Tackling climate crisis will increase economic growth, OECD research finds

Third of global GDP could be lost this century if climate crisis runs unchecked, says report

The UN climate chief said extreme weather would shave 1% from Europe’s GDP before mid-century, and by 2050 would shrink the economy by 2.3% a year. Photograph: Borja Suárez/Reuters

The Guardian - Fiona Harvey Environment editor

Taking strong action to tackle the climate crisis will increase countries’ economic growth, rather than damage their finances as critics of net zero policies have claimed, research from the world’s economic watchdog has found.

Setting ambitious targets on cutting greenhouse gas emissions, and setting out the policies to achieve them, would result in a net gain to global GDP by the end of the next decade, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), in a joint report with the UN Development Programme.

The calculation of the net gain, of 0.23% by 2040, would be even greater in 2050, if it included the benefit of avoiding the devastation that not cutting emissions would wreak on the economy.

By 2050, the most advanced economies would enjoy an increase of 60% in GDP per capita growth, while by the same date lower income countries would experience a 124% rise from 2025 levels.

In the shorter term, there would also be benefits for developing countries, with 175million people lifted out of poverty by the end of the decade, if governments invest in cutting emissions now.

By contrast, a third of global GDP could be lost this century, if the climate crisis were allowed to run unchecked.

Achim Steiner, executive secretary of the United Nations Development Programme, told a conference held by the German government in Berlin on Tuesday: “The overwhelming evidence that we now have is that we are not regressing if we invest in climate transitions. We actually see a modest increase in GDP growth, that may look small at first … but quickly grows.”

Simon Stiell, the UN climate chief, also warned in a speech on Wednesday morning in Berlin that Europe would suffer economic devastation from the climate crisis, if strong action were not taken soon. Extreme weather would shave 1% from Europe’s GDP before mid-century, and by 2050 would shrink the economy by 2.3% a year.

Although those figures may appear small, the crucial point is that the economic contraction would continue year after year. For comparison, the financial crisis of 2008-09 caused a contraction of 5.5% in the EU, but recovery began within a few years. The contraction owing to the climate crisis would be the equivalent of a serious recession occurring every year.

By the end of two decades of such damage, the EU economy would cease to exist.

“[Climate breakdown] is a recipe for permanent recession,” said Stiell. “As disasters make more and more regions unliveable, and food production declines, millions more people will be forced to migrate, internally and across borders.”

He added: “The climate crisis is an urgent national security crisis that should be at the top of every cabinet agenda.”

Critics of the target of reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 have complained that tackling the climate crisis, by switching from fossil fuels to a low-carbon economy, would stifle economic growth and cripple the global economy.

However, the costs involved in investing in renewable energy are relatively modest, compared with the likely damage. In the UK, the cost is likely to be 0.2% of GDP a year to 2050. Providing climate finance to the poor world would also benefit rich countries.

Data from the International Renewable Energy Agency (Irena), published on Wednesday, found record-breaking growth last year of 15% in renewable energy capacity. Nearly two-thirds of the growth was from China, the world’s powerhouse of green energy generation.

Francesco La Camera, the director general of Irena, said: “The continuous growth of renewables we witness each year is evidence that renewables are economically viable and readily deployable.”

However, fossil fuels continue to attract investment. In 2023, about 1.5m new jobs were created in the global clean energy sector – but nearly 1m jobs were also added in the fossil fuel industry.

Links

• Green technology and innovation
• Climate adaptation and resilience
• Climate mitigation and net-zero transition
• Finance and investment for climate goals
• Hottest year on record
• Young leaders on the frontlines of climate action

Climate determined the date of the election, yet remains utterly absent from it

Crikey - Ketan Joshi

More than 1,000 media pieces from major outlets mentioned climate change during the peak of the Black Summer bushfires. In February this year, there were just 250.

Major flooding in Lismore, NSW, from Tropical Cyclone Alfred (Image: AAP/Jason O'Brien)

Author Ketan Joshi is a writer, analyst, and communications consultant focusing on clean energy and climate change. He previously worked in climate and energy for private companies and government agencies, and now writes journalism and commentary from the front lines of climate and energy battles around the world. He is based in Oslo and consults to organisations addressing the climate crisis.

Australia’s election date was decided by climate change. 

Like every other major weather event of the past decade, Cyclone Alfred emerged in an atmosphere sweltering due to the heat-trapping effect of greenhouse gases. That made it hit harder and more unpredictably. 

Alfred tracked much farther south than cyclones normally do, so homes in southern Queensland and northern New South Wales were battered.

Albanese was forced to shift his election announcement, with both major parties having to deal with a surprise budget. It was weirdly fitting: a climate-intensified disaster playing a major role in deciding the timing of an election campaign that will refuse to directly engage with the urgency of fossil fuel elimination.

The days of the 2019 climate strikes have come and gone. Few want to say it aloud: Australia has entered a completely new phase of climate discourse. During the peak of the Black Summer bushfires, there were more than 1,000 pieces mentioning climate change in selected major print media outlets. In February 2025, there were about 250. Concerns have shifted towards the cost of living.

When it comes to the cost of power generation technologies, nuclear, coal, and gas are the most expensive, while wind and solar are the cheapest. 

However, Australians believe the opposite is true: polling shows 57% of respondents underestimate the percentage of renewables in Australia’s grids, and there is worryingly deep support for the expansion of new fossil gas extraction sites (alongside widespread acceptance of the “need” for gas in the “long term”). Incredibly, even the basic acceptance that human-induced heating is occurring shows early signs of weakening.

During the COVID pandemic, we were scared of death, disease and loss, but at some point in the past few years, we stopped being scared of the terrifying outcomes of fossil fuel reliance. Part of this is self-inflicted by people like me. 

Back in the mid-2010s, it emerged that we as climate communicators needed to talk more explicitly about the benefits of technologies like wind, solar, electric vehicles, and heat pumps: they’re cheaper, shinier, and modern. The notes we strike should be optimistic.

But these are side benefits. The heart of the story is that this is a massive harm-minimisation project that lives or dies on how rapidly we eliminate a trio of harmful substances from society. 

Is it any surprise that polls are showing the public is massively disconnecting from the sheer physical urgency of the problem, when so much of the focus has been on the power bill savings of solar panels and not on the immediate and deadly threat posed by a coal-fired power station?

Dutton now has the space to freely propose policies that actively incentivise the increased burning of fossil fuels in Australia. It is no accident that the opposition leader’s core energy message is promising to more heavily subsidise the use of oil and gas in Australia.

Under his proposals, wealthy people doing their shopping using gas-guzzling luxury utes and four-wheel drives will see a massive cut to their fossil fuel costs, through a deep cut to the taxation of road transport fuels. 

Dutton is promising to reserve a proportion of Australia’s gas for domestic use, on the grounds that ramping up supply of this fossil fuel will bring down power bills (a policy requested by crossbench senators including Jacqui Lambie and Rex Patrick).

At the time of writing, Australia’s core gas lobby groups haven’t yet screamed in outrage — presumably because Dutton is also offering to take an axe to the already generous approvals process for new gas extraction sites. Both the fuel excise cut and the gas extraction policies act as effective subsidies for fossil fuels.

The Coalition’s nuclear plan would almost certainly do nothing beyond massively increasing the lifespans of Australia’s unreliable coal-fired power fleet over the coming decades (to the delight of utilities more than willing to eat up subsidies to keep those plants polluting longer).

Labor has not been as brazen in proposing fossil fuel subsidies disguised as cost of living policies, but they suffer the same affliction in avoiding the issue at hand. Generous energy bill subsidies are vote-winners, but they don’t help get expensive fossil fuels out of power grids (particularly gas, the cost of which is a primary driver of wholesale electricity prices).

It is an absurd thing to spectate a debate about fossil fuels that refuses to mention the physical consequences of their use. Imagine gun control advocates in the US talking solely about the financial savings of not paying for bullets.

We want to stop burning coal, oil and gas because they rapidly wreck the physical systems we rely on to live. The fact that climate impacts are pulling the levers of this election’s schedule lays it out pretty neatly: the laws of physics don’t change based on our beliefs and our statements. 

Maybe this election is the perfect time to get back to the heart of the matter: fossil fuels are deadly, and we need to ditch them ASAP.

Links

• Newspaper coverage of climate change or global warming in five Australian newspapers
• Dutton’s nuclear promises billions for fossil fuels and a smaller economy for the rest of us
• While the government denies the science on carbon credits, the climate suffers
• This election, here’s what Australians across age groups and postcodes want from the next government 
• Housing, cost of living and climate change top list of what concerns voters most in Your Say
• The 2025 federal budget fails the millions of voters who want action on Australia’s struggling environment

Australia: Ten Climate Change Questions Demanding Answers - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

As climate change intensifies, Australia’s future is looking more uncertain.

While the impacts of rising temperatures and extreme weather are already being felt across the country, crucial questions remain unanswered.

Experts agree that we need more data and research to understand the full scope of climate change’s effects—and how Australia can best respond.

Australia's climate future is clouded by pressing questions that demand immediate attention:

1. Will the government's gas expansion plans lower energy costs without derailing emission targets?
   The Labor government's strategy to increase gas production aims to reduce energy prices. However, it's uncertain how this aligns with Australia's commitment to reducing emissions.

2. What reforms are in store for Australia's environmental legislation?
   Both major political parties have yet to clarify their positions on overhauling environmental laws, leaving Australians in the dark about future protections.

3. Are Australia's gas exports truly a cleaner alternative to coal?
   The claim that Australian gas exports are a cleaner substitute for coal lacks comprehensive evidence, raising questions about their environmental impact.

4. What are the emission reduction commitments for 2035?
   With 2035 on the horizon, neither major party has outlined clear strategies for emission reductions, leaving a significant gap in Australia's climate policy.

5. How will climate change intensify extreme weather events?
   Australia is already experiencing more frequent and severe heatwaves, bushfires, and floods. The extent of future intensification remains uncertain.

6. What are the projected impacts on Australia's unique biodiversity?
   Climate change threatens Australia's distinctive ecosystems, but detailed assessments of potential species extinctions and habitat loss are still needed.

7. How vulnerable are coastal communities to rising sea levels?
   With sea levels rising, the specific risks to Australia's coastal infrastructure and communities require further investigation to inform adaptation strategies.

8. What health risks does climate change pose to Australians?
   The health implications, including the spread of diseases and heat-related illnesses due to increased temperatures, need more comprehensive research.

9. How will water resources and agriculture be affected?
   Understanding the future availability of water and its impact on agriculture is crucial for ensuring food security and supporting rural economies.

10. What are the economic costs of inaction on climate change?
    Quantifying the financial consequences of failing to address climate change is essential for policymakers and the public to grasp the urgency of mitigation efforts.

Addressing these unanswered questions is critical for Australia's environmental and economic future.

Links

• Australians deserve answers on climate before they vote
• What is climate change and what can we do about it?
• Understanding climate change
• Dug up in Australia, burned around the world – exporting fossil fuels undermines climate targets
• Impacts of Climate Change
• Ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred ushers in a fresh wave of climate denial in Australia

2025 Budget: Big Promises, Bigger Doubts on Climate Action - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Treasurer Jim Chalmers unveiled the 2025 Federal Budget on March 25, promising billions for green industries. But critics say it's too little, too late.

$3 Billion for Green Energy—Enough?

The government pledged $3 billion to boost green metals and hydrogen. Chalmers called it an investment in a “Future Made in Australia.” He argued it would attract investors and create jobs.

Environmental groups aren’t convinced. “It’s window dressing,” said climate activist Sarah Evans. “We need urgent action, not just industry handouts.”

Voters Want More

Polling shows Australians want stronger climate policies. Many say the budget falls short. “People see through the spin,” said economist Daniel Wright. “They want real emissions cuts, not just money thrown at projects.”

Disasters Costing Billions

The budget admits climate-related disasters have already cost Australia $13.5 billion. But critics say the response is reactive, not preventive. “We’re paying the price for inaction,” said environmental analyst Lisa Tran.

Global Pressures Add to Uncertainty

The budget also warns of economic risks from global trade shifts. It points to U.S. policies that could disrupt Australia’s economy.

A Missed Opportunity?

While the budget puts cash into green industries, many argue it doesn’t go far enough. “This was the chance to lead on climate,” said Wright. “Instead, we got half-measures.”

The debate is far from over.

Links

• 2025 Budget Ignores Voters Seeking Environmental Action
• The 2025 federal budget fails the millions of voters who want action on Australia’s struggling environment
• The 2025 budget has few savings and surprises but it also ignores climate change
• The Federal Budget: three highlights and lowlights for climate
• Disaster response storm brewing over federal finances
•  Energy & Climate Policy | Latest News & Analysis 
• News & Analysis

Climate Change Australian Wildlife - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Climate change is having a profound impact on Australia’s animals and marine life.

Rising temperatures, shifting weather patterns, habitat destruction, and ocean acidification are some of the biggest threats.

Here’s how different species are being affected:

Land Animals

1. Koalas – Rising temperatures and more frequent bushfires are destroying eucalyptus forests, reducing food sources and habitat. Heatwaves can also cause dehydration and stress.
2. Kangaroos – Extreme heat and drought limit food and water availability, causing population declines in some areas.
3. Platypuses – Reduced rainfall and prolonged droughts are drying up rivers and streams, threatening their aquatic homes.
4. Flying Foxes – Mass die-offs have been recorded due to extreme heat events. Temperatures above 42°C (107°F) can kill thousands in a single day.
5. Frogs – Habitat loss and climate-related disease outbreaks, such as the spread of chytrid fungus, are pushing many frog species toward extinction.

Marine Life

1. Great Barrier Reef – Coral bleaching caused by warming ocean temperatures has devastated large sections of the reef, impacting fish and other marine species that rely on it.
2. Sea Turtles – Rising sand temperatures at nesting sites affect the sex ratio of hatchlings, with more females being born, threatening future population stability.
3. Fish Species – Warmer waters are forcing fish to migrate to cooler regions, disrupting ecosystems and food chains.
4. Sharks and Rays – Changes in water temperature and food availability are shifting shark distribution patterns, leading to increased sightings in areas where they were once uncommon.
5. Penguins and Seabirds – Changing ocean currents and declining fish stocks due to climate shifts are reducing food availability for seabirds like little penguins.

General Climate Impacts

• Increased Bushfires – Destroying vast areas of habitat and killing large numbers of animals.
• Drought and Water Shortages – Reducing food and water sources for many species.
• Extreme Weather Events – Cyclones, floods, and storms are damaging ecosystems and displacing wildlife.
• Ocean Acidification – Making it harder for shellfish and corals to form their protective structures, threatening the entire marine food chain.

Conclusion

Climate change is already causing severe disruptions to Australia’s wildlife.

Conservation efforts, habitat restoration, and emissions reduction are essential to protecting these species from further harm.

Links

• Australia’s biodiversity threatened by climate change
• Why caring about animals means caring about the climate crisis
• Vets for Climate Action
• Climate Change and Your Pet
• Climate Change and Livestock Welfare
• Impacts of Climate Change on Australian Wildlife
• Climate change is the single biggest threat facing the Reef
• The impact of climate extremes on Australia’s marine environment

Climate Change and Mental Health - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

The link between climate change, global warming, and mental health is becoming increasingly evident. The psychological and emotional impacts of environmental changes are affecting individuals and communities worldwide.

Here’s how:

1. Direct Psychological Impacts

• Extreme weather events (e.g., hurricanes, floods, bushfires) lead to PTSD, anxiety, and depression. Survivors often struggle with grief, loss, and uncertainty.
• Rising temperatures have been linked to increased aggression, irritability, and even higher suicide rates in some regions.

2. Chronic Stress & Anxiety (Eco-Anxiety & Climate Distress)

• Many people, especially younger generations, experience eco-anxiety—chronic fear of environmental collapse.
• Feelings of helplessness and despair can lead to depression and social withdrawal.

3. Displacement & Social Disruption

• Climate-related displacement (e.g., rising sea levels or droughts) leads to forced migration, loss of home, and cultural identity, increasing risks of PTSD and depression.
• Indigenous and rural communities are particularly vulnerable to losing traditional ways of life, which affects mental well-being.

4. Economic & Occupational Stress

• Farmers, fishers, and outdoor workers face job insecurity due to changing climate conditions, leading to financial stress and mental health struggles.
• Economic downturns linked to climate disasters put pressure on mental health support systems.

5. Disrupted Access to Healthcare & Social Services

• Natural disasters damage hospitals, clinics, and infrastructure, making mental health support harder to access.
• Vulnerable populations (e.g., elderly, low-income groups) suffer the most from climate-related healthcare disruptions.

What Can Be Done?

• Personal Resilience: Mindfulness, social connections, and activism can help individuals manage climate distress.
• Community Support: Strengthening mental health services in disaster-prone areas is crucial.
• Policy Action: Governments should address mental health as part of climate adaptation strategies.

Climate change is not just an environmental issue—it’s a human crisis that affects mental well-being at both personal and societal levels.

Links

• What happens when climate change and the mental-health crisis collide?
• Climate Change Affect On Mental Health | Commonwealth Fund
• The Effects of Climate Change on Mental Health - PubMed
• Explained: How climate change affects mental health
• Why mental health is a priority for action on climate change
• Climate Change and Mental Health Connections - Psychiatry.org
• The Impact of Climate Change on Mental Health - Frontiers
• Climate anxiety | UNICEF Parenting
• How do you cope with climate change’s effect on your mental health?

Last decade was Earth’s hottest ever as CO2 levels reach an 800,000-year high, says UN report

Associated Press - Sibi Arasu

Ricky Leath, an outreach specialist with the City of Miami, distributes water and supplies to the homeless to manage high temperatures, May 15, 2024, in Miami. (AP Photo/Lynne Sladky, File)

Last year was the hottest year on record, the top 10 hottest years were all in the past decade and planet-heating carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are at an 800,000-year high, a report Wednesday said.

In its annual State of the Climate report, the World Meteorological Organization laid bare all the markings of an increasingly warming world with oceans at record high temperatures, sea levels rising and glaciers retreating at record speed.

“Our planet is issuing more distress signals,” said António Guterres, United Nations Secretary-General.

He noted that the report says the international goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.8 Fahrenheit) since pre-industrial times is still possible.

“Leaders must step up to make it happen — seizing the benefits of cheap, clean renewables for their people and economies,” he said.

2024 was the first year to exceed 1.5 C in global temperature increase. Source: Copernicus Climate Change Service Graphic: M.K. Wildeman

The report attributed the heating to human activity — like the burning of coal, oil and gas — and in a smaller part to the naturally occurring El Nino weather phenomenon.

An El Nino formed in June 2023 and dissipated a year later, adding extra heat and helping topple temperature records.

In 2024, the world surpassed the 1.5 C limit for the first time — but just for a single year. Scientists measure breaching the climate goal as Earth staying above that level of warming over a longer time period.

The report said global heating is contributing to more extreme weather events that have led the highest levels of displacement for 16 years, contributed to worsening food crises and caused massive economic losses.

There were at least 151 “unprecedented” extreme weather events in 2024 alone, it said.

“It is a wake-up call that we are increasing the risks to our lives, economies and to the planet,” said Celeste Saulo, WMO’s Secretary-General.

Humanitarian worker Roger Duvan Lagunes carries a fan into a shelter in Veracruz, Mexico, on June 16, 2024. (AP Photo/Felix Marquez, File)

The report’s warnings come as the United States President Donald Trump has issued a series of rollbacks on climate commitments and cast doubt on climate science.

The U.S. is the world’s second biggest polluter currently and the largest emitter of greenhouse gases historically. It’s left some worried that other countries will also have less ambitious targets as a result.

“The science is indisputable. Attempts to hide climate science from the public will not stop us from feeling the dire impacts of climate change,” said Brenda Ekwurzel of the U.S.-based not-for-profit, Union of Concerned Scientists.

Men deliver sacks of ice cubes as demand remains high due to hot temperatures in Quezon city, Philippines on April 24, 2024. (AP Photo/Aaron Favila, File)

Vanessa Nakate, a Ugandan climate activist also warned that “the longer we delay emissions cuts, the worse it will get.”

“Phasing out fossil fuels is not a choice—it is an emergency response to a crisis unfolding before our eyes,” she said.

Links

• Climate change, already causing problems on Earth, could soon create a mess for orbiting satellites 
• Supreme Court rejects Republican-led effort to halt climate change lawsuits in Democratic-led states
• Scientists scorn EPA push to say climate change isn’t a danger, say just look around at the world
• Report highlights how communities hardest hit by climate change can build resilient water systems
• Climate change made conditions that fed California wildfires more likely and intense, study says
• EPA head says he’ll roll back dozens of environmental regulations, including rules on climate change