smoke lingers in the air. Below, the forest floor is blackened and bare.

It’s not a memory — it’s the new normal.

🔥 Climate Change Is No Longer a Future Threat

Australia’s unique wildlife is under siege. Climate change is no longer a distant danger. It’s the top threat facing our endangered species today.

From koalas to coral reefs, animals across the country are battling extreme heat, rising seas, megafires, and shifting seasons. Many are losing.

More than 1,800 Australian species are officially listed as threatened. According to the State of the Environment Report 2021, climate change now impacts every ecosystem.

🐨 Koalas Are Burning

Once considered safe, koalas are now endangered in Queensland, New South Wales, and the ACT.

Their forests are drying out. Bushfires are becoming more intense. Food trees are dying from drought or heat stress. And koalas, slow to adapt or move, are being left behind.

“Climate change amplifies every existing threat,” says Dr. Sarah Bekessy of RMIT University. “It’s the firestarter, the floodgate, the heatwave.”

🪸 The Great Barrier Reef Is Dying Fast

In the oceans, rising temperatures are wreaking havoc.

Marine heatwaves have killed off half the Great Barrier Reef’s corals since the mid-1990s. Mass bleaching events in 2016, 2017, and 2020 turned huge sections ghost white.

Corals rely on algae for nutrients and colour. When waters heat up, corals expel this algae — and often die within weeks.

“The reef is the rainforest of the sea,” says Professor Terry Hughes of James Cook University. “When it dies, everything suffers.”

Thousands of marine species depend on reefs. From clownfish to sea turtles, extinction risk ripples outward.

🐸 Frogs, Birds, and Wetlands on the Edge

It’s not just iconic animals in trouble. Entire ecosystems are fraying.

The critically endangered northern corroboree frog, native to the alpine bogs of southeastern Australia, needs cold, wet winters to breed. But snow is melting earlier. Bogs are drying. Eggs are dying.

The eastern curlew, a migratory shorebird, is losing its feeding grounds. Rising sea levels and coastal development are wiping out its wetlands.

In the Kakadu wetlands, saltwater intrusion is killing freshwater plants. Saltwater crocodiles are thriving — but fish, birds, and turtles are disappearing.

Science Is Clear — And the Clock Is Ticking

A 2020 study in Nature Climate Change found that one in six species could vanish worldwide if global temperatures rise beyond 2°C.

Australia is especially vulnerable. Our ecosystems are isolated and often fragile. Even small shifts in temperature or rainfall can cause population collapse.

💸 Action Is Possible — But Underfunded

Despite the urgency, funding remains patchy.

The Australian Conservation Foundation revealed that recovery funding for threatened species fell by 39% between 2013 and 2018.

Only 39 of Australia’s top 100 endangered species have fully funded recovery plans.

“You can’t save species without tackling climate change,” says Darren Grover of WWF Australia. “We need emissions cuts and on-the-ground recovery — fast.”

🌿 Hope Is Not Lost

There are signs of progress.

  • Bushfire recovery grants have helped restore habitats.

  • Wildlife corridors are reconnecting fragmented forests.

  • Indigenous land management is reintroducing traditional burning and conservation methods.

  • Grassroots communities are planting native trees and cleaning up coasts.

The federal government has even pledged “zero extinctions” in national parks — a bold goal, if backed by action.

🌏 We Have the Knowledge. We Need the Will.

Climate change is not tomorrow’s threat. It’s today’s reality.

Every delay costs more species. More forests. More reef. More future.

If we act now — and act boldly — we can still protect what makes Australia wild and wonderful.

But the window is closing. Fast.

Links

25/04/2025

What would change your mind about climate change? We asked 5,000 Australians – here’s what they told us

LOOKSLIKEPHOTO/Shutterstock

The Conversation - Kelly Kirkland  Abby Robinson  Amy S G Lee  Samantha Stanley  Zoe Leviston

AUTHORS
Kelly Kirkland
  Research Fellow in Psychology
  The University of Queensland
Abby Robinson
  PhD candidate in Social Psychology
  The University of Melbourne
Amy S G Lee
  PhD Candidate in Social Psychology
  The University of Melbourne
Samantha Stanley
  Research Fellow in Social Psychology
  UNSW Sydney
Zoe Leviston
  Research Fellow in Social Psychology
  Australian National University
Australia just sweltered through one of its hottest summers on record, and heat has pushed well into autumn. 
 
Once-in-a-generation floods are now striking with alarming regularity. 

As disasters escalate, insurers are warning some properties may soon be uninsurable. Yet, despite these escalating disasters — and a federal election looming — conversation around climate change remains deeply polarising.

But are people’s minds really made up? Or are they still open to change?

In research out today, we asked more than 5,000 Australians a simple question: what would change your mind about climate change? Their answers reveal both a warning and an opportunity.

Recent floods in western Queensland devastated graziers and remote towns such as Thargomindah. Bulloo Shire Council/AAP
On climate, Australians fall into six groups

Almost two thirds (64%) of Australians are concerned about the impact of climate change, according to a recent survey.

But drill deeper, and we quickly find Australians hold quite different views on climate. In fact, research in 2022 showed Australians can be sorted into six distinct groups based on how concerned and engaged they are with the issue.

At one end was the Alarmed group – highly concerned people who are convinced of the science, and already taking action (25% of Australians). At the other end was the Dismissive group (7%) – strongly sceptical people who often view climate change as exaggerated or even a hoax. In between were the Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged and Doubtful – groups who varied in belief, awareness and willingness to engage.

In our nationally representative survey, we asked every participant what might change their opinion about climate change? We then looked at how the answers differed between the six groups.

For those already convinced climate change is real and human-caused, we wanted to know what might make them doubt it. For sceptical participants, we wanted to know what might persuade them otherwise. In short, we weren’t testing who was “right” or “wrong” – we were mapping how flexible their opinions were.

Our views aren’t set in stone

People at both extremes – Alarmed and Dismissive – were the most likely to say “nothing” would change their minds. Nearly half the Dismissive respondents flat-out rejected the premise. But these two groups together make up just one in three Australians.

What about everyone in the middle ground? The rest – the Concerned (28%), Cautious (23%), Disengaged (3%) and Doubtful (14%) – showed much more openness. They matter most, because they’re the majority — and they’re still listening.

People with dismissive views of climate science are a small minority. jon lyall/Shutterstock
What information would change minds?

What would it take for people to be convinced? We identified four major themes: evidence and information, trusted sources, action being undertaken, and nothing.

The most common response was a desire for better evidence and information. But not just any facts would do. Participants said they wanted clear, plain-English explanations rather than jargon. They wanted statistics they could trust, and science that didn’t feel politicised or agenda-driven. Some said they’d be more convinced if they saw the impacts with their own eyes.

Crucially, many in the Doubtful and Cautious groups didn’t outright reject climate change – they just didn’t feel confident enough to judge the evidence.

The trust gap

Many respondents didn’t know who to believe on climate change. Scientists and independent experts were the most commonly mentioned trusted sources – but trust in these sources wasn’t universal.

Some Australians, especially in the more sceptical segments, expressed deep distrust toward the media, governments and the scientific community. Others said they’d be more receptive if information came from unbiased or apolitical sources. For some respondents, family, friends and everyday people were seen as more credible than institutions.

In an age of widespread misinformation, this matters. If we want to build support for climate action, we need the right messengers as much as the right message.

What about action?

Many respondents said their views could shift if they saw real, meaningful action – especially from governments and big business. Some wanted proof that Australia is taking climate change seriously. Others said action would offer hope or reduce their anxiety.

Even some sceptical respondents said coordinated, global action might persuade them – though they were often cynical about Australia’s impact compared to larger emitters. Others called for a more respectful, depoliticised conversation around climate.

In other words, for many Australians, it’s not just what evidence and information is presented about climate change. It’s also how it’s said, who says it, and why it’s being said.

Of course, the responses we gathered reflect what people say would change their minds. That’s not necessarily what would actually change their minds.

What does concrete evidence of climate action look like? Piyaset/Shutterstock
Why does this matter?

As climate change intensifies, so does misinformation — especially online, where artificial intelligence and social media accelerate its spread.

Misinformation has a corrosive effect. Spreading doubt, lies and uncertainty can erode public support for climate action.

If we don’t understand what Australians actually need to hear about climate change – and who they need to hear it from – we risk losing ground to confusion and doubt.

After years of growth from 2012 to 2019, Australian backing for climate action is fluctuating and even dropping, according to Lowy Institute polling.

Climate change may not be the headline issue in this federal election campaign. But it’s on the ballot nonetheless, embedded in debates over how to power Australia, jobs and the cost of living. If we want public support for meaningful climate action, we can’t just shout louder. We have to speak smarter.

Links

24/04/2025

GLOBAL: Climate Change April Review - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

2025-04-23_1

Escalating Climate Impacts

India-Pakistan Heatwave: An unprecedented early-season heatwave has gripped the Indian subcontinent, with temperatures soaring to 46.4°C in Barmer, Rajasthan.
The extreme heat has led to power outages, agricultural disruptions, and at least 19 fatalities due to associated storms.
Experts warn that such events may become more frequent and severe due to climate change. ​Link

Intensifying Rainstorms in New Orleans: Recent data indicate that rainstorms in New Orleans are becoming more intense, exemplified by a recent event dumping over six inches of rain in parts of the metro area.
This trend is attributed to human-driven climate change, which leads to warmer air capable of holding more moisture, resulting in heavier precipitation events. Link

Climate Innovation & Controversy

UK Geoengineering Trials: UK scientists, backed by £50 million from the government-funded Advanced Research and Invention Agency (Aria), are initiating small-scale outdoor geoengineering experiments.
These trials aim to test solar radiation management technologies, such as cloud brightening, to temporarily cool the planet.
While controversial, proponents argue that such research is essential given the urgency of climate tipping points. Link

Air Source Heat Pump Viability: A recent study at Energy House 2.0, a climate simulation lab at the University of Salford, tested whether air source heat pumps can provide sufficient hot water for a typical family, even on cold days.
The findings suggest that, with proper installation, these systems can effectively replace gas boilers without sacrificing comfort. Link

Public Sentiment & Accountability

Global Support for Climate Action: A global study involving 130,000 people across 125 countries reveals that 89% of the world's population wants stronger governmental action to combat climate change.
However, many individuals incorrectly believe they are in the minority, creating a "spiral of silence" that hinders collective mobilisation. ​Link

Law Firms' Fossil Fuel Involvement: Major law firms in London, including the prestigious Magic Circle members, have come under fire for their involvement in fossil fuel transactions despite promoting climate sustainability.
Critics argue that this dual approach is hypocritical and has substantial environmental consequences. Link

Key Climate Events in 2025

COP30 in Brazil: The 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) is scheduled to take place from November 10-21 in Belém, Brazil.
The conference will focus on climate finance, mitigation, nature protection, climate justice, and plastic pollution. ​Link

GLF Forests 2025: Scheduled for April 24-25 in Bonn, Germany, and online, this event aims to define the next decade of action for forest conservation and climate resilience. ​Link

Australia: Climate Litigation & Extreme Weather

Australia's Climate Challenges: Australia continues to experience extreme heat, with Townsville Airport recording its wettest year on record.
Additionally, the country has emerged as a global hotspot for climate change litigation, reflecting growing public demand for accountability and action. Link

More Reading

23/04/2025

Fire tornadoes becoming routine due to climate change, analysts say

ABC Ballarat - Laura Mayers

John King captured this footage 50 metres from his back door during the Grampians bushfire. Supplied: John King

SUMMARY

Fire analysts say once-theoretical fire behaviour is now becoming routine, including fire tornadoes.

John King captured a 100-metre-tall fire column only 50 metres from his back door during the Grampians bushfire in December.

Unusual fire behaviour was also seen in the Los Angeles fires in January.
John King was ready for the 2024 bushfire season.

Living on the fringes of western Victoria's Gariwerd/Grampians National Park, the CFA volunteer knew the importance of having a fire plan in place, as well as hoses and water tanks.

But Mr King was not prepared for a fire column spearing 100 metres in the air, only 50m from his back door.

"We had these willy willies [whirlwinds] going four or five times the height of some of the trees," he said.

Mr King began filming the awesome sight as it spiralled through the hot air, picking up speed, the heat of the blaze gathering a swirling column before dissolving into smoke.

He described it as "magnificent, in a strange way".
"It wasn't coming towards us, so to be honest, at the time I just felt a bit awe-inspired by it," Mr King said.
"It was an incredible sight."

John King captured the flame tornado only 50 metres from his back door. ABC Ballarat: Laura Mayers

The unusual natural phenomenon was captured during the height of bushfires sparked by dry lightning in December 2024 that raged for months and burnt through more than 136,000 hectares of bushland.

Once a myth, now reality

Fire analysts say unusual fire behaviours like tornadoes were once considered a myth, but may start to become more commonplace. 

Mr King says he was lucky he didn't lose any structures after the fast-moving bushfire went through his property. Supplied: John King







University of Tasmania professor of pyrogeography and fire science David Bowman said fire tornadoes were the flame equivalent of a water spout or dust devil.

"There are examples ... where you can actually see fire trucks being thrown around in these intense systems," Professor Bowman said.

"In really humungous fires you can get true tornadoes where they even have an eye and extraordinarily powerful winds."

The bushfire claimed parts of Mr King's fenceline on the boundaries of his property. Supplied: John King







A fire tornado, sometimes called a fire whirl, is created during strong wildfires energised by powerful winds, dry fuel and intense heat.

In the Los Angeles fire in January, which claimed the lives of 30 people and destroyed more than 150 square kilometres of homes and bushland, the "perfect" conditions led to the unusual fire behaviour.

The fires tore through the Grampians National Park and Mount William and Redman Bluff after being sparked by dry lightning. Supplied: John King





Professor Bowman said higher temperatures and climate change were fuelling droughts that were in turn leading to incredibly fast-moving fires that released large amounts of energy.

Fire tornadoes were seen along the fire front at Bullsbrook in Perth's north in 2020. ABC News

"We're seeing now worldwide things that were sort of almost theoretical or all very unlikely to happen are now becoming more routine," he said.

"Not only are they happening more often, they're happening in places you would never expect them to happen, like the Arctic Circle.

"They're also happening in the middle of the night.

"That is telling us that, because of this atmospheric acidity, [landscapes are] much drier, and so when you have dry landscapes they are poised to express extremely volatile behaviour."

How to prepare for bushfires | Emergency Tips

Links

22/04/2025

Exposure to perceptible temperature rise increases concern about climate change, higher education adds to understanding

The Conversation

Higher education can train students to carefully consider the evidence around them.
Adam Crowley/Tetra Images/Getty images


AUTHOR
Professor of Anthropology
University of Tennessee
Years ago, after taking an Earth science class, I found myself looking at the world differently. It was the 1990s, and lakes in Wisconsin where I lived at the time were beginning to freeze later in winter and thaw earlier in spring, and flowers seemed to bloom a bit earlier.

That geology class helped me understand the gradual warming that was underway, warming that has accelerated since then.

People are more likely to believe an explanation when they see direct evidence of it. In the U.S., the percentage of people who recognize that global warming is happening is higher in counties that experienced record high temperatures in the previous decade

But understanding what’s happening and why also matters. That’s because people’s existing knowledge shapes how they interpret the evidence they see.

Education level and political affiliation are both known to be strong global predictors of concern about climate change.

But does higher education actually create climate concern? 

As an anthropologist and a researcher in computational social science, I and my colleague Ben Horne set up a study to try to answer that question.

Education leverages experience into concern

In our study, we used Census Bureau data on the percentage of the population with at least a bachelor’s degree in 3,048 U.S. counties, NOAA data on recent warming by state, and Yale climate opinion survey data

We wanted to find out whether climate concern increases as a product of education and recent warming.

We found that in many southern states − such as Alabama, Mississippi and Texas − the correlation between the percentage of bachelor’s degrees at the county level and climate concern was weak. 

Higher education levels didn’t seem to make much of a difference in how concerned people were about climate change.

However, in northern states − such as Maine, Vermont and Michigan − the education effect was stronger. 

We believe this difference is in part because climate change is more perceptible in colder states. 

A 1-degree temperature rise in Florida may not feel significant, whereas in Maine or Wisconsin, it would be more noticeable as winters became shorter and signs of spring came earlier.

We believe the results suggest that higher education helps people who are exposed to perceptible warming shifts better understand the changes they are experiencing; it’s the pairing of both that makes the difference.

We wondered whether political ideology might be driving the trends we were finding. Southern states also tend to be more politically conservative.

When we controlled for political leanings, however, our analysis found that the education effect appeared to be mostly influenced by whether people had experienced perceptible warming in recent years.

There were two outliers: Despite being cold states that have experienced the effects of climate change, North and South Dakota had low education effects when it came to climate concern. 

One possible explanation is that fossil fuels are central to their economies, shaping local attitudes toward climate change.

Nationally, our study suggests that higher education leverages people’s experience with climate change to increase their climate concern. 

It isn’t just having a college education alone, as the different results from warmer and colder parts of the country show. It is experiencing rising temperatures that makes the difference. The more perceptible the warming, the greater the effect.

Young people are growing up with climate change

A generation ago, climate change seemed to be more theoretical prediction than common experience for most people in the U.S.

This may be part of the reason why a sense of urgency has been slow to develop, even though three-quarters of Americans recognize that global warming is happening

 Generations that grew up in the mid-20th century, when seasons and climate seemed constant, had little reason to expect change.

Today, as climate change accelerates, people are experiencing increasingly dangerous summer heat waves and extreme weather

Surveys show climate concern has increased in U.S. counties that have recently experienced warmer winters or extreme temperatures, and climate-driven disasters have increased public concern.

Younger generations may see the world differently. For them, climate change has been a reality in their developing years. 

Given their personal experiences and interest in science, we believe higher education will have a powerful effect.

Links

21/04/2025

The Silent Suffering: Climate Change’s Global Toll on Animals - Lethal Heating Editor BDA


Shifting Habitats and Vanishing Homes

Across the globe, animals are being forced to flee their native habitats as climate change reshapes ecosystems.

Rising temperatures, melting ice caps, and shifting rainfall patterns are driving species from the poles to the equator and from the sea to higher ground. 

Polar bears, once rulers of the Arctic, are now struggling to find stable ice platforms to hunt. 

In mountainous regions, animals like the snow leopard are being pushed further uphill, with nowhere left to go. 

As habitats shrink or disappear entirely, so too does the delicate balance that supports entire ecosystems.

Oceans in Crisis

Marine life is also under siege. 

Oceans, which absorb 90% of the Earth’s excess heat, are becoming warmer and more acidic. 

Coral reefs — often described as underwater rainforests — are bleaching at unprecedented rates. 

These reefs are home to a quarter of all marine species; when they die, a vast network of life collapses.

Fish are migrating to cooler waters, displacing predators and prey, while species such as sea turtles are experiencing skewed birth ratios because of warmer sands affecting egg incubation. 

The oceans are changing faster than marine animals can adapt.

Extreme Weather, Extreme Consequences

Increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events are wreaking havoc on animal populations. 

Wildfires in Australia, California, and the Amazon have destroyed millions of acres of habitat, killing billions of animals. 

Hurricanes, floods, and droughts are displacing countless species, often leaving them without food, shelter, or breeding grounds. 

For migratory species like birds and butterflies, changing weather patterns can result in mistimed migrations — arriving too early or too late for food sources to be available, leading to starvation and population decline.

Broken Food Chains

Climate change is disrupting the food web from the ground up. 

Insect populations, vital to both plant pollination and as a food source, are declining in many parts of the world due to rising temperatures and pesticide use. 

This has cascading effects on birds, reptiles, and mammals that rely on them. 

In the Arctic, changes in sea ice are affecting the timing of plankton blooms, which impacts fish populations and the animals that feed on them — including humans. 

The interconnectivity of species means that a disturbance to one can ripple across entire ecosystems.

A Narrowing Window for Action

Without immediate and meaningful action, many species face extinction within decades. 

Conservation efforts, while essential, are only a part of the solution. 

Reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, protecting and restoring natural habitats, and establishing wildlife corridors can help species adapt to a warming world. 

International cooperation, stronger environmental policies, and increased public awareness are critical.

The future of Earth’s animals depends not only on their resilience but on our willingness to act.

Unless we confront climate change head-on, the silent suffering of the animal kingdom may soon become a permanent silence.

Links

20/04/2025

Climate change is not just a problem of physics but a crisis of justice

The Guardian -

In an exclusive extract from Friederike Otto’s new book, she says climate disasters result from inequality as well as fossil fuel

Friederike Otto, associate director of the Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, and an associate professor in the Global Climate Science Programme. Photograph: Alamy

My research as a climate scientist is in attribution science. Together with my team, I analyse extreme weather events and answer the questions of whether, and to what extent, human-induced climate change has altered their frequency, intensity and duration.

When I first began my research, most scientists claimed that these questions couldn’t be answered. There were technical reasons for this: for a long time, researchers had no weather models capable of mapping all climate-related processes in sufficient detail. But there were other reasons that had less to do with the research itself.

Let’s imagine extreme flooding in Munich, Rome or London and heavy rainfall in the slums of Durban on the South African coast. How the people in these various places experience this extreme weather depends on the local economic and social conditions and, fundamentally, on their political situation.

Researching weather – and thus, the role of climate change – in the way I do is always political, and this makes it an uncomfortable topic for many scientists. I believe it is important to show that both obstacles – the technical and the political – can be overcome; our climate models have become better and better, and we are coming to realise that research cannot take place at a remove from the real world.

A burning area of Amazon rainforest in 2020. Photograph: Carl de Souza/AFP/Getty Images

For example, to know exactly how big the risk of a drought is – where and for whom – we need a whole lot of information. Three main factors come into play: the natural hazard, our exposure to the hazard, and the vulnerability with which we approach it.

In west Africa in 2022, entire regions suffered from dramatic flooding during the rainy season. These floods were caused in part by above-average rainfall that, as my team and I discovered, was significantly more intense than it would have been without climate change. The rainfall was considered a “natural hazard,” but exacerbated so significantly by human-caused climate change that it was anything but natural.

To a large extent, these floods – particularly in Nigeria – were caused by the release of a dam in neighbouring Cameroon, which flooded large parts of the densely populated Niger delta, home to more than 30 million people. The risk from rainfall is particularly high, both for the people and for local ecosystems and infrastructure such as buildings, bridges, roads and water supply lines.

This region is uniquely exposed to weather and natural hazards. A dam was supposed to have been built in the Nigerian part of the delta to hold back the water, but it was never built. Given the poor infrastructure and high rates of poverty, people in this area are particularly vulnerable, affected much more adversely than those in other areas.

The community of Imburu, north east Nigeria, is almost completely submerged in September 2022. Photograph: Radeno Haniel/AFP/Getty Images



So how does weather become a disaster?

We can’t say exactly how the effects of climate change vary by location and type of weather, but what is absolutely clear is that the more people are in harm’s way and the more vulnerable they are, the greater their risk.

We’ve learned a lot more in recent years about all aspects of risk. For example, it’s now clear that climate change alters heatwaves far more than other weather phenomena. With every study that my team and I perform, we seek to answer the question of what these alterations actually mean for a small section of the global population. In these studies – known as “attribution studies” among experts – we analyse not just historical and current weather data but also information on population density, socioeconomic structures and basically everything we can find about the event itself to gain the most accurate picture of what happened and to whom.

Only after all those steps do we ask whether climate change played a role. To do this, we work with various datasets that take into account a vast range of factors – land use, volcanic activity, natural weather variability, greenhouse gas levels, other pollutants, and much more.

Broadly speaking, we use climate models to simulate two different worlds: one world with human-caused climate change and one without. We then use various statistical methods to calculate how likely or intense heatwaves are in specific places, both with and without human-caused global warming.

But it is vulnerability and exposure that determine if weather becomes a disaster. The effects of extreme events always depend on the context – who can protect themselves from the weather (and how) is always a major factor. This is why the term “natural disaster” is entirely misplaced.

For example, one of our studies from 2021 showed that the food insecurity linked to the drought in southern Madagascar was caused mainly by poverty, a lack of social structures, and heavy dependence on rainfall, but not by human-induced climate change. Nevertheless, just as with the Nigerian floods, international reports talked only of the weather and climate. The international media barely mentioned that, in fact, the local infrastructure, which had remained unfinished for decades, played a decisive role in the disastrous drought.

People going to a Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) mobile clinic in Befeno, Madagascar, set up to treat the most serious cases of moderate and severe malnutrition after the 2021 drought. Photograph: RIJASOLO/AFP/Getty Images

How extreme events are reported – where the media focus their attention – doesn’t just influence the responsive measures we think possible. It also influences who we see as responsible for implementing the next necessary steps. Describing extreme weather as a singular moment that tells us something about climate change, and nothing more, conceals the factors that have just as much (if not more) impact on the weather’s effects, and provides politicians with a handy discussion framework as they try to divert attention from poor local decision-making and planning.

There are two main reasons infrastructure in both Madagascar and Nigeria is so lacking and often nonexistent: the sustained destruction of local social structures under European colonial rule and extreme inequality within the population – inequality between the genders, between rich and poor, between different ethnic groups. It is because of factors like these that climate change becomes such a life-threatening problem.

The main thing I have learned from extreme weather events is that the climate crisis is shaped largely by inequality and the still-undisputed dominance of patriarchal and colonial structures, which also prevent the serious pursuit of climate protection. By contrast, physical changes such as heavier rainfall and drier soil have only an indirect effect. In short, climate change is a symptom of this global crisis of inequality and injustice, not its cause.

Weather-related disasters are largely a matter of unfairness and injustice, not misfortune or fate. This applies at a local level, for example when patriarchal structures insist that pregnant women living in traditional societies have to work outdoors in extreme heat because working in the fields for personal consumption is “women’s work”. Or when financial aid is paid to the male head of the family and never reaches those responsible for putting food on the table.

But injustice is also apparent on a global scale. Climate science is a field dominated by white men, most with backgrounds in the natural sciences, who mainly conduct and lead studies focused on the physical aspects of the climate while disregarding numerous other issues. This is why far too few studies deal with the global interactions between social and physical changes in an evolving climate.

It’s no wonder that we lack credible research findings that could inform us about the issues of loss and damage in global climate policy on a scientific basis. This makes it even more difficult to show how centuries of colonial practices by the global north against the countries of the global south continue to influence the way we live, think and act.

It’s hardly news that climate change is mainly a problem because it damages people’s dignity and fundamental human rights. In fact, it’s the whole reason we talk about it on an international level.

The United Nations climate change conferences have never been about polar bears or the downfall of the human race. They have always been about human lives and countless livelihoods – and, of course, about economic issues. This is demonstrated by the debate on the target of limiting heating to 2C above preindustrial levels.

While this includes economic cost-benefit considerations, it is above all a political goal that doesn’t take science into account at all: not a single scientific assessment has ever defended or recommended a specific target – and with good reason, because setting such targets is ultimately an ethical issue. It can be expressed as a simple political question: how many more human lives, how many more coral reefs, how many more insects will we allow ourselves to lose to the short-term continued use of comparatively cheap fossil fuels in the global north?

Heatwaves in North America and west Africa, droughts in South Africa and Madagascar, forest fires in Australia and Brazil, floods in Germany and Pakistan: these fundamentally different events hit societies that are battling very different problems, and they all demonstrate the role of climate change in different ways.

A swimming pool surrounded by flood waters in Essen, western Germany on 26 December 2023. Photograph: Ina Fassbender/AFP/Getty Images
But it always proves true that the people who die are those with little money who can’t readily obtain all the help and information they need. And that doesn’t have to be the case, no matter where they are.

In my opinion, the fact this keeps on happening is due to one particular, and persistent, social narrative. The basic premise is that burning fossil fuels is essential to maintaining what we call prosperity, and that “freedom” isn’t possible if we’re imposing a speed limit.

If we compared modern society with the society of 300 years ago, we would unquestioningly attribute many of the achievements of recent centuries – like access to clean drinking water – to the burning of fossil energies. Historically, we associate coal, oil, and gas with democracy and western values, identifying a causal link between charcoal briquettes and the welfare state: the one affects the other. But even when this is actually true, we always forget to point out that the reverse conclusion – one perishes, and the other goes with it – is as fatal as it is false.

The global north and global south both continue to argue that, for reasons of fairness, the countries in the global south must initially have very high greenhouse gas emissions too, to ensure the growth of their economies. This completely ignores the fact that in the global north (as well as elsewhere), the poor pay for the lifestyles of a small number of wealthy people, be it the workers who toil in the mines for metals or the city dwellers subjected to greater air pollution due to the use of private vehicles. Who says that what happens in the global north is naturally better and must be imposed on the world?

Climate change would still have existed if Europe hadn’t conquered any colonies but humans had still burned fossil energy sources – but things would have looked very different without the west’s ongoing colonial mindset. In essence, colonial-fossil climate change is therefore not a climate crisis but a crisis of justice.

Climate change is a problem that has less to do with a collapsing climate or other physical conditions than we might think, and the consequences of this are wider-reaching than we have been willing to admit. It clearly shows us that the main way in which we currently research and fight climate change – as a physics problem – falls far too short. Obviously, we need to transform the way in which we obtain energy. Above all, however, we need to transform participation in social life and the application of political and economic power – who makes decisions and how.

This is an edited extract from Climate Injustice by Friederike Otto,
which will be published by Greystone Books on 24 April (£22)
 
     Climate Change Books

19/04/2025

Could humanity be extinct within 10,000 years? A new book is the wake up call our species needs

 The Conversation -

Shutterstock


AUTHOR
Strategic Professor
Palaeontology
Flinders University
In H.G. Wells’ dystopian 1895 novel The Time Machine an unnamed Victorian scientist travels to the year 802,701.
 
Instead of finding a flourishing, enlightened human civilisation reaping the cumulative benefits of millennia of economic and intellectual growth, he finds a horror scene. 
 
Here, gentle humans called Eloi are now the farmed food for the troglodyte-like Morlocks.

Science writer Henry Gee paints a less horrific but equally worrying picture of humanity’s future in his book The Decline and Fall of the Human Empire. Unlike Wells, Gee doesn’t see the human species capable of surviving longer than the next 8000-12,000 years.

This number is not an educated guess, or pessimistic opinion. It is based on statistical analyses that show our species is quickly degenerating amidst the chaos of our rapidly declining environments.

Review: The Decline and Fall of the Human Empire: Why Our Species Is on the Edge of Extinction – Henry Gee (Picador)

While all this might sound depressing, this book is a strangely engrossing read, addictive because of its continuum of interesting facts about our species’ origins and inevitable decline, and how we have impacted our planet in many unexpected ways. At times sarcastic, Gee’s book is more than just a monologue on our future. It could well be the ultimate wake up call to action for all of us.

A senior editor at Nature magazine, with a PhD in bovine palaeontology, Gee is also an accomplished writer of both popular science books and sci-fi novels. He writes in simple prose garnished with wit and humour, distilling complex science into an accessible read, a rare craft which won him the 2022 Royal Society Trivedi Science Book Prize for his previous book, A (Very) Short History of Life on Earth.

Henry Gee. John Gilbey/Macmillan
His new book takes a stoic look at humanity’s ultimate decline. 

This is something, he argues, we as a species cannot avoid, due to our damaging impact on the planet’s many environments, some of which are vital for our future food security. 

He does offer some hope for our survival beyond this time-frame, but it would rely on drastic, unlikely solutions.

The book is organised into three parts: Rise, Fall and Escape. 

Each details the story of our unique species from its prehistoric beginnings though to our success as the dominant mammal on Earth, and finally, to our fate in being too successful.

The rise of our species

“Rise” summarises a deluge of recent information about our ancient origins. Our modern human species, Homo sapiens, diverged from earlier human species around 300,000 years ago. We lived alongside a number of other such species at this time.

Genetics tells us a lot about our current population stability. Early human species almost went extinct before leaving Africa due to severe climatic events some 930,000–813,000 years ago, when the breeding population shrunk to an estimated 1,280 individuals on the entire planet. 

Modern Homo sapiens evolved later as a result of interbreeding amongst and between other archaic human species such as Neanderthals and Denisovans, the latter known from ancient DNA preserved in isolated small bones. 

Modern homo sapiens is a result of interbreeding amongst other archaic human species.
frank60/shutterstock

Only a small number of modern humans who evolved in Africa ever moved away from this continent, starting around 60,000 years ago. These eventually became our living human population of the world today. 

As Gee points out, “migration, is of course, the natural state of humanity”, a lesson with great implications for how we treat migrants today, many of whom are forced to flee war-torn or environmentally degraded areas.

I found this section full of fascinating new perspectives. For example, I didn’t know human populations in the past were very small. Fossil human remains are incredibly rare in most sites, full of many other kinds of mammals or bird remains.

Secondly, the populations of early Homo sapiens show great variability, indicating past populations were mostly isolated, not mixing very much. Small populations are more susceptible to natural disasters, so are easily wiped out by floods, tsunamis, fires, volcanic eruptions or other local events, keeping population numbers small.

Despite all this, we rose to over one billion people on the planet by the 1800s and to 8 billion today, fuelled by massive increases in agriculture and technology. The former provided enough food to sustain larger populations, the latter lengthened lifespans.

However, some researchers predict our population will peak at around 9.73 billion by about 2064, declining to 8.79 billion by 2100.

Other scenarios from the same source, involving better education and contraceptive access, predict the 2100 population at around 6.29 billion, and a decline from then onwards, eventually leading to a collapse once other factors, such as our declining fertility rates (leading to older populations, and labour shortages), kick in.

The fall of our species

The story of the royal Hapsburg family demonstrates how inbred human populations can lead to a host of debilitating disorders in future generations. 

Portrait of King Charles II
by
Juan Carreño de Miranda
Wikimedia Commons, CC BY
Between 1450-1750 there were 73 Hapsburg marriages, many between near relations. Uncles married nieces. First cousins twice removed married. 

This culminated in Charles II, the last Hapsburg king of Spain, who suffered many bouts of disease including rickets all his short life (he died at age 38) and couldn’t conceive any offspring. This is clearly not good for the species.

Random pandemics or diseases can, of course, strike populations without warning. Several evolved due to the growth of agriculture, when humans and animals came into closer contact. 

Viruses like flu, TB and plague are some examples of animal-borne diseases that jumped to humans, exactly as COVID did in 2020, though in that case not from a domesticated source.

The decline in our ability to reproduce as efficiently as in past populations is another worry for our species. 

The loss of the Y Chromosome in men, which is degenerating rapidly, is a disturbing trend, (though it may be addressed through genetic technology in the future). However, in some countries, male sperm counts and sperm quality are declining at an alarming rate.

The first detailed account of this, by Danish gynaecologist and obstetrician Elisabeth Carlesen and her team, showed sperm counts halved between 1940 and 1990. In Nigeria, sperm count and quality has dropped by 72.6% over the past 50 years.

Why is this happening? We don’t know yet. Gee cites as possible causes the increased human exposure to fossil fuel derivatives (in micro-plastics, and through other pollutions), climate change, or simply, our lifestyles.

To keep our population stable, every woman on the planet needs to have 2.1 babies (this number is the TFR or Total Fertility Rate). Even today many countries are dipping below this. 

China had a fertility rate of 1.18 in 2022. Japan’s was 1.26 in 2022 although the total fertility rate of all African nations in this year was 4.155. Globally, however, fertility rates are decreasing rapidly.

Survival or extinction?

The timing for our species extinction or “Doomsday scenario” is calculated using a statistical method developed by Princeton astrophysicist J. Richard Gott

The method is based on a statistical argument that we are living in the 95% range of humanity now, so we are more than 2.5% away from either the beginning or end of the species. (NB, this reasoning is complex, fully explained in the book.)

The average age of other human species (now all extinct) is mostly less than 2-3 million years. Our species has only been around about 300,000 years. However, if we are nearer the end of our species than the beginning, (assuming multiple factors leading to environmental collapse would happen sooner rather than later), Gee states,

I’d venture – with suitable hand-waving – that Homo sapiens will disappear from the Earth within the next 10,000 years.

Another argument about our imminent demise comes from “extinction debt”: when species destroy their habitat and eventually run out of resources. We humans have become the dominant species, pushing many thousands of species to extinction by altering habitats for growing food, harvesting wood, dumping our waste and so on.

Humans use about 25% of the world’s plants’ generation of photosynthesis as our food, a figure that has doubled since 1910. Humans and our domesticated animals make up 96% of all the mass of mammals on the planet. Around 70% of all birds on Earth comprise our poultry populations. And on it goes. The balance of nature is now changed forever, so predicting stability in long-term food security is way more difficult.

About 70% of birds on earth are poultry.
David Tadevosian/shutterstock


We humans represent a new force of evolution changing the biomass and reshaping most of our terrestrial ecosystems. We are also changing many marine ones, due to increased pollution, large-scale, over-fishing and the impacts of commercial shipping routes.

What to do?

All of this begs the question what can we do now? The answer is not about saving our species forever (all species have a finite lifespan). It’s matter of how much time do we have?. We can extend our species chances of longer survival if we can save our planet from further destruction and imminent environmental collapse, but we must we act now to do so.

The solution is simple. Science gives us clear directions as to how to mitigate climate change (by seriously reducing our production of greenhouse gases causing it); and how to restore damaged habitats (by cleaning them up). Politics unfortunately usually gets in the way of saving the planet due to human greed taking priority over any serious attempts at real progress in this area.

Gee has an elegant, if highly unlikely solution to saving our species. It might just be possible in the next century or so, he writes, with the increased pace of technology, to sustainably develop human colonies on the moon or Mars. We need first to develop a self-sustaining ecosystems that will provide food, clean air and all the resources necessary for life in order to survive on long distance space travels.

Despite various attempts, it has not been possible so far to survive in our own self-contained, mini-ecosytems, as seen by the failure of Biosphere 2 in the Arizona desert in the 1990s. 

Goodreads
This gigantic terrarium (1.27 hectares) had 3000 species of animals and plants, with eight humans living inside its enclosed walls. 

It seemed to work well for a while, but over time bacteria in the soil took too much oxygen while the thick concrete walls sucked all the carbon dioxide out of the air, starving plant life. Crops failed and their pollinators, the birds and bees, also died. 

The experiment lasted under three years before the humans inside had to break the seal to let fresh air in.

Gee predicts the settlement of space will one day happen, but he suggests we are at least two to three centuries away from that goal.

While the topic of this book might seem a little depressing, it is really a powerful wake up call to all of us, based on the very latest scientific research.

The stoics say if we can’t do anything about a problem, we shouldn’t worry about it. But in this case there is a lot we can all do. 

Voting for the right people who will enact change is the first step. 

This book should be mandatory reading for all politicians.

Climate Change Books

  • The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming - David Wallace-Wells
  • This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate - Naomi Klein
  • The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History - Elizabeth Kolbert
  • The Climate Book - Greta Thunberg
  • The New Climate War - Michael E. Mann
  • Saving Us: A Climate Scientist’s Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World - Katharine Hayhoe
  • All We Can Save: Truth, Courage, and Solutions for the Climate Crisis - Ayana Elizabeth Johnson & Katharine K. Wilkinson
  • How to Avoid a Climate Disaster - Bill Gates
  • The Future We Choose: Surviving the Climate Crisis - Christiana Figueres & Tom Rivett-Carnac
  • Climate Injustice - Friederike Otto