climate change effects on the environment essay

Climate Change Essay for Students and Children

500+ words climate change essay.

Climate change refers to the change in the environmental conditions of the earth. This happens due to many internal and external factors. The climatic change has become a global concern over the last few decades. Besides, these climatic changes affect life on the earth in various ways. These climatic changes are having various impacts on the ecosystem and ecology. Due to these changes, a number of species of plants and animals have gone extinct.

When Did it Start?

The climate started changing a long time ago due to human activities but we came to know about it in the last century. During the last century, we started noticing the climatic change and its effect on human life. We started researching on climate change and came to know that the earth temperature is rising due to a phenomenon called the greenhouse effect. The warming up of earth surface causes many ozone depletion, affect our agriculture , water supply, transportation, and several other problems.

Reason Of Climate Change

Although there are hundreds of reason for the climatic change we are only going to discuss the natural and manmade (human) reasons.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Natural Reasons

These include volcanic eruption , solar radiation, tectonic plate movement, orbital variations. Due to these activities, the geographical condition of an area become quite harmful for life to survive. Also, these activities raise the temperature of the earth to a great extent causing an imbalance in nature.

Human Reasons

Man due to his need and greed has done many activities that not only harm the environment but himself too. Many plant and animal species go extinct due to human activity. Human activities that harm the climate include deforestation, using fossil fuel , industrial waste , a different type of pollution and many more. All these things damage the climate and ecosystem very badly. And many species of animals and birds got extinct or on a verge of extinction due to hunting.

Effects Of Climatic Change

These climatic changes have a negative impact on the environment. The ocean level is rising, glaciers are melting, CO2 in the air is increasing, forest and wildlife are declining, and water life is also getting disturbed due to climatic changes. Apart from that, it is calculated that if this change keeps on going then many species of plants and animals will get extinct. And there will be a heavy loss to the environment.

What will be Future?

If we do not do anything and things continue to go on like right now then a day in future will come when humans will become extinct from the surface of the earth. But instead of neglecting these problems we start acting on then we can save the earth and our future.

Although humans mistake has caused great damage to the climate and ecosystem. But, it is not late to start again and try to undo what we have done until now to damage the environment. And if every human start contributing to the environment then we can be sure of our existence in the future.

{ “@context”: “https://schema.org”, “@type”: “FAQPage”, “mainEntity”: [ { “@type”: “Question”, “name”: “What is climate change and how it affects humans?”, “acceptedAnswer”: { “@type”: “Answer”, “text”: “Climate change is a phenomenon that happens because of human and natural reasons. And it is one of the most serious problems that not only affect the environment but also human beings. It affects human in several ways but in simple language, we can say that it causes many diseases and disasters that destroy life on earth.” } }, { “@type”: “Question”, “name”: “Can we stop these climatic changes?”, “acceptedAnswer”: { “@type”: “Answer”, “text”: “Yes, we can stop these climatic changes but for that, every one of us has to come forward and has to adapt ways that can reduce and control our bad habits that affect the environment. We have to the initiative and make everyone aware of the climatic changes.” } } ] }

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Climate Change and the Media Biases Words: 1473
• Climate Change: The Negative Effects Words: 1503
• Social Issue: Climate Change Words: 1062
• Climate Change Impacts Florida’s Biodiversity Words: 1805
• The Controversies of Climate Change Words: 1421
• “The Basics of Climate Change” Blog Words: 604
• Climate Change Factors and Impacts on Blue Crab Populations Words: 5492
• Climate Change from Different Perspectives Words: 1953
• Climate Change as a Challenge to Australia Words: 2975
• The Importance of Addressing Climate Change Words: 1144
• Climate Change Prediction for the Caribbean Words: 483
• Climate Change: The Impact on North America Words: 2798
• Security and Climate Change Words: 3018
• Climate Change and Crop Production Words: 1140
• Climate Change: Causes, Dynamics, and Effects Words: 568
• Climate Change and Related Issues in Canada Words: 680
• Water Scarcity Due to Climate Change Words: 1206
• Climate Change and Corporate Responsibility Words: 3614
• Water Scarcity as Effect of Climate Change Words: 1317
• Climate Change in Environmentally Vulnerable Countries Words: 1461
• Climate Change: Factors and Future Words: 1487
• The Health Impacts of Climate Change in China Words: 909
• Climate Change: Changing Patterns of Malaria Words: 2996

Climate Change Impacts

Explore the impacts of climate change with our effects of climate change essay. Learn more about climate change causes, effects, and solutions with the help of our sample. Keep reading to gain inspiration for your essay on climate change and its impact.

Effects of Climate Change: Essay Conclusion

Climate change, climate change impacts, managing climate change, effects of climate change: essay introduction.

It is doubtless that global change has become one the challenges, which encompasses a wide range of human life, including social and economical aspects of human life. Research has indicated that climate change will continue affecting the world as long as proper measures are not taken to protect the environment.

In this line of thought, human activities have been widely blamed for escalating effects of climate change around the world (Hillel & Rosenzweig 2010). Only time will tell whether taming climate change is possible or not.

In this regard, this assessment covers the impact of climate change in our lives today even as world leaders burn midnight oil to develop strategies, aimed at taming the scourge. This proposal topic has an array of benefits, especially in understanding the fatal nature of climate change.

It will mainly focus on the effects of climate change and make proposals on how to counteract the effects of climate together some of the preventive measures being considered by international leaders.

Through literature review, this project will compare different views as argued by different authors in order to synthesize the issue with varying view points. This will be crucial in capturing the main objective of the projects, which revolves around the analysis of the effects of climate change in the world today.

How is climate change defined? Although different environmental experts tend to have different definitions, the Australian Government defines climate change as the weather pattern observed for several years. These changes are mainly caused by human activities, which negatively impact the environment.

With reference to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released in the year 2007, climate change is no longer a myth, but a reality, whose impact has continually escalated from 1950s, mainly due to rising levels of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

This implies that human activities have significantly contributed this environmental scourge, which continues to affect most parts of the world. The IPCC report was a representation of the world view on climate change, collected from various scientific journals published around the world (Australian Government 2012).

The Australian Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency affirms that there is enough evidence to support the fact that the climate system of the earth has continuously been warming. Some of the observations made include the rising level of air in the world and high ocean temperatures. Others are the rising sea level, constant melting of snow and ice in most parts of the world.

One important fact to note about climate change is that it involves the rising temperatures of the climate system holistically, including all the oceans, atmosphere and the cryosphere. These findings concluded that the climate system is in a heating mode.

Even as we review other people’s work, it is important to note that climate change is more than mere global warming as perceived by most people. From scientific revelation, the climate will be varied broadly especially if the warming continues uncontrollably (Australian Government 2012). As a result, the world is likely to experience irregular rainfall patterns, occurrence of severe climatic events like heavy currents and droughts among others.

The impact of climate change has been felt in every part of the world. According to United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Asia, Africa and Latin America are among the regions of the world, which have severely been affected by the scourge. In a 2010 survey carried out by Climate Change Secretariat, Africa is under the pressure of climate change and remains vulnerable to these effects.

Unlike most parts of the world, Africa experiences varying climatic changes. Common occurrences in Africa are severe droughts and floods, which have had negative implications on the continent’s economy (UNFCCC 2010).

The two events are widely known to predispose famine and overall interference with the socio-well being of the society. According to the UNFCCC’s analysis, close to a third of Africa’s population inhabit drought-prone regions, while more than two million remain vulnerable to drought every year (UNFCCC 2010).

In understanding the implication of climate change in Africa, the survey found out that the issue of climate change is intertwined with several factors, which contribute to its escalation across the continent.

Some of these factors include poverty, weak institutions, illiteracy, lack of information and technology, limited infrastructure, poor accessibility to resources, poor management and conflicts. In addition, there is widespread exploitation of land, which remains a major threat to the climate.

Due to pressure on farming land, most farmers exert pressure through over-cultivation and deforestation. In addition, other factors like dunes and storms continue posing more negative threats to the environment and human beings (UNFCCC 2010).

As a result of these events, the continent experiences drought and overall scarcity of water. Due to this emerging trend, Africa is likely to face shortage of rainfall and overall scarcity of water. With Africa having several trans-boundary river basins, the continent is likely to experience conflicts over these basins. Another important aspect captured in the report is agriculture (UNFCCC 2010).

Since most subsistence farmers in Africa depend on rainfall and irrigation, the sector has been affected by insufficient supply in most Sub-Saharan regions. Besides this, UNFCCC notes that climate change has resulted into loss of agricultural land and a drop in subsistence crop production. With a good percentage of the population under the threat of starvation, climate change has undoubtedly led to escalation of insufficient food supply.

It is amazing to note that climate change has also contributed to the spread of some diseases like malaria, tuberculosis and diarrhea in most parts of Africa. As stated by the UNFCCC, there has been a shift in the distribution of disease vectors.

For instance, migration of mosquitoes to regions of higher altitude is likely to expose people in such regions to the risk of contracting malaria (UNFCCC 2010). Additionally, climate change is likely to result into negative impact on African ecosystems and habitats, which are already threatened by these changes. Due to reduced habitat and changing climatic conditions some species are likely to move to more tolerable regions.

In this line of though Robert Watson, Marufu Zinyowera and Richard Moss found out that climate change can have severe effects on human health. In a research carried out in 1998, the three reiterated that human health may be affected as a result of heat-stress mortality, urban air pollution and vector-borne diseases, which could be favored as a result of change in temperature or rainfall in a given ecosystem (Watson, Zinyowera & Moss 1998, p. 7).

Additionally, Watson, Zinyowera and Moss argued that these effects are commonly felt in developing countries, where lives are lost, communities affected and the cost in medical care rises due to high prevalence of some health complications.

With regard to the impact of climate change on biodiversity, Watson, Zinyowera and Moss, agree with UNFCCC’s findings. In their 1998 survey, the three argued that all ecosystems play a fundamental role in the society (Watson, Zinyowera & Moss 1998).

For instance, they are a source of goods and services to any society. In particular, these goods and services include provision of food, processing and storage of carbon and other nutrients, assimilation of wastes and provision of recreation and tourism opportunities among others.

As a result, they argued that climatic changes are known to alter the geographical local of various ecological systems, including the presence of certain species and their ability to remain productive to support the society. According to their findings, ecological systems are essentially dynamic and are commonly affected by climatic variations of whichever magnitude.

Nevertheless, the extreme to which the climate varies determines the changes, which occur in the ecosystem. In addition, the three authors noted the high level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was a major contributing factor towards climate changes taking place in the world today (Watson, Zinyowera & Moss 1998).

Besides influencing the ecosystems, Watson, Zinyowera and Moss noted that climate change may also have secondary effects, say, variations in soil characteristics and interference of regimes. These include diseases, pests and diseases, which are likely to support the existence of some species favorably than others (Watson, Zinyowera & Moss 1998).

This will automatically affect the survival of some species and the overall population of organisms. Similarly, they argued that that climate change has direct impact on food production in most parts of the world. According to the 1998 survey, the type of agricultural systems in place determines the manner in which crop productivity is affected by changes in climatic conditions and patterns.

Like many other scholars, Barrie Pittock spent his life studying the environment and how it is affected by changes in climate. In his 2009, survey, Climate Change: The Science, Impacts and Solutions , Pittock outlined several reasons why there is cause for alarm, regarding climate change in the world today.

According to Pittock, the UNFCCC seeks to reduce the impact of climate change by being on the frontline in the war against global warming (Pittock 2009, p. 107). He further noted that human-induced climate change is a major security threat in the world today. This stance is mainly backed by the well-known effects of climate change described by the UNFCCC and the IPCC.

Moreover, Pittock reiterated that climate change has complex effects in the world today, citing a number of examples. In cases where there is high rainfall resulting from climate change, the world may experience direct or indirect implications.

This could be seen through high or low crop yield, depending on the type of soil or crop. On the other hand, indirect effects may refer to changes in demand and supply, emanating from either low or high yield, depending on other factors. He therefore agreed with several authors and researchers who have enumerated implications of climate change on the environment and human life at large.

For example, Pittock noted that climate change has been a major cause of water shortages in most parts of the world (Pittock 2009, p. 108). He however attributed this to a number of factors, including precipitation decrease in some regions, high rates of evaporation in the world and general loss of glaciers.

Economically, Pittock noted that climate change affects the economic progress of a nation since resources may be diverted to disease control instead of advancing developing projects.

Moreover, it is important to note that most of the countries, which suffer severely as a result of climate change, are poor nations that lack stable economic muscles. As a result, there is a likelihood of richer countries becoming stronger as developing economies weaken further. Lastly, Pittock noted that some of the threats emanating from climate change cause irreversible damages, which end up haunting human beings forever (Pittock 2009, p. 109).

With reference to a number of scholars who have done research on the impact of climate change, it is evident that human activities have a role in the escalation of these effects. In his 2010 survey, Martin Kernan noted that there is a relation between human activities and global warming.

As a result of this global relationship, the world has registered an increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In this survey, he noted that the increase in green house gases is rampant in the northern hemisphere than any other part of the world.

As a result of high temperatures, Martin underscore that the changes have impact on the composition of natural ecosystems, regarding species population and their ability to survive (Kernan 2010, p. 15). What is most evident in Martin’s research is his comparison of the current state of the climate, to what was known hundreds of years ago.

Climate change also affects the quality of water in the United States. According to a research carried out by Robert Mendelsohn and James Neumann, water plays an important role in the life of a human being. Some of these functions include but not limited to power generation, food production, recreation and ecological processes (Mendelsohn & Mendelsohn 2004, p. 133).

However, this is only possible if the water is available and of good quality. Thus, changes in spatial distribution and quality can have direct social and economic effects on the society.

This alteration may occur as a result of increased concentration in greenhouse gases. Climate change can be detected by observing variation in temperatures, frequent and intense droughts and altered precipitation patterns among other factors (Mendelsohn & Mendelsohn 2004, p. 133).

The findings on the impact of climate change on the quality of water have also been pursued by Jan Dam, who argued that natural systems are usually sensitive to changes in climate variation. Hydrological quality is mainly affected by the temperature or concentration of water (Dam 2003, p. 95).

When oceans and other water bodies overheat because of high temperatures, this may result into negative impact on aquatic animals, which adapt to certain hydrological temperatures. Similarly, the quality of water is always altered when gases like carbon dioxide are dissolved in water basins. This may affect the mix of species present in a given ecosystem.

Based on the impact of climate change, it is doubtless that management of the risks has to be effected promptly before they become fatal and irreversible. One of the ways of controlling climate change is through reduction of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

This can be achieved through several ways, which minimize the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere (McCarthy 2001, p. 222). According to James McCarthy, this can be realized by adopting alternative sources of energy unlike how most economies rely of oil and petroleum products as the main source of energy. Additionally, good methods of farming are important to maintain the value of the environment for sustainable support.

Use of international legislations is also necessary in ensuring that rich countries do not exploit developing nations as they are major contributors of effluents into the atmosphere (Hillel & Rosenzweig 2010). Above all, the fight against climate change calls for environmental campaign, which requires the efforts of everybody in the world.

From the above review of literature, it is clear that climate change is a major socio and environmental issue affecting the world today. Mainly caused by human activities, climate change poses a chain of challenges and threats to the environment.

For instance, there are several diseases, which affect human beings as a result of climate change (Rosenberg & Edmonds 2005). Of importance is also the alteration of the quality of the natural environment, which affects biodiversity. This has led to the extinction of some species, while others have increased exponentially in numbers.

Moreover, it is imperative to note that some of the occurrences, which are considered to be natural, are caused by climate change. Common ones include floods and draughts (Faure, Gupta & Nentjes 2003, p. 340).

Most of these calamities continue to be recognized as natural disasters yet they can be controlled using simple mitigation measures. In most cases, adoption of renewable sources of energy has always been considered to be the most important way of saving the world from climate change. Although it is a complex issue to handle, joint global efforts are important in making progress.

Australian Government 2012, Impacts of climate change .

Dam, J 2003, Impacts of Climate Change and Climate Variability on Hydrological Regimes , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Faure, M, Gupta, J & Nentjes, A 2003, Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol: The Role of Institutions and Instruments to Control Global Change , Edward Elgar Publishing, United Kingdom.

Hillel, D & Rosenzweig, C 2010, Handbook of Climate Change and Agroecosystems: Impacts, Adaptation, and Mitigation , World Scientific, Singapore.

Kernan, M 2010, Climate Change Impacts on Freshwater Ecosystems , John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.

Mendelsohn, R & Neumann, J 2004, The Impact Of Climate Change On The United States Economy , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Pittock, B 2009, Climate Change: The Science, Impacts and Solutions , Csiro Publishing, Sydney.

Rosenberg, N, & Edmonds, J 2005, Climate Change Impacts for the Conterminous USA: An Integrated Assessment , Springer, New York.

UNFCCC 2010, Climate Change: Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Adaptation In Developing Countries.

Watson, R, Zinyowera, M & Moss, R 1998, The Regional Impacts of Climate Change: An Assessment of Vulnerability , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2020, January 8). Climate Change Impacts. https://studycorgi.com/climate-change-impacts/

"Climate Change Impacts." StudyCorgi , 8 Jan. 2020, studycorgi.com/climate-change-impacts/.

StudyCorgi . (2020) 'Climate Change Impacts'. 8 January.

1. StudyCorgi . "Climate Change Impacts." January 8, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/climate-change-impacts/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Climate Change Impacts." January 8, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/climate-change-impacts/.

StudyCorgi . 2020. "Climate Change Impacts." January 8, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/climate-change-impacts/.

This paper, “Climate Change Impacts”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: October 7, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

• ENVIRONMENT

How global warming is disrupting life on Earth

The signs of global warming are everywhere, and are more complex than just climbing temperatures.

Our planet is getting hotter. Since the Industrial Revolution—an event that spurred the use of fossil fuels in everything from power plants to transportation—Earth has warmed by 1 degree Celsius, about 2 degrees Fahrenheit.  

That may sound insignificant, but 2023 was the hottest year on record , and all 10 of the hottest years on record have occurred in the past decade.  

Global warming and climate change are often used interchangeably as synonyms, but scientists prefer to use “climate change” when describing the complex shifts now affecting our planet’s weather and climate systems.  

Climate change encompasses not only rising average temperatures but also natural disasters, shifting wildlife habitats, rising seas , and a range of other impacts. All of these changes are emerging as humans continue to add heat-trapping greenhouse gases , like carbon dioxide and methane, to the atmosphere.

What causes global warming?

When fossil fuel emissions are pumped into the atmosphere, they change the chemistry of our atmosphere, allowing sunlight to reach the Earth but preventing heat from being released into space. This keeps Earth warm, like a greenhouse, and this warming is known as the greenhouse effect .  

Carbon dioxide is the most commonly found greenhouse gas and about 75 percent of all the climate warming pollution in the atmosphere. This gas is a product of producing and burning oil, gas, and coal. About a quarter of Carbon dioxide also results from land cleared for timber or agriculture.  

Methane is another common greenhouse gas. Although it makes up only about 16 percent of emissions, it's roughly 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide and dissipates more quickly. That means methane can cause a large spark in warming, but ending methane pollution can also quickly limit the amount of atmospheric warming. Sources of this gas include agriculture (mostly livestock), leaks from oil and gas production, and waste from landfills.  

What are the effects of global warming?  

One of the most concerning impacts of global warming is the effect warmer temperatures will have on Earth's polar regions and mountain glaciers. The Arctic is warming four times faster than the rest of the planet. This warming reduces critical ice habitat and it disrupts the flow of the jet stream, creating more unpredictable weather patterns around the globe.  

( Learn more about the jet stream. )

A warmer planet doesn't just raise temperatures. Precipitation is becoming more extreme as the planet heats. For every degree your thermometer rises, the air holds about seven percent more moisture. This increase in moisture in the atmosphere can produce flash floods, more destructive hurricanes, and even paradoxically, stronger snow storms.  

The world's leading scientists regularly gather to review the latest research on how the planet is changing. The results of this review is synthesized in regularly published reports known as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports.  

A recent report outlines how disruptive a global rise in temperature can be:

• Coral reefs are now a highly endangered ecosystem. When corals face environmental stress, such as high heat, they expel their colorful algae and turn a ghostly white, an effect known as coral bleaching . In this weakened state, they more easily die.  
• Trees are increasingly dying from drought , and this mass mortality is reshaping forest ecosystems.
• Rising temperatures and changing precipitation patterns are making wildfires more common and more widespread. Research shows they're even moving into the eastern U.S. where fires have historically been less common.
• Hurricanes are growing more destructive and dumping more rain, an effect that will result in more damage. Some scientists say we even need to be preparing for Cat 6 storms . (The current ranking system ends at Cat 5.)

How can we limit global warming?  

Limiting the rising in global warming is theoretically achievable, but politically, socially, and economically difficult.  

Those same sources of greenhouse gas emissions must be limited to reduce warming. For example, oil and gas used to generate electricity or power industrial manufacturing will need to be replaced by net zero emission technology like wind and solar power. Transportation, another major source of emissions, will need to integrate more electric vehicles, public transportation, and innovative urban design, such as safe bike lanes and walkable cities.  

( Learn more about solutions to limit global warming. )

One global warming solution that was once considered far fetched is now being taken more seriously: geoengineering. This type of technology relies on manipulating the Earth's atmosphere to physically block the warming rays of the sun or by sucking carbon dioxide straight out of the sky.

Restoring nature may also help limit warming. Trees, oceans, wetlands, and other ecosystems help absorb excess carbon—but when they're lost, so too is their potential to fight climate change.  

Ultimately, we'll need to adapt to warming temperatures, building homes to withstand sea level rise for example, or more efficiently cooling homes during heat waves.  

Related Topics

• CLIMATE CHANGE
• ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION
• POLAR REGIONS

You May Also Like

Why all life on Earth depends on trees

Life probably exists beyond Earth. So how do we find it?

Pizzlies, grolars, and narlugas: Why we may soon see more Arctic hybrids

For Antarctica’s emperor penguins, ‘there is no time left’

Listen to 30 years of climate change transformed into haunting music

• Environment
• Paid Content

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• Mind, Body, Wonder
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Top Questions
• Climatic variation since the last glaciation
• The greenhouse effect
• Radiative forcing
• Water vapour
• Carbon dioxide
• Surface-level ozone and other compounds
• Nitrous oxides and fluorinated gases
• Land-use change
• Stratospheric ozone depletion
• Volcanic aerosols
• Variations in solar output
• Variations in Earth’s orbit
• Water vapour feedback
• Cloud feedbacks
• Ice albedo feedback
• Carbon cycle feedbacks
• Modern observations
• Prehistorical climate records
• Theoretical climate models
• Patterns of warming
• Precipitation patterns
• Regional predictions
• Ice melt and sea level rise
• Ocean circulation changes
• Tropical cyclones
• Environmental consequences of global warming
• Socioeconomic consequences of global warming

How does global warming work?

Where does global warming occur in the atmosphere, why is global warming a social problem, where does global warming affect polar bears.

global warming

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• U.S. Department of Transportation - Global Warming: A Science Overview
• NOAA Climate.gov - Climate Change: Global Temperature
• Natural Resources Defense Council - Global Warming 101
• American Institute of Physics - The discovery of global warming
• LiveScience - Causes of Global Warming
• global warming - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• global warming - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

Human activity affects global surface temperatures by changing Earth ’s radiative balance—the “give and take” between what comes in during the day and what Earth emits at night. Increases in greenhouse gases —i.e., trace gases such as carbon dioxide and methane that absorb heat energy emitted from Earth’s surface and reradiate it back—generated by industry and transportation cause the atmosphere to retain more heat, which increases temperatures and alters precipitation patterns.

Global warming, the phenomenon of increasing average air temperatures near Earth’s surface over the past one to two centuries, happens mostly in the troposphere , the lowest level of the atmosphere, which extends from Earth’s surface up to a height of 6–11 miles. This layer contains most of Earth’s clouds and is where living things and their habitats and weather primarily occur.

Continued global warming is expected to impact everything from energy use to water availability to crop productivity throughout the world. Poor countries and communities with limited abilities to adapt to these changes are expected to suffer disproportionately. Global warming is already being associated with increases in the incidence of severe and extreme weather, heavy flooding , and wildfires —phenomena that threaten homes, dams, transportation networks, and other facets of human infrastructure. Learn more about how the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report, released in 2021, describes the social impacts of global warming.

Polar bears live in the Arctic , where they use the region’s ice floes as they hunt seals and other marine mammals . Temperature increases related to global warming have been the most pronounced at the poles, where they often make the difference between frozen and melted ice. Polar bears rely on small gaps in the ice to hunt their prey. As these gaps widen because of continued melting, prey capture has become more challenging for these animals.

Recent News

global warming , the phenomenon of increasing average air temperatures near the surface of Earth over the past one to two centuries. Climate scientists have since the mid-20th century gathered detailed observations of various weather phenomena (such as temperatures, precipitation , and storms) and of related influences on climate (such as ocean currents and the atmosphere’s chemical composition). These data indicate that Earth’s climate has changed over almost every conceivable timescale since the beginning of geologic time and that human activities since at least the beginning of the Industrial Revolution have a growing influence over the pace and extent of present-day climate change .

Giving voice to a growing conviction of most of the scientific community , the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was formed in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), published in 2021, noted that the best estimate of the increase in global average surface temperature between 1850 and 2019 was 1.07 °C (1.9 °F). An IPCC special report produced in 2018 noted that human beings and their activities have been responsible for a worldwide average temperature increase between 0.8 and 1.2 °C (1.4 and 2.2 °F) since preindustrial times, and most of the warming over the second half of the 20th century could be attributed to human activities.

AR6 produced a series of global climate predictions based on modeling five greenhouse gas emission scenarios that accounted for future emissions, mitigation (severity reduction) measures, and uncertainties in the model projections. Some of the main uncertainties include the precise role of feedback processes and the impacts of industrial pollutants known as aerosols , which may offset some warming. The lowest-emissions scenario, which assumed steep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions beginning in 2015, predicted that the global mean surface temperature would increase between 1.0 and 1.8 °C (1.8 and 3.2 °F) by 2100 relative to the 1850–1900 average. This range stood in stark contrast to the highest-emissions scenario, which predicted that the mean surface temperature would rise between 3.3 and 5.7 °C (5.9 and 10.2 °F) by 2100 based on the assumption that greenhouse gas emissions would continue to increase throughout the 21st century. The intermediate-emissions scenario, which assumed that emissions would stabilize by 2050 before declining gradually, projected an increase of between 2.1 and 3.5 °C (3.8 and 6.3 °F) by 2100.

Many climate scientists agree that significant societal, economic, and ecological damage would result if the global average temperature rose by more than 2 °C (3.6 °F) in such a short time. Such damage would include increased extinction of many plant and animal species, shifts in patterns of agriculture , and rising sea levels. By 2015 all but a few national governments had begun the process of instituting carbon reduction plans as part of the Paris Agreement , a treaty designed to help countries keep global warming to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) above preindustrial levels in order to avoid the worst of the predicted effects. Whereas authors of the 2018 special report noted that should carbon emissions continue at their present rate, the increase in average near-surface air temperature would reach 1.5 °C sometime between 2030 and 2052, authors of the AR6 report suggested that this threshold would be reached by 2041 at the latest.

The AR6 report also noted that the global average sea level had risen by some 20 cm (7.9 inches) between 1901 and 2018 and that sea level rose faster in the second half of the 20th century than in the first half. It also predicted, again depending on a wide range of scenarios, that the global average sea level would rise by different amounts by 2100 relative to the 1995–2014 average. Under the report’s lowest-emission scenario, sea level would rise by 28–55 cm (11–21.7 inches), whereas, under the intermediate emissions scenario, sea level would rise by 44–76 cm (17.3–29.9 inches). The highest-emissions scenario suggested that sea level would rise by 63–101 cm (24.8–39.8 inches) by 2100.

The scenarios referred to above depend mainly on future concentrations of certain trace gases, called greenhouse gases , that have been injected into the lower atmosphere in increasing amounts through the burning of fossil fuels for industry, transportation , and residential uses. Modern global warming is the result of an increase in magnitude of the so-called greenhouse effect , a warming of Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere caused by the presence of water vapour , carbon dioxide , methane , nitrous oxides , and other greenhouse gases. In 2014 the IPCC first reported that concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides in the atmosphere surpassed those found in ice cores dating back 800,000 years.

Of all these gases, carbon dioxide is the most important, both for its role in the greenhouse effect and for its role in the human economy. It has been estimated that, at the beginning of the industrial age in the mid-18th century, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere were roughly 280 parts per million (ppm). By the end of 2022 they had risen to 419 ppm, and, if fossil fuels continue to be burned at current rates, they are projected to reach 550 ppm by the mid-21st century—essentially, a doubling of carbon dioxide concentrations in 300 years.

A vigorous debate is in progress over the extent and seriousness of rising surface temperatures, the effects of past and future warming on human life, and the need for action to reduce future warming and deal with its consequences. This article provides an overview of the scientific background related to the subject of global warming. It considers the causes of rising near-surface air temperatures, the influencing factors, the process of climate research and forecasting, and the possible ecological and social impacts of rising temperatures. For an overview of the public policy developments related to global warming occurring since the mid-20th century, see global warming policy . For a detailed description of Earth’s climate, its processes, and the responses of living things to its changing nature, see climate . For additional background on how Earth’s climate has changed throughout geologic time , see climatic variation and change . For a full description of Earth’s gaseous envelope, within which climate change and global warming occur, see atmosphere .

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 16 November 2022

Climate change and human behaviour

Nature Human Behaviour volume  6 ,  pages 1441–1442 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

32k Accesses

4 Citations

63 Altmetric

Metrics details

Climate change is an immense challenge. Human behaviour is crucial in climate change mitigation, and in tackling the arising consequences. In this joint Focus issue between Nature Climate Change and Nature Human Behaviour , we take a closer look at the role of human behaviour in the climate crisis.

In the late 19th century, the scientist (and suffragette) Eunice Newton Foote published a paper suggesting that a build-up of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere could cause increased surface temperatures 1 . In the mid-20th century, the British engineer Guy Callendar was the first to concretize the link between carbon dioxide levels and global warming 2 . Now, a century and a half after Foote’s work, there is overwhelming scientific evidence that human behaviour is the main driver of climatic changes and global warming.

The negative effects of rising temperatures on the environment, biodiversity and human health are becoming increasingly noticeable. The years 2020 and 2016 were among the hottest since the record keeping of annual surface temperatures began in 1880 (ref. 3 ). Throughout 2022, the globe was plagued by record-breaking heatwaves. Even regions with a naturally warm climate, such as Pakistan or India, experienced some of their hottest days much earlier in the year — very probably a consequence of climate change 4 . According to the National Centers for Environmental Information of the United States, the surface global temperature during the decade leading up to 2020 was +0.82 °C (+1.48 °F) above the 20th-century average 5 . It is clear that we are facing a global crisis that requires urgent action.

During the Climate Change Conference (COP21) of the United Nations in Paris 2015, 196 parties adopted a legally binding treaty with the aim to limit global warming to ideally 1.5 °C and a maximum of 2 °C, compared to pre-industrial levels. A recent report issued by the UN suggests that we are very unlikely to meet the targets of the Paris Agreement. Instead, current policies are likely to cause temperatures to increase up to 2.8 °C this century 6 . The report suggests that to get on track to 2 °C, new pledges would need to be four times higher — and seven times higher to get on track to 1.5 °C. This November, world leaders will meet for the 27th time to coordinate efforts in facing the climate crisis and mitigating the effects during COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt.

This Focus issue

Human behaviour is not only one of the primary drivers of climate change but also is equally crucial for mitigating the impact of the Anthropocene. In 2022, this was also explicitly acknowledged in the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). For the first time, the IPCC directly discussed behavioural, social and cultural dynamics in climate change mitigation 7 . This joint Focus highlights some of the aspects of the human factor that are central in the adaptation to and prevention of a warming climate, and the mitigation of negative consequences. It features original pieces, and also includes a curated collection of already published content from across journals in the Nature Portfolio.

Human behaviour is a neglected factor in climate science

In the light of the empirical evidence for the role of human behaviour in climatic changes, it is curious that the ‘human factor’ has not always received much attention in key research areas, such as climate modelling. For a long time, climate models to predict global warming and emissions did not account for it. This oversight meant that predictions made by these models have differed greatly in their projected rise in temperatures 8 , 9 .

Human behaviour is complex and multidimensional, making it difficult — but crucial — to account for it in climate models. In a Review , Brian Beckage and colleagues thus look at existing social climate models and make recommendations for how these models can better embed human behaviour in their forecasting.

The psychology of climate change

The complexity of humans is also reflected in their psychology. Despite an overwhelming scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change, research suggests that many people underestimate the effects of it, are sceptical of it or deny its existence altogether. In a Review , Matthew Hornsey and Stephan Lewandowsky look at the psychological origins of such beliefs, as well as the roles of think tanks and political affiliation.

Psychologists are not only concerned with understanding and addressing climate scepticism but are also increasingly worried about mental health consequences. Two narrative Reviews address this topic. Neil Adger et al. discuss the direct and indirect pathways by which climate change affects well-being, and Fiona Charlson et al. adopt a clinical perspective in their piece. They review the literature on the clinical implications of climate change and provide practical suggestions for mental health practitioners.

Individual- and system-level behaviour change

To limit global warming to a minimum, system-level and individual-level behaviour change is necessary. Several pieces in this Focus discuss how such change can be facilitated.

Many interventions for individual behaviour change and for motivating environmental behaviour have been proposed. In a Review , Anne van Valkengoed and colleagues introduce a classification system that links different interventions to the determinants of individual environmental behaviour. Practitioners can use the system to design targeted interventions for behaviour change.

Ideally, interventions are scalable and result in system-level change. Scalability requires an understanding of public perceptions and behaviours, as Mirjam Jenny and Cornelia Betsch explain in a Comment . They draw on the experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss crucial structures, such as data observatories, for the collection of reliable large-scale data.

Such knowledge is also key for designing robust climate policies. Three Comments in Nature Climate Change look at how insights from behavioural science can inform policy making in areas such as natural-disaster insurance markets , carbon taxing and the assignment of responsibility for supply chain emissions .

Time to act

To buck the trend of rising temperatures, immediate and significant climate action is needed.

Natural disasters have become more frequent and occur at ever-closer intervals. The changing climate is driving biodiversity loss, and affecting human physical and mental health. Unfortunately, the conversations about climate change mitigation are often dominated by Global North and ‘WEIRD’ (Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic) perspectives, neglecting the views of countries in the Global South. In a Correspondence , Charles Ogunbode reminds us that climate justice is social justice in the Global South and that, while being a minor contributor to emissions and global warming, this region has to bear many of the consequences.

The fight against climate change is a collective endeavour and requires large-scale solutions. Collective action, however, usually starts with individuals who raise awareness and drive change. In two Q&As, Nature Human Behaviour entered into conversation with people who recognized the power of individual behaviour and took action.

Licypriya Kangujam is a 10-year-old climate activist based in India. She tells us how she hopes to raise the voices of the children of the world in the fight against climate change and connect individuals who want to take action.

Wolfgang Knorr is a former academic who co-founded Faculty for a Future to help academics to transform their careers and address pressing societal issues. In a Q&A , he describes his motivations to leave academia and offers advice on how academics can create impact.

Mitigation of climate change (as well as adaptation to its existing effects) is not possible without human behaviour change, be it on the individual, collective or policy level. The contents of this Focus shed light on the complexities that human behaviour bears, but also point towards future directions. It is the duty of us all to turn this knowledge into action.

Foote, E. Amer. J. Sci. 22 , 377–381 (1856).

Google Scholar  

Callendar, G. S. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 64 , 223–240 (1938).

Article   Google Scholar  

NASA. Vital signs – global temperature. climate.nasa.gov , https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/ (2022).

Zachariah, M. et al. Climate change made devastating early heat in India and Pakistan 30 times more likely. worldweatherattribution.org , https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/wp-content/uploads/India_Pak-Heatwave-scientific-report.pdf (2022).

NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Annual 2020 Global Climate Report. ncei.noaa.gov , https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/monthly-report/global/202013 (2021).

United Nations Environment Programme. Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing Window — Climate Crisis Calls For Rapid Transformation Of Societies (UNEP, 2022).

IPCC. Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change (IPCC, 2022).

Calvin, K. & Bond-Lamberty, B. Environ. Res. Lett. 13 , 063006 (2018).

Beckage, B. et al. Clim. Change 163 , 181–188 (2020).

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Climate change and human behaviour. Nat Hum Behav 6 , 1441–1442 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01490-9

Download citation

Published : 16 November 2022

Issue Date : November 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01490-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Polarized collaboration benefits knowledge production: empirical analyses of the mediating effect of co-production pattern in wikipedia articles on climate change.

• Kunhao Yang
• Mengyuan Fu

Journal of Computational Social Science (2024)

Searching for a sustainable solution to increasing chemical pollution

• Joanna Rakowska

Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

What Is Climate Change?

Climate change is a long-term change in the average weather patterns that have come to define Earth’s local, regional and global climates. These changes have a broad range of observed effects that are synonymous with the term.

Changes observed in Earth’s climate since the mid-20th century are driven by human activities, particularly fossil fuel burning, which increases heat-trapping greenhouse gas levels in Earth’s atmosphere, raising Earth’s average surface temperature. Natural processes, which have been overwhelmed by human activities, can also contribute to climate change, including internal variability (e.g., cyclical ocean patterns like El Niño, La Niña and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and external forcings (e.g., volcanic activity, changes in the Sun’s energy output , variations in Earth’s orbit ).

Scientists use observations from the ground, air, and space, along with computer models , to monitor and study past, present, and future climate change. Climate data records provide evidence of climate change key indicators, such as global land and ocean temperature increases; rising sea levels; ice loss at Earth’s poles and in mountain glaciers; frequency and severity changes in extreme weather such as hurricanes, heatwaves, wildfires, droughts, floods, and precipitation; and cloud and vegetation cover changes.

“Climate change” and “global warming” are often used interchangeably but have distinct meanings. Similarly, the terms "weather" and "climate" are sometimes confused, though they refer to events with broadly different spatial- and timescales.

What Is Global Warming?

Global warming is the long-term heating of Earth’s surface observed since the pre-industrial period (between 1850 and 1900) due to human activities, primarily fossil fuel burning, which increases heat-trapping greenhouse gas levels in Earth’s atmosphere. This term is not interchangeable with the term "climate change."

Since the pre-industrial period, human activities are estimated to have increased Earth’s global average temperature by about 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), a number that is currently increasing by more than 0.2 degrees Celsius (0.36 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade. The current warming trend is unequivocally the result of human activity since the 1950s and is proceeding at an unprecedented rate over millennia.

Weather vs. Climate

“if you don’t like the weather in new england, just wait a few minutes.” - mark twain.

Weather refers to atmospheric conditions that occur locally over short periods of time—from minutes to hours or days. Familiar examples include rain, snow, clouds, winds, floods, or thunderstorms.

Climate, on the other hand, refers to the long-term (usually at least 30 years) regional or even global average of temperature, humidity, and rainfall patterns over seasons, years, or decades.

Find Out More: A Guide to NASA’s Global Climate Change Website

This website provides a high-level overview of some of the known causes, effects and indications of global climate change:

Evidence. Brief descriptions of some of the key scientific observations that our planet is undergoing abrupt climate change.

Causes. A concise discussion of the primary climate change causes on our planet.

Effects. A look at some of the likely future effects of climate change, including U.S. regional effects.

Vital Signs. Graphs and animated time series showing real-time climate change data, including atmospheric carbon dioxide, global temperature, sea ice extent, and ice sheet volume.

Earth Minute. This fun video series explains various Earth science topics, including some climate change topics.

Other NASA Resources

Goddard Scientific Visualization Studio. An extensive collection of animated climate change and Earth science visualizations.

Sea Level Change Portal. NASA's portal for an in-depth look at the science behind sea level change.

NASA’s Earth Observatory. Satellite imagery, feature articles and scientific information about our home planet, with a focus on Earth’s climate and environmental change.

Header image is of Apusiaajik Glacier, and was taken near Kulusuk, Greenland, on Aug. 26, 2018, during NASA's Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG) field operations. Learn more here . Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Discover More Topics From NASA

Explore Earth Science

Earth Science in Action

Earth Science Data

Facts About Earth

Newsroom Post

Climate change: a threat to human wellbeing and health of the planet. taking action now can secure our future.

BERLIN, Feb 28 – Human-induced climate change is causing dangerous and widespread disruption in nature and affecting the lives of billions of people around the world, despite efforts to reduce the risks. People and ecosystems least able to cope are being hardest hit, said scientists in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, released today.

“This report is a dire warning about the consequences of inaction,” said Hoesung Lee, Chair of the IPCC. “It shows that climate change is a grave and mounting threat to our wellbeing and a healthy planet. Our actions today will shape how people adapt and nature responds to increasing climate risks.”

The world faces unavoidable multiple climate hazards over the next two decades with global warming of 1.5°C (2.7°F). Even temporarily exceeding this warming level will result in additional severe impacts, some of which will be irreversible. Risks for society will increase, including to infrastructure and low-lying coastal settlements.

The Summary for Policymakers of the IPCC Working Group II report,  Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability was approved on Sunday, February 27 2022, by 195 member governments of the IPCC, through a virtual approval session that was held over two weeks starting on February 14.

Urgent action required to deal with increasing risks

Increased heatwaves, droughts and floods are already exceeding plants’ and animals’ tolerance thresholds, driving mass mortalities in species such as trees and corals. These weather extremes are occurring simultaneously, causing cascading impacts that are increasingly difficult to manage. They have exposed millions of people to acute food and water insecurity, especially in Africa, Asia, Central and South America, on Small Islands and in the Arctic.

To avoid mounting loss of life, biodiversity and infrastructure, ambitious, accelerated action is required to adapt to climate change, at the same time as making rapid, deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. So far, progress on adaptation is uneven and there are increasing gaps between action taken and what is needed to deal with the increasing risks, the new report finds. These gaps are largest among lower-income populations. 

The Working Group II report is the second instalment of the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), which will be completed this year.

“This report recognizes the interdependence of climate, biodiversity and people and integrates natural, social and economic sciences more strongly than earlier IPCC assessments,” said Hoesung Lee. “It emphasizes the urgency of immediate and more ambitious action to address climate risks. Half measures are no longer an option.”

Safeguarding and strengthening nature is key to securing a liveable future

There are options to adapt to a changing climate. This report provides new insights into nature’s potential not only to reduce climate risks but also to improve people’s lives.

“Healthy ecosystems are more resilient to climate change and provide life-critical services such as food and clean water”, said IPCC Working Group II Co-Chair Hans-Otto Pörtner. “By restoring degraded ecosystems and effectively and equitably conserving 30 to 50 per cent of Earth’s land, freshwater and ocean habitats, society can benefit from nature’s capacity to absorb and store carbon, and we can accelerate progress towards sustainable development, but adequate finance and political support are essential.”

Scientists point out that climate change interacts with global trends such as unsustainable use of natural resources, growing urbanization, social inequalities, losses and damages from extreme events and a pandemic, jeopardizing future development.

“Our assessment clearly shows that tackling all these different challenges involves everyone – governments, the private sector, civil society – working together to prioritize risk reduction, as well as equity and justice, in decision-making and investment,” said IPCC Working Group II Co-Chair Debra Roberts.

“In this way, different interests, values and world views can be reconciled. By bringing together scientific and technological know-how as well as Indigenous and local knowledge, solutions will be more effective. Failure to achieve climate resilient and sustainable development will result in a sub-optimal future for people and nature.”

Cities: Hotspots of impacts and risks, but also a crucial part of the solution

This report provides a detailed assessment of climate change impacts, risks and adaptation in cities, where more than half the world’s population lives. People’s health, lives and livelihoods, as well as property and critical infrastructure, including energy and transportation systems, are being increasingly adversely affected by hazards from heatwaves, storms, drought and flooding as well as slow-onset changes, including sea level rise.

“Together, growing urbanization and climate change create complex risks, especially for those cities that already experience poorly planned urban growth, high levels of poverty and unemployment, and a lack of basic services,” Debra Roberts said.

“But cities also provide opportunities for climate action – green buildings, reliable supplies of clean water and renewable energy, and sustainable transport systems that connect urban and rural areas can all lead to a more inclusive, fairer society.”

There is increasing evidence of adaptation that has caused unintended consequences, for example destroying nature, putting peoples’ lives at risk or increasing greenhouse gas emissions. This can be avoided by involving everyone in planning, attention to equity and justice, and drawing on Indigenous and local knowledge.

A narrowing window for action

Climate change is a global challenge that requires local solutions and that’s why the Working Group II contribution to the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) provides extensive regional information to enable Climate Resilient Development.

The report clearly states Climate Resilient Development is already challenging at current warming levels. It will become more limited if global warming exceeds 1.5°C (2.7°F). In some regions it will be impossible if global warming exceeds 2°C (3.6°F). This key finding underlines the urgency for climate action, focusing on equity and justice. Adequate funding, technology transfer, political commitment and partnership lead to more effective climate change adaptation and emissions reductions.

“The scientific evidence is unequivocal: climate change is a threat to human wellbeing and the health of the planet. Any further delay in concerted global action will miss a brief and rapidly closing window to secure a liveable future,” said Hans-Otto Pörtner.

For more information, please contact:

IPCC Press Office, Email: [email protected]   IPCC Working Group II:  Sina Löschke,  Komila Nabiyeva: [email protected]

Notes for Editors

Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The Working Group II report examines the impacts of climate change on nature and people around the globe. It explores future impacts at different levels of warming and the resulting risks and offers options to strengthen nature’s and society’s resilience to ongoing climate change, to fight hunger, poverty, and inequality and keep Earth a place worth living on – for current as well as for future generations. 

Working Group II introduces several new components in its latest report: One is a special section on climate change impacts, risks and options to act for cities and settlements by the sea, tropical forests, mountains, biodiversity hotspots, dryland and deserts, the Mediterranean as well as the polar regions. Another is an atlas that will present data and findings on observed and projected climate change impacts and risks from global to regional scales, thus offering even more insights for decision makers.

The Summary for Policymakers of the Working Group II contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) as well as additional materials and information are available at https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/

Note : Originally scheduled for release in September 2021, the report was delayed for several months by the COVID-19 pandemic, as work in the scientific community including the IPCC shifted online. This is the second time that the IPCC has conducted a virtual approval session for one of its reports.

AR6 Working Group II in numbers

270 authors from 67 countries

• 47 – coordinating authors
• 184 – lead authors
• 39 – review editors
• 675 – contributing authors

Over 34,000 cited references

A total of 62,418 expert and government review comments

(First Order Draft 16,348; Second Order Draft 40,293; Final Government Distribution: 5,777)

More information about the Sixth Assessment Report can be found  here .

Additional media resources

Assets available after the embargo is lifted on Media Essentials website .

Press conference recording, collection of sound bites from WGII authors, link to presentation slides, B-roll of approval session, link to launch Trello board including press release and video trailer in UN languages, a social media pack.

The website includes  outreach materials  such as videos about the IPCC and video recordings from  outreach events  conducted as webinars or live-streamed events.

Most videos published by the IPCC can be found on our  YouTube  channel. Credit for artwork

About the IPCC

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the UN body for assessing the science related to climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to provide political leaders with periodic scientific assessments concerning climate change, its implications and risks, as well as to put forward adaptation and mitigation strategies. In the same year the UN General Assembly endorsed the action by the WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC. It has 195 member states.

Thousands of people from all over the world contribute to the work of the IPCC. For the assessment reports, IPCC scientists volunteer their time to assess the thousands of scientific papers published each year to provide a comprehensive summary of what is known about the drivers of climate change, its impacts and future risks, and how adaptation and mitigation can reduce those risks.

The IPCC has three working groups:  Working Group I , dealing with the physical science basis of climate change;  Working Group II , dealing with impacts, adaptation and vulnerability; and  Working Group III , dealing with the mitigation of climate change. It also has a  Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories  that develops methodologies for measuring emissions and removals. As part of the IPCC, a Task Group on Data Support for Climate Change Assessments (TG-Data) provides guidance to the Data Distribution Centre (DDC) on curation, traceability, stability, availability and transparency of data and scenarios related to the reports of the IPCC.

IPCC assessments provide governments, at all levels, with scientific information that they can use to develop climate policies. IPCC assessments are a key input into the international negotiations to tackle climate change. IPCC reports are drafted and reviewed in several stages, thus guaranteeing objectivity and transparency. An IPCC assessment report consists of the contributions of the three working groups and a Synthesis Report. The Synthesis Report integrates the findings of the three working group reports and of any special reports prepared in that assessment cycle.

About the Sixth Assessment Cycle

At its 41st Session in February 2015, the IPCC decided to produce a Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). At its 42nd Session in October 2015 it elected a new Bureau that would oversee the work on this report and the Special Reports to be produced in the assessment cycle.

Global Warming of 1.5°C , an IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty  was launched in October 2018.

Climate Change and Land , an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems  was launched in August 2019, and the  Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate  was released in September 2019.

In May 2019 the IPCC released the  2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories , an update to the methodology used by governments to estimate their greenhouse gas emissions and removals.

In August 2021 the IPCC released the Working Group I contribution to the AR6, Climate Change 2021, the Physical Science Basis

The Working Group III contribution to the AR6 is scheduled for early April 2022.

The Synthesis Report of the Sixth Assessment Report will be completed in the second half of 2022.

For more information go to  www.ipcc.ch

Related Content

Remarks by the ipcc chair during the press conference to present the working group ii contribution to the sixth assessment report.

Monday, 28 February 2022 Distinguished representatives of the media, WMO Secretary-General Petteri, UNEP Executive Director Andersen, We have just heard …

February 2022

Fifty-fifth session of the ipcc (ipcc-55) and twelfth session of working group ii (wgii-12), february 14, 2022, working group report, ar6 climate change 2022: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability.

Advertisement

• Publications

This site uses cookies to enhance your user experience. By continuing to use this site you are agreeing to our COOKIE POLICY .

Grab your lab coat. Let's get started

Create an account below to get 6 c&en articles per month, receive newsletters and more - all free., it seems this is your first time logging in online. please enter the following information to continue., as an acs member you automatically get access to this site. all we need is few more details to create your reading experience., not you sign in with a different account..

Password and Confirm password must match.

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.

Already have an ACS ID? Log in here

The key to knowledge is in your (nitrile-gloved) hands

Access more articles now. choose the acs option that’s right for you..

Already an ACS Member? Log in here  

$0 Community Associate

ACS’s Basic Package keeps you connected with C&EN and ACS.

• Access to 6 digital C&EN articles per month on cen.acs.org
• Weekly delivery of the C&EN Essential newsletter

$80 Regular Members & Society Affiliates

ACS’s Standard Package lets you stay up to date with C&EN, stay active in ACS, and save.

• Access to 10 digital C&EN articles per month on cen.acs.org
• Weekly delivery of the digital C&EN Magazine
• Access to our Chemistry News by C&EN mobile app

$160 Regular Members & Society Affiliates $55 Graduate Students $25 Undergraduate Students

ACS’s Premium Package gives you full access to C&EN and everything the ACS Community has to offer.

• Unlimited access to C&EN’s daily news coverage on cen.acs.org
• Weekly delivery of the C&EN Magazine in print or digital format
• Significant discounts on registration for most ACS-sponsored meetings

Your account has been created successfully, and a confirmation email is on the way.

Your username is now your ACS ID.

Greenhouse Gases

• ‘Climate change is already bad, but we can still fix this problem’

Climate scientist Rob Jackson talks his new book and the case for restoring the atmosphere

By katherine bourzac, special to c&en, august 30, 2024 | a version of this story appeared in volume 102, issue 27.

• How can companies recycle wind turbine blades?
• Are fluorinated drugs PFAS?
• Can Europe’s chemical industry survive net zero?
• Promising plastics recycling method relies on simple catalysts

Climate change is scary. But Stanford University climate scientist Rob Jackson says this should motivate us to take action. In his new book, Into the Clear Blue Sky, Jackson takes readers on a world tour of climate solutions. Jackson introduces scientists and entrepreneurs who are developing green steel, plant-based meat, and carbon sequestration technologies, and local activists who are restoring wetlands and advocating for climate justice.

Jackson has a front-row seat to the world’s still-rising greenhouse gas emissions. He’s chair of the Global Carbon Project , a group of hundreds of volunteer scientists who calculate and publish what he calls a “pulse-of-the-planet estimate” of emissions.

The atmosphere is in need of repair. But Jackson is particularly optimistic about the potential for restoring atmospheric methane to preindustrial levels—something he says we can accomplish in our lifetimes if we start cutting emissions now. Katherine Bourzac talked with Jackson about his book, his research on methane, and how we can, as he puts it, go “from climate despair to climate repair.” This interview was edited for length and clarity.

What inspired you to write this book?

I wanted to try and reach an audience beyond the people I normally do.

I view my book as a home repair manual for the planet. It highlights the people and the ideas needed to solve the climate crisis. I want most of all to give people hope, a sense of optimism. Yes, climate change is already bad, but we can still fix this problem.

▸ Hometown: Houston

▸ Current position: Professor of earth system science, Stanford University

▸ Education: PhD, ecology, Utah State University, 1992; MS, statistics, Utah State University, 1992; MS, ecology, Utah State University, 1990; BS, chemical engineering, Rice University, 1983

▸ Professional highlights: With the exception of working with students, the Global Carbon Project. It probably has the most impact of anything I do.

▸ Favorite place he traveled for the book: A Finland site that was ravaged by peat mining for decades. It inspired me because people there are trying to restore habitats the best they can in a climate-constrained world. Being there and seeing the thriving life today—it’s inspiring to see people working to bring habitats back even if they’re not exactly the same as they were at first.

▸ Inspiring works: The restored frescoes in the Sistine Chapel. When I started thinking about restoring the atmosphere, I started thinking, “How do people think about taking care of artifacts for centuries?”

Where are we now with greenhouse gas emissions?

Concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide are all at record highs. None of them have peaked, let alone started to drop.

That sounds more discouraging than it is. There’s a lot happening in clean energy, especially. The solar panels and the wind turbines are helping a lot, but we’re not reducing energy use. We’re using solar to address new energy demand rather than to take fossil energy offline. We need renewables to displace fossils, not just add to new energy demands.

Related: Sam Kean’s latest book explores the molecules we breathe

What about the targets set by the Paris Agreement, which commits to limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2 °C over preindustrial levels? Are we on track, and have temperature increases been a helpful way to talk about climate change?

We’ve blown by the 1.5 °C temperature threshold, and we’re sprinting towards 2 °C. Obviously, temperature thresholds are important, but I’m trying to provide a narrative that resonates with people.

In this book I try to use the idea of restoration as a way of resetting the narrative on climate action. The Endangered Species Act requires us to bring endangered species back to health, not just to keep them alive. When we see grizzly bears in Yellowstone meadows, when we see gray whales migrating to Alaska each spring, we’re seeing the planet restored. Our goal for the atmosphere should be the same.

Do you think that we’re at the point where we need not only to reduce emissions but also to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere?

For years, I viewed greenhouse gas removal or negative-emission technologies as a distraction. They can be used to delay activity and mitigation today if we think, “Oh, don’t worry, we’ll just pull them out of the air tomorrow, or next century.”

Related: Left Wanting Better Data

But we have gone so long without cutting emissions that we now need both. Mitigation first, always. And we’re going to need to pull some greenhouse gases out of the air, I believe, to keep a habitable planet.

But realistically, it may not be possible. Why should we expect people to spend trillions of dollars to pull carbon dioxide out of the air in the next decade or in the next generation when we weren’t willing to spend billions of dollars to keep it out of the air today?

What can individuals do?

Transportation and our homes are what we most control.

Electric vehicles will ultimately win out over gas combustion because they’re faster and better and require less maintenance. That transition will take decades, though. The biggest source of emissions for most readers is probably flying . So flying less is something we can all do. The backdrop to that is that most of the people on Earth have never flown.

We can also control whether we use gas or electricity at home. I spent the last decade documenting the climate and health benefits of moving from gas to electric appliances. Our stoves emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas; benzene, a carcinogen; and nitrogen oxide gases, which are an asthma trigger.

Why have you shifted your research focus to methane in recent years?

Methane has warming superpowers . It’s more potent than carbon dioxide, and shorter lived. If we stopped emitting methane today with a magic wand, the atmosphere would return to normal within 10 or 20 years. We would save half a degree Celsius of warming by doing so. There’s no other lever we can pull to have so much influence on the climate in the short term.

If we stop emitting carbon dioxide today, there would still be a trillion extra tons of it in the air a century or 1,000 years from now. Restoring the atmosphere for carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide is something I will never see. But I do dream of seeing it for methane.

In the book you discuss how the level of consumption in the US drives our outsize carbon emissions. Is climate change primarily a technology problem, or do we need to consume less?

Yeah, it’s a question that isn’t asked often enough. I tell students I don’t believe we can build our way out of climate change. We do need technological solutions. But we have to use less, certainly in the richest countries like the US. We have almost a car per person in the US. If everyone on Earth owned a car, there would be 7 billion cars. I don’t care whether they’re EVs or hydrogen cars, the world would not be better off with 5 or 6 billion more vehicles.

It’s easier to talk about the next green technology than it is to say, “What if we just didn’t build that?” If we took one coal or gas power plant offline, it would keep far more carbon dioxide from the air than all the direct-air-capture capacity that’s ever been built.

Related: Reasons ForReplacing Fossil Fuels

You start one of the chapters in your book with the question, “What would you do if you thought we were in danger of ending civilization on Earth?” Do you think we are in danger of that?

Unchecked, I think we are. But on the other hand, air pollution and toxics in the US are a lot better than when I was a kid.

The elimination of lead in gasoline has saved billions of dollars and countless lives. We do act sometimes when the evidence is clear enough and interest groups don’t get in the way.

Katherine Bourzac is a freelance writer based in San Francisco who covers climate change, chemistry, and the environment. A version of this story first appeared in ACS Central Science : cenm.ag/robjackson .

You might also like...

Sign up for C&EN's must-read weekly newsletter

Contact us to opt out anytime

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Linkedin
• Share on Reddit

This article has been sent to the following recipient:

Join the conversation

Contact the reporter

Submit a Letter to the Editor for publication

Engage with us on Twitter

The power is now in your (nitrile gloved) hands

Sign up for a free account to get more articles. or choose the acs option that’s right for you..

Already have an ACS ID? Log in

Create a free account To read 6 articles each month from

Join acs to get even more access to.

The Influence of Climate Change on Extreme Environmental Events

Climate change affects global temperature and precipitation patterns. These effects, in turn, influence the intensity and, in some cases, the frequency of extreme environmental events, such as forest fires, hurricanes, heat waves, floods, droughts, and storms.

Climatology, Earth Science, Ecology

Boise National Forest Fire

Research shows human-caused climate change has worsened the risk of extreme weather events like the wildfires of the western United States, such as this forest fire in the Boise National Forest, Idaho.

Photograph by David R. Frazier Photolibrary, Inc./Science Source

Climate change caused by the emission of greenhouse gases from human activities affects global temperature and precipitation . Records from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicate that the global average temperature has increased by at least 0.4 degrees Celsius (0.72 degrees Fahrenheit) since the 1970s, and that by 2100, it could increase to around 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial temperatures. While the global effects of climate change may seem too small to be noticed by people living around the world, we have already experienced the effects of climate change through severe weather events, including forest fires, hurricanes , droughts , heat waves, floods, and storms. Computer modelling of real data has shown that the frequency and intensity of these events are influenced by climate change. There is a distinction that needs to be made when it comes to the relationship between climate change and extreme environmental events: Climate change has not been proven to directly cause individual extreme environmental events, but it has been shown to make these events more destructive, and likely happen more frequently,than they normally would be. This drastic change is due to the increase in greenhouse gas emissions—primarily through the burning of fossil fuels for transportation, heat, and electricity—in the past 150 years. Greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, trap heat within Earth’s atmosphere, making the planet warmer. A warmer atmosphere affects the water cycle because warmer air can hold more water vapor . In fact, the air’s capacity to hold water vapor increases by 7 percent with an increase in temperature of 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit). This, along with warmer ocean temperatures, leads to heavier precipitation. Heavy precipitation can cause problems like flooding and landslides —where large amounts of soil or rock slide down a slope. An increase in intense precipitation comes with an increase in intense dry periods as well. Essentially, climate change causes wet places to become wetter and dry places to become drier by altering large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns. Warmer temperatures on land lead to reduced snowpack , earlier snowmelt , and evaporation of water from freshwater bodies. Extreme heat can lead to more frequent, severe, and prolonged heat waves and droughts and can make forest fires worse. On top of that, wildfires are harder to put out when air temperature is high and soil moisture is low. The number of heat waves, heavy rain events, and major hurricanes has increased in the United States. Hurricane Katrina of 2005 and Hurricane Sandy of 2012 are two of the most costly hurricanes in the history of the United States. The number of hurricanes that have occurred over recent years has not been linked to climate change, but their intensity has. The wind speed of tropical storms is increased by warmer sea-surface temperatures; by the end of the century, scientists predict maximum wind speed will increase by 2–11 percent. Coastal cities that are vulnerable to hurricanes will also be impacted by the sea level rise of around 0.3–1.2 meters (0.98–3.94 feet) in the next century, which will worsen coastal storms and flooding. Without preparing for climate change–induced environmental hazards , an increasing number of people worldwide will lose their homes and be forced into poverty. An average of around 22.5 million people have been displaced per year by climate or weather-related events since 2008. One way to prepare for extreme environmental events is by using current and past data and records to create computer models that show the frequency and intensity of these events. These models can also be used to predict when and where future events will occur and how destructive they will be. With this information, we can prepare for extreme weather events by warning people living in high-risk areas and sending disaster relief . The impact of climate change can also be observed in models by simulating the effects of different concentrations of greenhouse gases on variables, such as wind, rainfall, temperature, and air pressure. Past models used to prove that there is a relationship between climate change and extreme environmental events were not always reliable. This was due to a lack of data as well as flaws in climate models at the time. However, climate models have become more reliable, and a new field of science has developed to determine how climate change directly impacts extreme weather events: extreme event attribution. Since 2004, scientists have published more than 170 studies on the role of human-induced climate change on 190 extreme weather events. Research has found that climate change has increased the risk of wildfires in the western United States, extreme rainfall in China, and drought in South Africa. Continuous research and improvement in the field of extreme event attribution may help us figure out more precisely how climate change impacts extreme weather events–and how we might change this course.

Media Credits

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Production Managers

Program specialists, last updated.

October 19, 2023

User Permissions

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service .

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

Related Resources

Frontiers for Young Minds

• Download PDF

Impacts of Climate Change

Climate change is already affecting the environment and people around the world. We have seen changes in the air, in water, and in plants and animals. These impacts include things like warmer temperatures, sea-level rise, heavy rainfall and more intense storms. Hundreds of plants and animals on the land and in the ocean have been lost because of very hot temperatures. Climate change has also made it more difficult for many people to access food or water, and has caused some people to lose their ways of earning a living. Unfortunately, people who have contributed the least to climate change are experiencing the worst effects. This shows that the effects of climate change are not fair and that there are uneven impacts on different people and places. It is important for us to understand the impacts of climate change on the environment and people so that we can find ways to solve these problems.

Climate Change Has Many Impacts

Climate change is already affecting the environment and people around the world. This article explores some of the many impacts of climate change, including warming air and oceans; melting ice; disruptions to plants, animals, and ecosystems; and negative impacts on people’s health and the ways that people earn a living. However, while climate change is having impacts all over the world, it is important to recognize that the causes and consequences of climate change are not evenly distributed. People in places that have contributed the least to climate change are often the most negatively impacted.

While there are many impacts of climate change, as seen in Figure 1 , there are also many solutions that are available to reduce these impacts and to stop climate change from getting worse. It is really important to understand the impacts of climate change, to persuade governments and people of the need to act straight away to reduce these impacts.

• Climate change has widespread impacts.

Impacts on the Environment

Climate change has already caused widespread changes to the environment, and these changes are happening quickly . Human activities are responsible for releasing greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. These greenhouse gases have resulted in an increase in the global surface temperature, which is the average temperature of the world over both the ocean and land. In the years 2011–2020, global surface temperature was around 1.1°C higher than it was in the years 1850–1900 [ 1 ]. Since 1970, global surface temperature has increased faster than in any other 50-year period over at least the last 2,000 years. This is a really fast change to global surface temperature and something that we have not seen in the past!

The increase in the global surface temperature is absolutely due to the actions of people. However, different regions of the world have contributed more or less to the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing global warming. Historically, North America, Europe, and Eastern Asia have contributed the largest amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. These regions have contributed over half of the greenhouse gases that are causing climate change. However, as you will see in the following sections, regions that have historically contributed the least to climate change are experiencing the worst impacts.

The higher global surface temperature has resulted in many weather and climate extremes being affected. For instance, heatwaves are happening more often and are more intense than they have been in the past. Since the 1950s, most regions of the world have seen an increase in heatwaves that are due to human-caused climate change. On the other hand, cold extremes, including cold waves, have become less frequent and less severe. So, overall, we are experiencing more hot extremes than cold extremes.

Since 1950, heavy precipitation events, such as heavy rainfall, have also increased—both in how often they are happening and how intense they are. Droughts , which are long periods of unusually dry weather with not enough rain, are also happening more often. We also see an increase in the percentage of very strong tropical cyclones , which are also called hurricanes or typhoons in certain parts of the world.

Climate change is also causing impacts in the ocean. Marine heatwaves, which is when the water becomes much hotter than usual, are becoming much more common [ 2 ]. Since the 1980s, there has been about a 50% increase in these very hot ocean conditions. Sea levels are also rising. Global mean sea level increased by 0.20 m between 1901 and 2018. On average, sea level rose 1.3 mm every year between 1901 and 1971. This increased to 1.9 mm every year between 1971 and 2006. Sea levels then further increased by 3.7 mm every year between 2006 and 2018. Human influence was very likely the main driver of these increases since at least 1971. So, we are seeing sea levels rising faster than we have experienced in the past.

Impacts on Nature

Climate change is also causing loss of biodiversity and damaging Earth’s ecosystems. Large numbers of plants and animals have died because of the increasing temperatures. As a result, hundreds of species in numerous areas, both on land and in the ocean, have been lost [ 3 ] (For more information on how organisms respond to climate change, see this article ).

As temperatures increase, organisms move their living areas to environments that suit them better. Due to warmer temperatures, about half of the species that have been studied have moved toward the north and south poles, to higher elevations, or to deeper waters where it is cooler. Warmer temperatures have also led many plants and animals to change the times when they perform important activities, such as flowering, migrating, and reproducing.

Glaciers are getting smaller and ecosystems in mountains and in the Arctic are being affected by the thawing of permafrost —land that was once permanently frozen. We have seen land become too dry to support life (called desertification) and we have also seen the loss of land (called land degradation). These processes are the worst in low-lying coastal areas, river deltas, drylands, and areas with permafrost. Nearly half of the world’s coastal wetlands have been lost in the last 100 years, due in part to climate change.

Impacts on Food and Water

These changes to the environment and to nature have had many impacts on people and societies. Increasing weather and climate extremes have caused millions of people to not have enough food to meet their basic needs. In areas with warmer temperatures, climate change is having negative impacts on farming. Some farmers cannot grow as much food as they could before. Changes to the ocean have negatively impacted fisheries . In some places, fishers are catching fewer fish than they used to. These impacts on farming and fisheries have contributed to the decreased food supply experienced by some people. Climate change also negatively impacts water availability. For at least some part of the year, about half of the world’s population does not have access to enough water.

These impacts on food and water availability are most severe in places and communities that have historically contributed the least to climate change. These are regions such as Africa, Asia, Central and South America, and other countries that are the least developed, including small islands and the Arctic. Across the globe, we also see more severe impacts affecting Indigenous peoples, small-scale food producers, and low-income households.

Impacts on Human Health And Life

Climate change has also negatively affected human health and life. Between 2010 and 2020, deaths from floods, droughts, and storms were 15 times higher in highly vulnerable regions compared to regions with very low vulnerability. Regions that are highly vulnerable are also those that have historically contributed the least to climate change. Around the world, we see that extreme heat events have resulted in deaths and negative impacts on people’s health. Diseases including Lyme disease, malaria, and dengue have increased. Food safety has also been negatively impacted, with an increase in infections such as salmonella and an increase in toxins that are associated with cancer.

Climate change has also contributed to malnutrition, particularly for women, pregnant women, children, low-income households, Indigenous peoples, and minority groups. Mental health is also being affected. We see that people who have been exposed to disasters are experiencing trauma and distress. People, and particularly young people, are also experiencing mental health challenges when thinking about or anticipating the impacts of climate change. This shows why it is so important to learn not only about the impacts of climate change, but also about the solutions that can help to solve these problems!

Impacts on Economies And Cultures

Climate change is also causing negative impacts on important parts of the economy , such as agriculture, forestry, fishery, energy, and tourism. Buildings, roads, and other types of infrastructure are being damaged or destroyed by floods and storms. This has resulted in high costs to repair or replace them. People are finding that their livelihoods, or ways of making a living, are being negatively affected due to impacts on farming, health, and even the destruction of their homes.

There are also impacts on people’s culture due to climate change. In some cases, people have been forced to move because of climate change impacts. As you may imagine, being forced to move from their homes has had negative effects on people’s sense of belonging to a particular place. For example, Indigenous peoples in coastal Alaska and in villages in the Solomon Islands and Fiji who have had to move because of climate change have experienced emotional distress and the loss of cultural and spiritual bonds to their homes.

To sum it up, climate change is causing negative impacts all over the world. The air and oceans are getting hotter, and it is changing where animals and plants live. Warming temperatures are making people sick and affecting how they make a living, and warming is also causing plants, animals, and people to die. The impacts of climate change are not fair because the people who did the least to cause it are suffering the most.

But there is hope! There are lots of ways we can stop climate change from getting worse. We need to understand how big the problem is so that everyone, from governments down to regular people, can work together to fix it fast. It is super important for all of us to join hands and take strong actions to fight against climate change.

Greenhouse Gases : ↑ Gases in the atmosphere which can absorb heat and cause the planet to warm up. These occur naturally, such as carbon dioxide and water vapor, but human activity is putting more greenhouse gases into the air leading to the planet getting warmer.

Weather and Climate Extremes : ↑ When the weather or climate is doing something very different from normal, such as very hot temperatures or very intense storms.

Drought : ↑ When there is not enough rain for a long time, causing the ground to dry up and making it hard for people, plants, and animals to get the water they need.

Tropical Cyclones : ↑ A big, spinning storm that forms over warm ocean waters. It has strong winds and lots of rain and can cause flooding and damage when it moves over land.

Biodiversity : ↑ The variety of all life on Earth, including plants, animals, and the ecosystems that they live in.

Permafrost : ↑ Ground that stays frozen all year round, even in the summer. It is found in very cold places like the Arctic.

Fisheries : ↑ Places where people catch fish and other sea animals for food. They can be in the ocean, lakes, or rivers.

Economy : ↑ How money and resources are made, used, and shared in a place. It includes jobs, businesses, and trade.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We thank the IPCC for providing the source material that we have simplified for this audience of young minds. We thank the Young Reviewers that have helped to make this article more interesting, including Alissar and Shanmukh. Alissar is not only dedicated to her academic pursuits but also actively involved in various volunteer activities, aiming at serving and enhancing the needs of the Syrian society. And Shanmukh is strongly interested in math and science and hopes to pursue a career in data science.

[1] ↑ IPCC 2023. “Summary for policymakers”, in Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , eds. Core Writing Team, H. Lee, and J. Romero. Geneva: IPCC, 1–34. doi: 10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647.001

[2] ↑ IPCC 2019. “Summary for policymakers”, in IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate , eds. H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, M. Tignor, E. Poloczanska, et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3–35. doi: 10.1017/9781009157964.001

[3] ↑ IPCC 2022. “Technical summary”, in Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , eds. H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E. S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 37–118. doi: 10.1017/9781009325844.002

Science News

Abdulhamid Hosbas/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Century of Science: Theme

Our climate change crisis

The climate change emergency.

Even in a world increasingly battered by weather extremes, the summer 2021 heat wave in the Pacific Northwest stood out. For several days in late June, cities such as Vancouver, Portland and Seattle baked in record temperatures that killed hundreds of people. On June 29 Lytton, a village in British Columbia, set an all-time heat record for Canada, at 121° Fahrenheit (49.6° Celsius); the next day, the village was incinerated by a wildfire.

Within a week, an international group of scientists had analyzed this extreme heat and concluded it would have been virtually impossible without climate change caused by humans. The planet’s average surface temperature has risen by at least 1.1 degree Celsius since preindustrial levels of 1850–1900 — because people are loading the atmosphere with heat-trapping gases produced during the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and gas, and from cutting down forests.

A little over 1 degree of warming may not sound like a lot. But it has already been enough to fundamentally transform how energy flows around the planet. The pace of change is accelerating, and the consequences are everywhere. Ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting, raising sea levels and flooding low-lying island nations and coastal cities. Drought is parching farmlands and the rivers that feed them. Wildfires are raging. Rains are becoming more intense, and weather patterns are shifting .

The roots of understanding this climate emergency trace back more than a century and a half. But it wasn’t until the 1950s that scientists began the detailed measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide that would prove how much carbon is pouring from human activities. Beginning in the 1960s, researchers began developing comprehensive computer models that now illuminate the severity of the changes ahead.

Global average temperature change, 1850–2021

Long-term climate datasets show that Earth’s average surface temperature (combined land and ocean) has increased by more than 1 degree Celsius since preindustrial times. Temperature change is the difference from the 1850–1900 average.

Today we know that climate change and its consequences are real, and we are responsible. The emissions that people have been putting into the air for centuries — the emissions that made long-distance travel, economic growth and our material lives possible — have put us squarely on a warming trajectory . Only drastic cuts in carbon emissions, backed by collective global will, can make a significant difference.

“What’s happening to the planet is not routine,” says Ralph Keeling, a geochemist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif. “We’re in a planetary crisis.” — Alexandra Witze

Tracking a Greenland glacier

The calving front of Greenland’s Helheim Glacier, which flows toward the sea where it crumbles into icebergs, held roughly the same position from the 1970s until 2001 (left, the calving front is to the far right of the image). But by 2005 (right), it had retreated 7.5 kilometers toward its source. 

The first climate scientists

One day in the 1850s, Eunice Newton Foote, an amateur scientist and women’s rights activist living in upstate New York, put two glass jars in sunlight. One contained regular air — a mix of nitrogen, oxygen and other gases including carbon dioxide — while the other contained just CO 2 . Both had thermometers in them. As the sun’s rays beat down, Foote observed that the jar of CO 2 alone heated more quickly, and was slower to cool, than the one containing plain air.

The results prompted Foote to muse on the relationship between CO 2 , the planet and heat. “An atmosphere of that gas would give to our earth a high temperature,” she wrote in an 1856 paper summarizing her findings .

Three years later, working independently and apparently unaware of Foote’s discovery, Irish physicist John Tyndall showed the same basic idea in more detail. With a set of pipes and devices to study the transmission of heat, he found that CO 2 gas, as well as water vapor, absorbed more heat than air alone. He argued that such gases would trap heat in Earth’s atmosphere, much as panes of glass trap heat in a greenhouse, and thus modulate climate. “As a dam built across a river causes a local deepening of the stream, so our atmosphere, thrown as a barrier across the terrestrial rays, produces a local heightening of the temperature at the Earth’s surface,” he wrote in 1862.

Today Tyndall is widely credited with the discovery of how what are now called greenhouse gases heat the planet, earning him a prominent place in the history of climate science. Foote faded into relative obscurity — partly because of her gender, partly because her measurements were less sensitive. Yet their findings helped kick off broader scientific exploration of how the composition of gases in Earth’s atmosphere affects global temperatures.

Carbon floods in

Humans began substantially affecting the atmosphere around the turn of the 19th century, when the Industrial Revolution took off in Britain. Factories burned tons of coal; fueled by fossil fuels, the steam engine revolutionized transportation and other industries. In the decades since, fossil fuels including oil and natural gas have been harnessed to drive a global economy. All these activities belch gases into the air.

Yet Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish physical chemist, wasn’t worried about the Industrial Revolution when he began thinking in the late 1800s about changes in atmospheric CO 2 levels. He was instead curious about ice ages — including whether a decrease in volcanic eruptions, which can put CO 2 into the atmosphere, would lead to a future ice age. Bored and lonely in the wake of a divorce, Arrhenius set himself to months of laborious calculations involving moisture and heat transport in the atmosphere at different zones of latitude. In 1896 he reported that halving the amount of CO 2 in the atmosphere could indeed bring about an ice age — and that doubling CO 2 would raise global temperatures by around 5 to 6 degrees C.

It was a remarkably prescient finding for work that, out of necessity, had simplified Earth’s complex climate system down to just a few variables. Today, estimates for how much the planet will warm through a doubling of CO 2 — a measure known as climate sensitivity — range between 1.5 degrees and 4.5 degrees Celsius. (The range remains broad in part because scientists now incorporate their understanding of many more planetary feedbacks than were recognized in Arrhenius’ day.)  

But Arrhenius’ findings didn’t gain much traction with other scientists at the time. The climate system seemed too large, complex and inert to change in any meaningful way on a timescale that would be relevant to human society. Geologic evidence showed, for instance, that ice ages took thousands of years to start and end. What was there to worry about? And other laboratory experiments — later shown to be flawed — appeared to indicate that changing levels of CO 2 would have little impact on heat absorption in the atmosphere. Most scientists aware of the work came to believe that Arrhenius had been proved wrong.

One researcher, though, thought the idea was worth pursuing. Guy Stewart Callendar, a British engineer and amateur meteorologist, had tallied weather records over time, obsessively enough to determine that average temperatures were increasing at 147 weather stations around the globe. In 1938, in a paper in a Royal Meteorological Society journal , he linked this temperature rise to the burning of fossil fuels. Callendar estimated that fossil fuel burning had put around 150 billion metric tons of CO 2 into the atmosphere since the late 19th century.

Like many of his day, Callendar didn’t see global warming as a problem. Extra CO 2 would surely stimulate plants to grow and allow crops to be farmed in new regions. “In any case the return of the deadly glaciers should be delayed indefinitely,” he wrote. But his work revived discussions tracing back to Tyndall and Arrhenius about how the planetary system responds to changing levels of gases in the atmosphere. And it began steering the conversation toward how human activities might drive those changes.

When World War II broke out the following year, the global conflict redrew the landscape for scientific research. Hugely important wartime technologies, such as radar and the atomic bomb, set the stage for “big science” studies that brought nations together to tackle high-stakes questions of global reach. And that allowed modern climate science to emerge.

The Keeling curve and climate change

One major postwar effort was the International Geophysical Year, an 18-month push in 1957–1958 that involved a wide array of scientific field campaigns including exploration in the Arctic and Antarctica. Climate change wasn’t a high research priority during the IGY, but some scientists in California, led by Roger Revelle of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, used the funding influx to begin a project they’d long wanted to do. The goal was to measure CO 2 levels at different locations around the world, accurately and consistently.

The job fell to geochemist Charles David Keeling, who put ultraprecise CO 2 monitors in Antarctica and on the Hawaiian volcano of Mauna Loa. Funds soon ran out to maintain the Antarctic record, but the Mauna Loa measurements continued. Thus was born one of the most iconic datasets in all of science — the “Keeling curve,” which tracks the rise of atmospheric CO 2 . When Keeling began his measurements in 1958, CO 2 made up 315 parts per million of the global atmosphere. Within just a few years it became clear that the number was increasing year by year. Because plants take up CO 2 as they grow in spring and summer and release it as they decompose in fall and winter, CO 2 concentrations rose and fell each year in a sawtooth pattern — but superimposed on that pattern was a steady march upward.  

Monthly average CO 2 concentrations at Mauna Loa Observatory

Atmospheric carbon dioxide measurements collected continuously since 1958 at Mauna Loa volcano in Hawaii show the rise due to human activities. The visible sawtooth pattern is due to seasonal plant growth: Plants take up CO 2 in the growing seasons, then release it as they decompose in fall and winter.

“The graph got flashed all over the place — it was just such a striking image,” says Ralph Keeling, who is Charles David Keeling’s son. Over the years, as the curve marched higher, “it had a really important role historically in waking people up to the problem of climate change.” The Keeling curve has been featured in countless earth science textbooks, congressional hearings and in Al Gore’s 2006 documentary on climate change, An Inconvenient Truth . Each year the curve keeps going up: In 2016 it passed 400 ppm of CO 2 in the atmosphere, as measured during its typical annual minimum in September. In 2021, the annual minimum was 413 ppm. (Before the Industrial Revolution, CO 2 levels in the atmosphere had been stable for centuries at around 280 ppm.)

Around the time that Keeling’s measurements were kicking off, Revelle also helped develop an important argument that the CO 2 from human activities was building up in Earth’s atmosphere. In 1957 he and Hans Suess, also at Scripps at the time, published a paper that traced the flow of radioactive carbon through the oceans and the atmosphere. They showed that the oceans were not capable of taking up as much CO 2 as previously thought; the implication was that much of the gas must be going into the atmosphere instead. “Human beings are now carrying out a large-scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future,” Revelle and Suess wrote in the paper. It’s one of the most famous sentences in earth science history.

“Human beings are now carrying out a large-scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future.”

Here was the insight underlying modern climate science: Atmosheric CO 2 is increasing, and humans are causing the buildup. Revelle and Suess became the final piece in a puzzle dating back to Svante Arrhenius and John Tyndall.

“I tell my students that to understand the basics of climate change, you need to have the cutting-edge science of the 1860s, the cutting-edge math of the 1890s and the cutting-edge chemistry of the 1950s,” says Joshua Howe, an environmental historian at Reed College in Portland, Ore.

Environmental awareness grows

As this scientific picture began to emerge in the late 1950s, Science News was on the story. A March 1, 1958 article in Science News Letter , “Weather May Be Warming,” described a warm winter month in the Northern Hemisphere. It posits three theories, including that “carbon dioxide poured into the atmosphere by a booming industrial civilization could have caused the increase. By burning up about 100 billion tons of coal and oil since 1900, man himself may be changing the climate.” By 1972, the magazine was reporting on efforts to expand global atmospheric greenhouse gas monitoring beyond Keeling’s work; two years later, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration launched its own CO 2 monitoring network, now the biggest in the world.

Environmental awareness on other issues grew in the 1960s and 1970s. Rachel Carson catalyzed the modern U.S. environmental movement in 1962 when she published a magazine series and then a book, Silent Spring , condemning the pesticide DDT for its ecological impacts. 1970 saw the celebration of the first Earth Day , in the United States and elsewhere, and in India in 1973 a group of women led a series of widely publicized protests against deforestation. This Chipko movement explicitly linked environmental protection with protecting human communities, and helped seed other environmental movements.

The fragility of global energy supplies was also becoming more obvious through the 1970s. The United States, heavily dependent on other countries for oil imports, entered a gas shortage in 1973–74 when Arab members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries cut off oil supplies because of U.S. government support for Israel. The shortage prompted more people to think about the finiteness of natural resources and the possibility of overtaxing the planet. — Alexandra Witze

Climate change evidence piles up

Observational data collected throughout the second half of the 20th century helped researchers gradually build their understanding of how human activities were transforming the planet. “It was a sort of slow accretion of evidence and concern,” says historian Joshua Howe of Reed College.

Environmental records from the past, such as tree rings and ice cores, established that the current changes in climate are unusual compared with the recent past. Yet such paleoclimatology data also showed that climate has changed quickly in the deep past — driven by triggers other than human activity, but with lessons for how abrupt planetary transformations can be.

Ice cores pulled from ice sheets, such as that atop Greenland, offer some of the most telling insights for understanding past climate change. Each year snow falls atop the ice and compresses into a fresh layer of ice representing climate conditions at the time it formed. The abundance of certain forms, or isotopes, of oxygen and hydrogen in the ice allows scientists to calculate the temperature at which it formed, and air bubbles trapped within the ice reveal how much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases were in the atmosphere at that time. So drilling down into an ice sheet is like reading the pages of a history book that go back in time the deeper you go.

Scientists began reading these pages in the early 1960s, using ice cores drilled at a U.S. military base in northwest Greenland . Contrary to expectations that past climates were stable, the cores hinted that abrupt climate shifts had happened over the last 100,000 years. By 1979, an international group of researchers was pulling another deep ice core from a second location in Greenland — and it, too, showed that abrupt climate change had occurred in the past. In the late 1980s and early 1990s a pair of European- and U.S.-led drilling projects retrieved even deeper cores from near the top of the ice sheet, pushing the record of past temperatures back a quarter of a million years.

Together with other sources of information, such as sediment cores drilled from the seafloor and molecules preserved in ancient rocks, the ice cores allowed scientists to reconstruct past temperature changes in extraordinary detail. Many of those changes happened alarmingly fast. For instance, the climate in Greenland warmed abruptly more than 20 times in the last 80,000 years, with the changes occurring in a matter of decades. More recently, a cold spell that set in around 13,000 years ago suddenly came to an end around 11,500 years ago — and temperatures in Greenland rose 10 degrees Celsius in a decade.

Evidence for such dramatic climate shifts laid to rest any lingering ideas that global climate change would be slow and unlikely to occur on a timescale that humans should worry about. “It’s an important reminder of how ‘tippy’ things can be,” says Jessica Tierney, a paleoclimatologist at the University of Arizona in Tucson.

More evidence of global change came from Earth-observing satellites, which brought a new planet-wide perspective on global warming beginning in the 1960s. From their viewpoint in the sky, satellites have measured the steady rise in global sea level — currently 3.4 millimeters per year and accelerating, as warming water expands and as ice sheets melt — as well as the rapid decline in ice left floating on the Arctic Ocean each summer at the end of the melt season. Gravity-sensing satellites have ‘weighed’ the Antarctic and Greenlandic ice sheets from above since 2002, reporting that more than 400 billion metric tons of ice are lost each year.

Temperature observations taken at weather stations around the world also confirm that we are living in the hottest years on record. The 10 warmest years since record keeping began in 1880 have all occurred since 2005. And nine of those 10 have come since 2010.

What’s more, extreme weather is hammering the planet more and more frequently. That 2021 heat wave in the Pacific Northwest, for instance, is just a harbinger of what’s to come. — Alexandra Witze

Worrisome predictions from climate models

By the 1960s, there was no denying that the planet was warming. But understanding the consequences of those changes — including the threat to human health and well-being — would require more than observational data. Looking to the future depended on computer simulations: complex calculations of how energy flows through the planetary system. Such models of the climate system have been crucial to developing projections for what we can expect from greenhouse warming.

A first step in building climate models was to connect everyday observations of weather to the concept of forecasting future climate. During World War I, the British mathematician Lewis Fry Richardson imagined tens of thousands of meteorologists working to forecast the weather, each calculating conditions for a small part of the atmosphere but collectively piecing together a global forecast. Richardson published his work in 1922, to reviews that called the idea “of almost quixotic boldness.”

But it wasn’t until after World War II that computational power turned Richardson’s dream into reality. In the wake of the Allied victory, which relied on accurate weather forecasts for everything from planning D-Day to figuring out when and where to drop the atomic bombs, leading U.S. mathematicians acquired funding from the federal government to improve predictions. In 1950 a team led by Jule Charney, a meteorologist at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., used the ENIAC, the first general-purpose, programmable electronic computer, to produce the first computer-driven regional weather forecast . The forecasting was slow and rudimentary, but it built on Richardson’s ideas of dividing the atmosphere into squares, or cells, and computing the weather for each of those. With the obscure title “Numerical integration of the barotropic vorticity equation,” the paper reporting the results set the stage for decades of climate modeling to follow.

By 1956 Norman Phillips, a member of Charney’s team, had produced the world’s first general circulation model, which captured how energy flows between the oceans, atmosphere and land. Phillips ran the calculations on a computer with just 5 kilobytes of memory, yet it was able to reproduce monthly and seasonal patterns in the lower atmosphere. That meant scientists could begin developing more realistic models of how the planet responds to factors such as increasing levels of greenhouse gases. The field of climate modeling was born.

The work was basic at first, because early computers simply didn’t have much computational power to simulate all aspects of the planetary system. “People thought that it was stupid to try to study this greenhouse-warming issue by three-dimensional model[s], because it cost so much computer time,” meteorologist Syukuro Manabe told physics historian Spencer Weart in a 1989 oral history .

Climate models have predicted how much ice the Ilulissat region of the Greenland ice sheet might lose by 2300 based on different scenarios for greenhouse gas emissions. The models are compared to 2008 (first image). In a best-case scenario, in which emissions peak by mid-century, the speed at which the glacier is sending ice out into the ocean is much lower (second image) than with a worst-case scenario, in which emissions rise at a high rate (third image).

An important breakthrough came in 1967, when Manabe and Richard Wetherald — both at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, a lab born from Charney’s group — published a paper in the Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences that modeled connections between Earth’s surface and atmosphere and calculated how changes in carbon dioxide would affect the planet’s temperature. Manabe and Wetherald were the first to build a computer model that captured the relevant processes that drive climate , and to accurately simulate how the Earth responds to those processes. (Manabe shared the 2021 Nobel Prize in physics for his work on climate modeling; Wetherald died in 2011.)

The rise of climate modeling allowed scientists to more accurately envision the impacts of global warming. In 1979, Charney and other experts met in Woods Hole, Mass., to try to put together a scientific consensus on what increasing levels of CO 2 would mean for the planet. They analyzed climate models from Manabe and from James Hansen of NASA. The resulting “Charney report” concluded that rising CO 2 in the atmosphere would lead to additional and significant climate change. The ocean might take up much of that heat, the scientists wrote — but “it appears that the warming will eventually occur, and the associated regional climatic changes so important to the assessment of socioeconomic consequence may well be significant.”

In the decades since, climate modeling has gotten increasingly sophisticated . Scientists have drawn up a variety of scenarios for how carbon emissions might change in the future, depending on the stringency of emissions cuts. Modelers use those scenarios to project how climate and weather will change around the globe, from hotter croplands in China to melting glaciers in the Himalayas. Climate simulations have also allowed researchers to identify the fingerprints of human impacts on extreme weather that is already happening, by comparing scenarios that include the influence of human activities with those that do not.

And as climate science firmed up and the most dramatic consequences became clear, the political battles raged. — Alexandra Witze

Climate science meets politics

With the development of climate science tracing back to the early Cold War, perhaps it shouldn’t be a surprise that the science of global warming became enmeshed in broader societal and political battles. A complex stew of political, national and business interests mired society in debates about the reality of climate change, and what to do about it, decades after the science became clear that humans are fundamentally altering the planet’s atmosphere.

Society has pulled itself together before to deal with global environmental problems, such as the Antarctic ozone hole. In 1974 chemists Mario Molina and F. Sherwood Rowland, both of the University of California, Irvine, reported that chlorofluorocarbon chemicals, used in products such as spray cans and refrigerants, caused a chain of reactions that gnawed away at the atmosphere’s protective ozone layer . The resulting ozone hole, which forms over Antarctica every spring, allows more ultraviolet radiation from the sun to make it through Earth’s atmosphere and reach the surface, where it can cause skin cancer and eye damage.

Governments ultimately worked under the auspices of the United Nations to craft the 1987 Montreal Protocol, which strictly limited the manufacture of chlorofluorocarbons . In the years following, the ozone hole began to heal. But fighting climate change would prove to be far more challenging. Chlorofluorocarbons were a suite of chemicals with relatively limited use and for which replacements could be found without too much trouble. But the greenhouse gases that cause global warming stem from a wide variety of human activities, from energy development to deforestation. And transforming entire energy sectors to reduce or eliminate carbon emissions is much more difficult than replacing a set of industrial chemicals.

In 1980, though, researchers took an important step toward banding together to synthesize the scientific understanding of climate change and bring it to the attention of international policy makers. It started at a small scientific conference in Villach, Austria. There, experts met under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization, the International Council of Scientific Unions and the United Nations Environment Program to discuss the seriousness of climate change. On the train ride home from the meeting, Swedish meteorologist Bert Bolin talked with other participants about how a broader, deeper and more international analysis was needed. In 1985, a second conference was held at Villach to highlight the urgency, and in 1988, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC, was born. Bolin was its first chairperson.

The IPCC became a highly influential and unique body. It performs no original scientific research; instead, it synthesizes and summarizes the vast literature of climate science for policy makers to consider — primarily through massive reports issued every couple of years. The first IPCC report , in 1990, predicted that the planet’s global mean temperature would rise more quickly in the following century than at any point in the last 10,000 years, due to increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Successive IPCC reports showed more and more confidence in the link between greenhouse emissions and rising global temperatures — and explored how society might mitigate and adapt to coming changes.

IPCC reports have played a key role in providing scientific information for nations discussing how to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations. This process started with the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 , which resulted in the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. Annual U.N. meetings to tackle climate change led to the first international commitments to reduce emissions, the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. Under it, developed countries committed to reduce emissions of CO 2 and other greenhouse gases. By 2007 the IPCC declared that the reality of climate warming is “unequivocal ”; the group received the Nobel Peace Prize that year along with Al Gore for their work on climate change.

The IPCC process ensured that policy makers had the best science at hand when they came to the table to discuss cutting emissions. “If you go back and look at the original U.N. framework on climate change, already you see the core of the science represented there,” says Rachel Cleetus, a climate policy expert with the Union of Concerned Scientists in Cambridge, Mass. Of course, nations did not have to abide by that science — and they often didn’t.

Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, international climate meetings discussed less hard-core science and more issues of equity. Countries such as China and India pointed out that they needed energy to develop their economies, and that nations responsible for the bulk of emissions through history, such as the United States, needed to lead the way in cutting greenhouse gases. Meanwhile, residents of some of the most vulnerable nations, such as low-lying islands that are threatened by sea level rise, gained visibility and clout at international negotiating forums. “The issues around equity have always been very uniquely challenging in this collective action problem,” says Cleetus.

By 2015, the world’s nations had made some progress on the emissions cuts laid out in the Kyoto Protocol, but it was still not enough to achieve substantial global reductions. That year, a key U.N. climate conference in Paris produced an international agreement to try to limit global warming to 2 degrees C , and preferably 1.5 degrees C, above preindustrial levels.

Every country has its own approach to the challenge of addressing climate change. In the United States, which gets approximately 80 percent of its energy from fossil fuels, sophisticated efforts to downplay and critique the science led to major delays in climate action. For decades U.S. fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil worked to influence politicians to take as little action on emissions reductions as possible. Working with a small group of influential scientists, this well-funded, well-orchestrated campaign took many of its tactics from earlier tobacco-industry efforts to cast doubt on the links between smoking and cancer, as historians Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway documented in their book Merchants of Doubt.

Perhaps the peak of U.S. climate denialism came in the late 1980s and into the 1990s — roughly a century after Swedish physical chemist Svante Arrhenius laid out the consequences of putting too much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. In 1988 NASA scientist James Hansen testified to lawmakers about the consequences of global warming. “It is already happening now,” Hansen said, summarizing what scientists had long known.

The high-profile nature of Hansen’s testimony, combined with his NASA expertise, vaulted global warming into the public eye in the United States like never before. “It really hit home with a public who could understand that there are reasons that Venus is hot and Mars is cold,” says Joshua Howe, a historian at Reed College. “And that if you use that same reasoning, we have some concerns about what is happening here on Earth.” But Hansen also kicked off a series of bitter public battles about the reality of human-caused climate change that raged for years.        

One common approach of climate skeptics was to attack the environmental data and models that underlie climate science. In 1998, scientist Michael Mann, then at the University of Massachusetts–Amherst, and colleagues published a detailed temperature record that formed the basis of what came to be known as the “hockey stick” graph, so named because the chart showed a sharp rise in temperatures (the hockey blade) at the end of a long, much flatter period (the hockey stick). Skeptics soon demanded the data and software processing tools Mann used to create the graph. Bloggers and self-proclaimed citizen scientists created a cottage industry of questioning new climate science papers under the guise of “audits.” In 2009 hackers broke into a server at the University of East Anglia, a leading climate-research hub in Norwich, England, and released more than 1,000 e-mails between climate scientists. This “Climategate” scandal purported to reveal misconduct on the part of the researchers, but several reviews largely exonerated the scientists.  

The graph that launched climate skeptic attacks

This famous graph, produced by scientist Michael Mann and colleagues, and then reproduced in a 2001 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, dramatically captures temperature change over time. Climate change skeptics made it the center of an all-out attack on climate science.

Such tactics undoubtedly succeeded in feeding politicians’ delay on climate action in the United States, most of it from Republicans. President George W. Bush withdrew the country from the Kyoto Protocol in 2001 ; Donald Trump similarly rejected the Paris accord in 2017 . As late as 2015, the chair of the Senate’s environment committee, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, brought a snowball into Congress on a cold winter’s day in order to continue his argument that human-caused global warming is a “hoax.” In Australia, a similar mix of right-wing denialism and fossil fuel interests has kept climate change commitments in flux, as prime ministers are voted in and out over fierce debates about how the nation should act on climate.

Yet other nations have moved forward. Some European countries such as Germany aggressively pursued renewable energies, such as wind and solar, while activists such as the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg — the vanguard of a youth-action movement — pressured their governments for more.

In recent years the developing economies of China and India have taken center stage in discussions about climate action. Both nations argue that they must be allowed extra time to wean themselves off fossil fuels in order to continue economic growth. They note that historically speaking, the United States is the largest total emitter of carbon by far.

Total carbon dioxide emissions by country, 1850–2021

These 20 nations have emitted the largest cumulative amounts of carbon dioxide since 1850. Emissions are shown in in billions of metric tons and are broken down into subtotals from fossil fuel use and cement manufacturing (blue) as well as from land use and forestry (green).

China, whose annual CO 2 emissions surpassed those of the United States in 2006, declared several moderate steps in 2021 to reduce emissions, including that it would stop building coal-burning power plants overseas. India announced it would aim for net-zero emissions by 2070, the first time it has set a date for this goal.

Yet such pledges continue to be criticized. At the 2021 U.N. Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, Scotland, India was globally criticized for not committing to a complete phaseout of coal — although the two top emitters, China and the United States, have not themselves committed to phasing out coal. “There is no equity in this,” says Aayushi Awasthy, an energy economist at the University of East Anglia. — Alexandra Witze

Facing a warmer future

Climate change creeps up gradually on society, except when it doesn’t. The slow increase in sea level, for instance, causes waters to lap incrementally higher at shorelines year after year. But when a big storm comes along — which may be happening more frequently due to climate change — the consequences become much more obvious. Storm surge rapidly swamps communities and wreaks disproportionate havoc. That’s why New York City installed floodgates in its subway and tunnel system in the wake of 2012’s Superstorm Sandy , and why the Pacific island nation of Tuvalu has asked Australia and New Zealand to be prepared to take in refugees fleeing from rising sea levels.

The list of climate impacts goes on and on — and in many cases, changes are coming faster than scientists had envisioned a few decades ago. The oceans are becoming more acidic as they absorb carbon dioxide, harming tiny marine organisms that build protective calcium carbonate shells and are the base of the marine food web. Warmer waters are bleaching coral reefs. Higher temperatures are driving animal and plant species into areas in which they previously did not live, increasing the risk of extinction for many. “It’s no longer about impacts in the future,” says Rachel Cleetus, a climate policy expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “It’s about what’s happening in the U.S. here and now, and around the world.”

No place on the planet is unaffected. In many areas, higher temperatures have led to major droughts, which dry out vegetation and provide additional fuel for wildfires such as those that have devastated Australia , the Mediterranean and western North America in recent years. The Colorado River , the source of water for tens of millions of people in the western United States , came under a water-shortage alert in 2021 for the first time in history.

Then there’s the Arctic, where temperatures are rising at more than twice the global average and communities are at the forefront of change. Permafrost is thawing, destabilizing buildings, pipelines and roads. Caribou and reindeer herders worry about the increased risk of parasites to the health of their animals. With less sea ice available to buffer the coast from storm erosion, the Inupiat village of Shishmaref, Alaska, risks crumbling into the sea. It will need to move from its sand-barrier island to the mainland .

“We know these changes are happening and that the Titanic is sinking,” says Louise Farquharson, a geomorphologist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks who monitors permafrost and coastal change around Alaska. Like many Arctic scientists, she is working with Indigenous communities to understand the shifts they’re experiencing and what can be done when buildings start to slump and water supplies start to drain away. “A big part is just listening to community members and understanding what they’re seeing change,” she says.

All around the planet, those who depend on intact ecosystems for their survival face the greatest threat from climate change. And those with the least resources to adapt to climate change are the ones who feel it first .

“We are going to warm,” says Claudia Tebaldi, a climate scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California. “There is no question about it. The only thing that we can hope to do is to warm a little more slowly.”

That’s one reason why the IPCC report released in 2021 focuses on anticipated levels of global warming. There is a big difference between the planet warming 1.5 degrees versus 2 degrees or 2.5 degrees. Consider that we are now at least 1.1 degrees above preindustrial levels of CO 2 and are already seeing dramatic shifts in climate. Given that, keeping further global temperature increases as low as possible will make a big difference in the climate impacts the planet faces. “With every fraction of a degree of warming, everything gets a little more intense,” says paleoclimatologist Jessica Tierney. “There’s no more time to beat around the bush.”

Historical and projected global temperature change

Various scenarios for how greenhouse gas emissions might change going forward help scientists predict future climate change. This graph shows the simulated historical temperature trend along with future projections of global surface temperature based on five scenarios from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Temperature change is the difference from the 1850–1900 average.

The future rests on how much nations are willing to commit to cutting emissions and whether they will stick to those commitments. It’s a geopolitical balancing act the likes of which the world has never seen.

Science can and must play a role going forward. Improved climate models will illuminate what changes are expected at the regional scale, helping officials prepare. Governments and industry have crucial parts to play as well. They can invest in technologies, such as carbon sequestration, to help decarbonize the economy and shift society toward more renewable sources of energy. “We can solve these problems — most of the tools are already there,” says Cascade Tuholske, a geographer at Columbia University. “We just have to do it.”

Huge questions remain. Do voters have the will to demand significant energy transitions from their governments? How can business and military leaders play a bigger role in driving climate action? What should be the role of low-carbon energy sources that come with downsides, such as nuclear energy ? How can developing nations achieve a better standard of living for their people while not becoming big greenhouse gas emitters? How can we keep the most vulnerable from being disproportionately harmed during extreme events, and incorporate environmental and social justice into our future?

These questions become more pressing each year, as CO 2 accumulates in our atmosphere. The planet is now at higher levels of CO 2 than at any time in the last 3 million years. Yet Ralph Keeling, keeper of the iconic Mauna Loa record tracking the rise in atmospheric CO 2 , is already optimistically thinking about how scientists would be able to detect a slowdown, should the world actually start cutting emissions by a few percent per year. “That’s what the policy makers want to see — that there’s been some large-scale impact of what they did,” he says.

At the 2021 U.N. climate meeting in Glasgow diplomats from around the world agreed to work more urgently to shift away from using fossil fuels. They did not, however, adopt targets strict enough to keep the world below a warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. It’s been well over a century since Svante Arrhenius recognized the consequences of putting extra carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and yet world leaders have yet to pull together to avoid the most dangerous consequences of climate change.

Time is running out. — Alexandra Witze

Climate change facts

We know that climate change and its consequences are real, and we are responsible. Here’s what the science tells us.

How much has the planet warmed over the past century?

The planet’s average surface temperature has risen by at least 1.1 degree Celsius since preindustrial levels of 1850–1900.

What is causing climate change?

People are loading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases produced during the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and gas, and cutting down forests.

What are some of the effects of climate change?

Ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting, raising sea levels and flooding low-lying island nations and coastal cities. Drought is parching farmlands and the rivers that feed them. Wildfires are raging. Rains are becoming more intense, and weather patterns are shifting.

What is the greenhouse effect?

In the 19th century, Irish physicist John Tyndall found that carbon dioxide gas, as well as water vapor, absorbed more heat than air alone. He argued that such gases would trap heat in Earth’s atmosphere, much as panes of glass trap heat in a greenhouse, and thus modulate climate.

What is the Keeling curve?

One of the most iconic datasets in all of science, the Keeling curve tracks the rise of atmospheric CO 2 . When geochemist Charles David Keeling began his measurements in 1958 on the Hawaiian volcano of Mauna Loa, CO 2 made up 315 parts per million of the global atmosphere. Each year the curve keeps going up: In 2016 it passed 400 ppm of CO 2 in the atmosphere, as measured during its typical annual minimum in September. In 2021, the annual minimum was 413 ppm.

Does it get hotter every year?

Average global temperatures fluctuate from year to year, but temperature observations taken at weather stations around the world confirm that we are living in the hottest years on record. The 10 warmest years since record keeping began in 1880 have all occurred since 2005. And nine of those 10 have come since 2010.

What countries emit the most carbon dioxide?

The United States has been the largest total emitter of carbon dioxide by far, followed by China and Russia. China’s annual CO 2 emissions surpassed those of the United States in 2006.

What places are impacted by climate change?

No place on the planet is unaffected. Higher temperatures have led to major droughts, providing fuel for wildfires such as those that have devastated Australia , the Mediterranean and western North America in recent years. The Colorado River came under a water-shortage alert in 2021 for the first time in history. In the Arctic, where temperatures are rising at more than twice the global average, permafrost is thawing, destabilizing buildings, pipelines and roads. With less sea ice available to buffer the coast from storm erosion, the Inupiat village of Shishmaref, Alaska, risks crumbling into the sea. All around the planet, those who depend on intact ecosystems for their survival face the greatest threat from climate change. And those with the least resources to adapt to climate change are the ones who feel it first .

Editor’s note: This story was published March 10, 2022.

British mathematician Lewis Fry Richardson (shown at center) proposes forecasting the weather by piecing together the calculations of tens of thousands of meteorologists working on small parts of the atmosphere.

Geochemist Charles David Keeling (shown in 1988) begins tracking the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide at Mauna Loa in Hawaii. The record, which continues through today, has become one of the most iconic datasets in all of science.

Rachel Carson (shown) publishes the book Silent Spring , raising alarm over the ecological impacts of the pesticide DDT. The book helps catalyze the modern U.S. environmental movement.

The first Earth Day, organized by U.S. senator Gaylord Nelson and graduate student Denis Hayes, is celebrated.

The first Landsat satellite launched (shown), opening the door to continuous monitoring of Earth and its features from above.

A powerful eruption from the Philippines’ Mount Pinatubo (shown) ejects millions of tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, temporarily cooling the planet.  

World leaders gathered (shown) at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro to address how to pursue economic development while also protecting the Earth. The meeting resulted in an international convention on climate change.

Activist Greta Thunberg initiates the “School Strike for Climate” movement by protesting outside the Swedish parliament. Soon, students around the world join a growing movement demanding action on climate change . (Activists at the 2021 U.N. Climate Change Conference are shown.)

From the archive

Climate change foreseen.

In an early mention of climate change in Science News-Letter , the predecessor of Science News , British meteorologist C.E.P. Brooks warns that present warming trends could lead to “important economic and political effects.”

IGY Brings Many Discoveries

Science News Letter lists the Top 8 accomplishments of the International Geophysical Year.

Chilling possibilities

Science News explores the tentative idea that global temperatures are cooling and that a new ice age could be imminent, which is later shown to be inaccurate.

Long Hot Future: Warmer Earth Appears Inevitable

“The planet earth will be a warmer place in the 21st century, and there is no realistic strategy that can prevent the change,” Science News reports.

Ozone and Global Warming: What to Do?

Policy makers discuss how to solve the dual problems of ozone depletion and global warming.

Looking for Mr. Greenhouse

Science writer Richard Monastersky reports on scientists’ efforts to evaluate how to connect increasing greenhouse gases and a warming climate.

World Climate Panel Charts Path for Action

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that “the fingerprint of man in the past temperature record” is now apparent.

Animals on the Move

A warming climate means shifting ranges and ecosystem disruptions for a lot of species, Nancy Ross-Flanigan reports.

Changing climate: 10 years after ‘An Inconvenient Truth’

A decade after former vice president Al Gore releases the documentary film An Inconvenient Truth , Science News looks back at how climate science has advanced.

With nowhere to hide from rising seas, Boston prepares for a wetter future

Mary Caperton Morton reports for Science News on how Boston is taking action to prepare for rising seas.

The new UN climate change report shows there’s no time for denial or delay

Earth & climate writer Carolyn Gramling covers the sixth assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which documents how climate change is already affecting every region on Earth.

Climate change disinformation is evolving. So are efforts to fight back

Researchers are testing games and other ways to help people recognize climate change denial.

Extreme weather in 2022 showed the global impact of climate change

Heat waves, floods, wildfires and drought around the world were exacerbated by Earth’s changing climate.

It’s possible to reach net-zero carbon emissions. Here’s how

Cutting carbon dioxide emissions to curb climate change and reach net zero is possible but not easy.

The last 12 months were the hottest on record

The planet’s average temperature was about 1.3 degrees Celsius higher than the 1850–1900 average, a new report finds.

Science News is published by Society for Science

Subscribers, enter your e-mail address for full access to the Science News archives and digital editions.

Not a subscriber? Become one now .

Where We Work

Arab states, asia and the pacific, europe & central asia, latin america & the caribbean.

You’re using an outdated browser. Old browsers are unstable, unsafe and do not support the features of of this website. Please upgrade to continue.

Your browser does not support JavaScript. This site relies on JavaScript to structure its navigation and load images across all pages. Please enable JavaScript to continue.

The climate crisis is a health crisis – here’s why

• Share on LinkedIn
• Share on Facebook
• Share on twitter
• Share via email

• Human health is deeply interconnected with our planet’s climate and the health of the biosphere.
• Climate change impacts human health through more frequent and intense severe weather, extreme heat, air pollution, intensified disease outbreaks and pandemics, increased malnutrition rates from food insecurity, and mental distress.
• As the impacts of climate change escalate, they can perpetuate or even aggravate cycles of inequality, deepening health and social inequities within and between countries.
• Countries must work to integrate climate and health policies and build climate-informed, green and resilient health systems.

What is the connection between climate change and public health?

Human health is deeply interconnected with our planet’s climate and the health of the biosphere. When temperatures and sea levels rise, when storms rage and wildfire smoke pollutes the air, when habitat destruction and droughts affect water and food security, humans cannot escape the consequences–especially in countries and communities already struggling to manage existing health challenges. 

As the impacts of climate change escalate, they can perpetuate or even aggravate cycles of inequality, deepening health and social inequities within and between countries. Marginalized communities, who are least equipped to cope with the effects, often bear the brunt of these impacts. 

What are some specific and common ways that climate change impacts our health?

• Severe weather:  Extreme weather events such as storms, floods and landslides have caused over two million deaths between 1970 and 2021, with over 90 percent occurring in low- and middle-income countries. These events are becoming more frequent and severe due to climate change, inflicting immense physical and psychological harm. As a result, they increase demand for health services while simultaneously threatening the health sector’s ability to provide quality services and care by interrupting power lines, damaging or destroying facilities, and hindering access to care, especially in remote areas where infrastructure is already fragile.  
• Extreme heat:  Climate change is driving more frequent and intense heatwaves. For example, it is estimated that nearly 50,000 lives were lost in Europe in 2023 due to extreme heat. Under our current trajectory, about 2 billion people will be exposed to severe heat by 2100, with South and Southeast Asia being particularly vulnerable to wet-bulb temperatures . Many people are also increasingly at risk of wildfires, with longer fire seasons and the frequency and magnitude of extreme wildfires doubling over the past 20 years .  
• Infectious diseases:  Climate change is ushering in an era of new and intensified disease outbreaks and pandemics. Vectors, including disease-carrying mosquitoes, are already spreading to regions where they had never been present before. Extreme flooding aggravates the spread of waterborne diseases like cholera and rising temperatures are projected to cause a 20 percent increase in cases of dengue, Zika and chikungunya. By 2040, the spread of malaria alone could put 5 billion people at risk . And with ecosystems being reshaped by deforestation, urbanization and rising global temperatures, animals and humans are forced into closer contact, raising the risk for pandemics caused by zoonotic diseases like COVID-19.  
• Malnutrition:  The direct effects of climate change on health are compounded by indirect climate change impacts like loss of food supply–linked to droughts, floods, shifting seasons–which can create and exacerbate nutritional issues. A new analysis of 103 countries shows that days of extreme heat, increasing in frequency and intensity of drought due to climate change, accounted for an estimated 98 million more people reporting moderate to severe food insecurity in 2020 than the average in the period between 1981–2010.

Wildfires pose an extreme risk to human health. In 2023 alone, an area twice the size of Mexico was consumed by flames. Photo: UNDP Costa Rica / SINAC

By 2040, because of climate change, 5 billion people might be at risk of malaria. Community health points are crucial for early diagnosis and treatment. Photo: Miguel Samper / UNDP Bolivia

• Air pollution:  The burning of fossil fuels is the primary cause of climate change, but it is also responsible for air pollution. 99 percent of the world is breathing at levels deemed unsafe by the World Health Organization (WHO). Air pollution is associated with an increase in several chronic diseases like cancers and heart and respiratory diseases and can seriously aggravate existing conditions. The WHO estimates that air pollution is responsible for about 6.7 million deaths annually, and is linked to negative pre- and postnatal outcomes and neurological conditions such as dementia. Low- and middle-income countries pay the heaviest price, with 90 percent of premature deaths caused by air pollution occurring in these countries.  
• The mental toll:  Whether it’s trauma, mental illness and distress in response to floods, storms and wildfires, or the chronic mental health impacts of water and food shortages, conflict and migration, and more frequent and severe pandemics, climate change has widespread and alarming implications for mental health . The awareness of these threats leads to its own psychological impacts, with ‘climate anxiety’ and ‘eco stress’ impacting many, particularly young people who must cope with the prospect of a highly uncertain and unstable future.

What can countries do to limit the health impacts of climate change?

Countries must incorporate health at every step of the way in their climate change mitigation, preparedness and adaptation measures. This includes deeply interrogating the systems we've built–reliant on fossil fuels, unsustainable land use and agricultural practices, deforestation and urban sprawl–which not only drive climate change but also intensify the health consequences, particularly for vulnerable groups.

Integrate climate and health policies

An increasing number of actors, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), are calling for coordinated action across sectors to alleviate the health impacts of climate change. At COP28 in 2023, 148 country governments endorsed the groundbreaking COP28 Declaration on Climate and Health . In this declaration, countries committed to pursuing better integration of health considerations into their climate policy processes and of climate considerations into their health policy agendas.

This entails, for example, taking health into account in designing the next round of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) due in 2025. Currently, only 32 percent of these national climate pledges specifically mention the health sector and note climate-related health outcomes or adaptation measures.

A switch to LED lightbulbs is saving energy and improving conditions for health workers in Jamaica. Photo: UNDP Jamaica

The eVIN smart vaccine supply chain management system has revolutionized vaccine storage and stock monitoring in India. Photo: UNDP India

Build climate-informed and resilient health systems

Low-emission, resilient health systems are critical for keeping communities healthy as they grapple with the impacts of climate change. But what does a “resilient health system” actually look like in practice? 

It might look like integrating climate and weather information in health surveillance systems that are monitoring climate-sensitive diseases. This helps ensure continuous data collection and analysis, efficient forecasting and early warning for health risks. It also involves enhancing climate-informed disease control and prevention programmes, including digitizing information and surveillance systems, improving medical laboratories for case detection, and training health personnel on climate change and health. It is also quite literal: climate-proofing healthcare facilities, infrastructure and operations, so that extreme weather events don’t severely disrupt or impact healthcare services. 

And perhaps most importantly, it is about people. To ensure health service delivery and preparedness at every step of the way, countries must invest in and train local health workforces, strengthen community-led interventions and promote local climate action, all of which will enhance equitable access to and delivery of health services to meet people where they are.  

Green the health sector and leverage health expertise

In 2020, the healthcare sector was responsible for 4.6 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and one in three healthcare facilities lacked the resources to manage their waste. By transferring to renewable energy, greening the health sector supply chain and improving energy efficiency and waste management in the health sector, countries can advance their climate change mitigation efforts while improving health outcomes. The benefits are many: reduced emissions and air pollution, cost savings, improved access to quality healthcare, and enhanced resilience to future climate change impacts.

At COP26 in 2021, countries committed to lowering the emissions of their health systems , with 14 countries setting clear mitigation targets to reach net-zero carbon emissions from their health systems by 2050. As a result, the Alliance for Transformative Action on Climate and Health (ATACH) was created by the World Health Organization to help countries implement these commitments by revising their NDCs and other climate policies and programmes, with UNDP as a supporting member. 

How can we ensure no one is left behind in climate and health efforts?

The impacts of climate change on human health and well-being are exacerbated by a vicious cycle of inequalities, disproportionately affecting society’s most vulnerable and marginalized people, including women, children (especially girls), the elderly, people with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples, outdoor and informal workers, and people living in poverty or in remote locations.

These groups often have less access to healthcare, safe housing and resources like air conditioning, making them more susceptible to diseases and the health impacts of extreme climate events. For example, people with disabilities are up to four times more likely to die in disasters. Climate change also poses an immense threat to pregnant women, newborns and children, not least of which is due to disease, poor nutrition and extreme heat, which can lead to adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes . People living with HIV or other chronic illnesses are also at risk if access to health services is disrupted by climate-related hazards or pandemics.

Disaster preparedness drills are crucial to protecting vulnerable groups, such as children, from climate hazards. Photo: Manuth Buth / UNDP Cambodia

Water scarcity affects vulnerable groups the most, particularly women and girls, who often bear the burden of ensuring water access for their households. Photo: UNDP Zimbabwe

In addition, climate change is expected to push up to 132 million people (more than half of whom live in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia) into extreme poverty by 2030, with 44 million of these driven by health impacts. Threats to incomes, livelihoods and well-being will be made all the more salient as climate change continues to force people to move within and out of their countries, further straining health systems, threatening human rights, increasing the risk of conflict and worsening poverty. In 2023, there were already at least 7.7 million people in 82 countries and territories living in internal displacement as a result of weather-related hazards. And by 2050, that number could increase to 216 million people due to slow-onset climate change impacts.

In light of this, countries must make a commitment to consider how power and discrimination shape health inequities and address the social determinants of health such as income, employment, education, food insecurity, housing and social protection, discrimination, displacement and more. Bold action at the global and national levels to reduce these inequalities is critical, including by considering how health can feature in ongoing discussions around loss and damage .

How does UNDP support action to limit the health impacts of climate change?

In 2023, UNDP worked with 59 countries on the nexus of health, environment and climate change, work that is guided by the UNDP HIV and Health Strategy 2022-2025 and UNDP Strategic Plan 2022-2025 .

Through its climate change mitigation work, UNDP aims to reduce the emissions footprint of the healthcare sector and improve health outcomes. This work includes supporting sustainable procurement initiatives to ensure health products have the lowest possible climate impact; helping governments adopt environmentally and socially sound practices to manage healthcare waste in Southwest Asia ; and training women to become clean energy entrepreneurs to reduce indoor air pollution from cooking in Peru . Under Solar for Health , UNDP has helped enable climate-resilient, low-emission and reliable health services across 15 countries by providing access to renewable energy.

Under Solar for Health, UNDP has helped provide access to renewable energy for health facilities in 15 countries. Photo: UNDP Zimbabwe

At the same time, UNDP’s support to 100 countries worldwide to adapt to climate change helps protect communities from the health impacts of growing water and food insecurity and more extreme weather events. Examples of this work include supporting the integration of health considerations into national adaptation policy and planning in countries from Bhutan to Papua New Guinea ; fostering resilience for food security and climate resilient agriculture in countries from Kiribati to El Salvador ; improving water resource management and access to water in countries from the Maldives to Somalia ; strengthening access to climate information and early warning systems in countries from Pakistan to Malawi ; and strengthening climate-resilient health systems in Least Developed Countries in Asia and the Pacific Islands in partnership with WHO and with funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF).

With funding from the European Union, UNDP has supported Ethiopia, India and Mongolia to develop air pollution investment cases , revealing the economic, health and environmental burden of air pollution and calculating the return on investment for priority solutions.

Furthermore, in Bangladesh, Bhutan and Maldives, UNDP supports the safe sorting, sterilizing and disposing of healthcare waste to help prevent the negative impacts of healthcare waste on human and environmental health, with funding from Japan.

Continued, new and strengthened partnerships are key for this work to be effective and sustainable. In 2023, at COP28, the Green Climate Fund (GCF), UNDP and WHO launched a new initiative that is ramping up financial support for developing countries to mitigate and respond to the impacts of climate change on health in 15 countries across Africa, Asia and Southeastern Europe.

Explore More Stories

Improving health services with clean energy in malawi.

Two men installing a solar energy installation in Malawi. Photo : UNDP Malawi

Solar for health

Solar panels on the roof of the Chikumbi Health Center, Chongwe District, Zambia. Photos: UNDP / Karin Schermbrucker for Slingshot

Climate Change: Evidence and Causes: Update 2020 (2020)

Chapter: conclusion, c onclusion.

This document explains that there are well-understood physical mechanisms by which changes in the amounts of greenhouse gases cause climate changes. It discusses the evidence that the concentrations of these gases in the atmosphere have increased and are still increasing rapidly, that climate change is occurring, and that most of the recent change is almost certainly due to emissions of greenhouse gases caused by human activities. Further climate change is inevitable; if emissions of greenhouse gases continue unabated, future changes will substantially exceed those that have occurred so far. There remains a range of estimates of the magnitude and regional expression of future change, but increases in the extremes of climate that can adversely affect natural ecosystems and human activities and infrastructure are expected.

Citizens and governments can choose among several options (or a mixture of those options) in response to this information: they can change their pattern of energy production and usage in order to limit emissions of greenhouse gases and hence the magnitude of climate changes; they can wait for changes to occur and accept the losses, damage, and suffering that arise; they can adapt to actual and expected changes as much as possible; or they can seek as yet unproven “geoengineering” solutions to counteract some of the climate changes that would otherwise occur. Each of these options has risks, attractions and costs, and what is actually done may be a mixture of these different options. Different nations and communities will vary in their vulnerability and their capacity to adapt. There is an important debate to be had about choices among these options, to decide what is best for each group or nation, and most importantly for the global population as a whole. The options have to be discussed at a global scale because in many cases those communities that are most vulnerable control few of the emissions, either past or future. Our description of the science of climate change, with both its facts and its uncertainties, is offered as a basis to inform that policy debate.

A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The following individuals served as the primary writing team for the 2014 and 2020 editions of this document:

• Eric Wolff FRS, (UK lead), University of Cambridge
• Inez Fung (NAS, US lead), University of California, Berkeley
• Brian Hoskins FRS, Grantham Institute for Climate Change
• John F.B. Mitchell FRS, UK Met Office
• Tim Palmer FRS, University of Oxford
• Benjamin Santer (NAS), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
• John Shepherd FRS, University of Southampton
• Keith Shine FRS, University of Reading.
• Susan Solomon (NAS), Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research
• John Walsh, University of Alaska, Fairbanks
• Don Wuebbles, University of Illinois

Staff support for the 2020 revision was provided by Richard Walker, Amanda Purcell, Nancy Huddleston, and Michael Hudson. We offer special thanks to Rebecca Lindsey and NOAA Climate.gov for providing data and figure updates.

The following individuals served as reviewers of the 2014 document in accordance with procedures approved by the Royal Society and the National Academy of Sciences:

• Richard Alley (NAS), Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University
• Alec Broers FRS, Former President of the Royal Academy of Engineering
• Harry Elderfield FRS, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge
• Joanna Haigh FRS, Professor of Atmospheric Physics, Imperial College London
• Isaac Held (NAS), NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory
• John Kutzbach (NAS), Center for Climatic Research, University of Wisconsin
• Jerry Meehl, Senior Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research
• John Pendry FRS, Imperial College London
• John Pyle FRS, Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge
• Gavin Schmidt, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
• Emily Shuckburgh, British Antarctic Survey
• Gabrielle Walker, Journalist
• Andrew Watson FRS, University of East Anglia

The Support for the 2014 Edition was provided by NAS Endowment Funds. We offer sincere thanks to the Ralph J. and Carol M. Cicerone Endowment for NAS Missions for supporting the production of this 2020 Edition.

F OR FURTHER READING

For more detailed discussion of the topics addressed in this document (including references to the underlying original research), see:

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2019: Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate [ https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc ]
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), 2019: Negative Emissions Technologies and Reliable Sequestration: A Research Agenda [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25259 ]
• Royal Society, 2018: Greenhouse gas removal [ https://raeng.org.uk/greenhousegasremoval ]
• U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), 2018: Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume II: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States [ https://nca2018.globalchange.gov ]
• IPCC, 2018: Global Warming of 1.5°C [ https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15 ]
• USGCRP, 2017: Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume I: Climate Science Special Reports [ https://science2017.globalchange.gov ]
• NASEM, 2016: Attribution of Extreme Weather Events in the Context of Climate Change [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21852 ]
• IPCC, 2013: Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) Working Group 1. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis [ https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1 ]
• NRC, 2013: Abrupt Impacts of Climate Change: Anticipating Surprises [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18373 ]
• NRC, 2011: Climate Stabilization Targets: Emissions, Concentrations, and Impacts Over Decades to Millennia [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12877 ]
• Royal Society 2010: Climate Change: A Summary of the Science [ https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/publications/2010/climate-change-summary-science ]
• NRC, 2010: America’s Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change [ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12782 ]

Much of the original data underlying the scientific findings discussed here are available at:

• https://data.ucar.edu/
• https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu
• https://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu
• https://ess-dive.lbl.gov/
• https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/
• https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
• http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu
• http://hahana.soest.hawaii.edu/hot/

Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. It is now more certain than ever, based on many lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth's climate. The Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences, with their similar missions to promote the use of science to benefit society and to inform critical policy debates, produced the original Climate Change: Evidence and Causes in 2014. It was written and reviewed by a UK-US team of leading climate scientists. This new edition, prepared by the same author team, has been updated with the most recent climate data and scientific analyses, all of which reinforce our understanding of human-caused climate change.

Scientific information is a vital component for society to make informed decisions about how to reduce the magnitude of climate change and how to adapt to its impacts. This booklet serves as a key reference document for decision makers, policy makers, educators, and others seeking authoritative answers about the current state of climate-change science.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

Human, economic, environmental toll of climate change on the rise: WMO

Facebook Twitter Print Email

The relentless advance of climate change brought more drought, flooding and heatwaves to communities around the world last year, compounding threats to people’s lives and livelihoods, the UN’s World Meteorological Organization ( WMO ) said on Friday.

WMO latest State of the Global Climate report shows that the last eight years were the eight warmest on record , and that sea level rise and ocean warming hit new highs . Record levels of greenhouse gases caused “planetary scale changes on land, in the ocean and in the atmosphere”.

World Meteorological Organization April 21, 2023

The organization says its report, released ahead of this year’s Mother Earth Day , echoes UN Secretary-General António Guterres ’ call for “ deeper, faster emissions cuts to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degree Celsius”, as well as “ massively scaled-up investments in adaptation and resilience, particularly for the most vulnerable countries and communities who have done the least to cause the crisis”.

WMO Secretary-General, Prof. Petteri Taalas, said that amid rising greenhouse gas emissions and a changing climate, “populations worldwide continue to be gravely impacted by extreme weather and climate events ”. He stressed that last year, “continuous drought in East Africa, record breaking rainfall in Pakistan and record-breaking heatwaves in China and Europe affected tens of millions, drove food insecurity, boosted mass migration, and cost billions of dollars in loss and damage.”

WMO highlights the importance of investing in climate monitoring and early warning systems to help mitigate the humanitarian impacts of extreme weather. The report also points out that today, improved technology makes the transition to renewable energy “cheaper and more accessible than ever” .

Warmest years on record

The State of the Global Climate report complements the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) Sixth Assessment report released a month ago, which includes data up to 2020.

WMO’s new figures show that global temperatures have continued to rise, making the years 2015 to 2022 the eight warmest ever since regular tracking started in 1850. WMO notes that this was despite three consecutive years of a cooling La Niña climate pattern.

WMO says concentrations of the three main greenhouse gases, which trap heat in the atmosphere – carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide – reached record highs in 2021, which is the latest year for which consolidated data is available , and that there are indications of a continued increase in 2022.

Indicators ‘off the charts’

According to the report, “melting of glaciers and sea level rise - which again reached record levels in 2022 - will continue to up to thousands of years ”. WMO further highlights that “Antarctic sea ice fell to its lowest extent on record and the melting of some European glaciers was, literally, off the charts”.

Sea level rise, which threatens the existence of coastal communities and sometimes entire countries, has been fuelled not only by melting glaciers and ice caps in Greenland and Antarctica, but also by the expansion of the volume of oceans due to heat. WMO notes that ocean warming has been “particularly high in the past two decades”.

Deadly consequences

The report examines the many socio-economic impacts of extreme weather, which have wreaked havoc in the lives of the most vulnerable around the world . Five consecutive years of drought in East Africa, in conjunction with other factors such as armed conflict, have brought devastating food insecurity to 20 million people across the region.

Extensive flooding in Pakistan caused by severe rainfall in July and August last year killed over 1,700 people, while some 33 million were affected. WMO highlights that total damage and economic losses were assessed at $30 billion, and that by October 2022, around 8 million people had been internally displaced by the floods.

The report also notes that in addition to putting scores of people on the move, throughout the year, hazardous climate and weather-related events “worsened conditions” for many of the 95 million people already living in displacement .

Threat to ecosystems

Environmental impacts of climate change are another focus of the report, which highlights a shift in recurring events in nature, “such as when trees blossom, or birds migrate”. The flowering of cherry trees in Japan has been tracked since the ninth century, and in 2021 the date of the event was the earliest recorded in 1,200 years .

As a result of such shifts, entire ecosystems can be upended . WMO notes that spring arrival times of over a hundred European migratory bird species over five decades “show increasing levels of mismatch to other spring events”, such as the moment when trees produce leaves and insects take flight, which are important for bird survival.

The report says these mismatches “are likely to have contributed to population decline in some migrant species , particularly those wintering in sub-Saharan Africa”, and to the ongoing destruction of biodiversity.

Ending the ‘war on nature’

In his message on Earth Day, UN chief Mr. Guterres warned that “ biodiversity is collapsing as one million species teeter on the brink of extinction ”, and called on the world to end its “relentless and senseless wars on nature”, insisting that “we have the tools, the knowledge, and the solutions” to address climate change.

Last month, Mr. Guterres convened an Advisory Panel of top UN agency officials, private sector and civil society leaders, to help fast track a global initiative aiming to protect all countries through life-saving early warning systems by 2027. Stepped up coordinated action was announced, initially in 30 countries particularly vulnerable to extreme weather, including Small Island Developing States and Least Developed Countries.

Early Warnings for All

WMO Secretary-General Prof. Petteri Taalas said on Friday that some one hundred countries currently do not have adequate weather services in place, and that the UN Early Warnings for All Initiative “ aims to fill the existing capacity gap to ensure that every person on earth is covered by early warning services”.

Mr. Taalas explained that “achieving this ambitious task requires improvement of observation networks, investments in early warning, hydrological and climate service capacities.” He also stressed the effectiveness of collaboration among UN agencies in addressing humanitarian impacts of climate events, especially in reducing mortality and economic losses. 

• extreme weather
• climate action

Search the United Nations

• What Is Climate Change
• Myth Busters
• Renewable Energy
• Finance & Justice
• Initiatives
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Paris Agreement
• Climate Ambition Summit 2023
• Climate Conferences
• Press Material
• Communications Tips

How is climate change impacting the world’s ocean

The ocean has long taken the brunt of the impacts of human-made global warming, says UN Climate Change . As the planet’s greatest carbon sink, the ocean absorbs excess heat and energy released from rising greenhouse gas emissions trapped in the Earth’s system. Today, the ocean has absorbed about 90 percent of the heat generated by rising emissions. 

As the excessive heat and energy warms the ocean, the change in temperature leads to unparalleled cascading effects, including ice-melting, sea-level rise, marine heatwaves, and ocean acidification. 

These changes ultimately cause a lasting impact on marine biodiversity, and the lives and livelihoods of coastal communities and beyond - including around 680 million people living in low-lying coastal areas, almost 2 billion who live in half of the world’s megacities that are coastal, nearly half of the world’s population (3.3 billion) that depends on fish for protein, and almost 60 million people who work in fisheries and the aquaculture sector worldwide. 

Here are some of the major consequences of the impacts of climate change on the ocean.

Sea-level rise

Sea-level rise has accelerated in recent decades due to increasing ice loss in the world’s polar regions. Latest data from the World Meteorological Organization shows that global mean sea-level reached a new record high in 2021, rising an average of 4.5 millimeter per year over the period 2013 to 2021. 

Together with intensifying tropical cyclones, sea-level rise has exacerbated extreme events such as deadly storm surges and coastal hazards such as flooding, erosion and landslides, which are now projected to occur at least once a year in many locations. Such events occurred once per century historically.

Moreover, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that several regions, such as the western Tropical Pacific, the South-west Pacific, the North Pacific, the South-west Indian Ocean and the South Atlantic, face substantially faster sea-level rise.  

Marine heatwaves

Marine heatwaves have doubled in frequency, and have become longer-lasting, more intense and extensive. The IPCC says that human influence has been the main driver of the ocean heat increase observed since the 1970s. 

The majority of heatwaves took place between 2006 and 2015, causing widespread coral bleaching and reef degradation. In 2021, nearly 60 percent of the world’s ocean surface experienced at least one spell of marine heatwaves. The UN Environment Programme says that every one of the world’s coral reefs could bleach by the end of the century if the water continues to warm. 

Coral bleaching occurs as reefs lose their life-sustaining microscopic algae when under stress. The last global bleaching event started in 2014 and extended well into 2017 - spreading across the Pacific, Indian and Atlantic oceans.   

Loss of marine biodiversity

Rising temperatures increase the risk of irreversible loss of marine and coastal ecosystems . Today, widespread changes have been observed, including damage to coral reefs and mangroves that support ocean life, and migration of species to higher latitudes and altitudes where the water could be cooler.  Latest estimates from the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization warn that more than half of the world’s marine species may stand on the brink of extinction by 2100. At a 1.1°C  increase in temperature today, an estimated 60 percent of the world's marine ecosystems have already been degraded or are being used unsustainably. A warming of 1.5°C threatens to destroy 70 to 90 percent of coral reefs , and a 2°C increase means a nearly 100 percent loss - a point of no return.

The ocean – the world’s greatest ally against climate change

The ocean is central to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. Here are a few reasons we need to safeguard the ocean as our best ally for climate solutions.

Peter Thomson: Moving the needle on the sustainable blue economy

Ambassador Peter Thomson of Fiji, UN Special Envoy for the Ocean, mobilizes global action to conserve and sustainably use the ocean. Read the full interview.

Climate Adaptation

Climate change is here. There are many ways to adapt to what is happening and what will happen. For more tips, check out the ActNow campaign .

Facts and figures

• What is climate change?
• Causes and effects
• Myth busters

Cutting emissions

• Explaining net zero
• High-level expert group on net zero
• Checklists for credibility of net-zero pledges
• Greenwashing
• What you can do

Clean energy

• Renewable energy – key to a safer future
• What is renewable energy
• Five ways to speed up the energy transition
• Why invest in renewable energy
• Clean energy stories
• A just transition

Adapting to climate change

• Climate adaptation
• Early warnings for all
• Youth voices

Financing climate action

• Finance and justice
• Loss and damage
• $100 billion commitment
• Why finance climate action
• Biodiversity
• Human Security

International cooperation

• What are Nationally Determined Contributions
• Acceleration Agenda
• Climate Ambition Summit
• Climate conferences (COPs)
• Youth Advisory Group
• Action initiatives
• Secretary-General’s speeches
• Press material
• Fact sheets
• Communications tips

• News, Stories & Speeches
• Get Involved
• Structure and leadership
• Committee of Permanent Representatives
• UN Environment Assembly
• Funding and partnerships
• Policies and strategies
• Evaluation Office
• Secretariats and Conventions
• Asia and the Pacific
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• New York Office
• North America
• Climate action
• Nature action
• Chemicals and pollution action
• Digital Transformations
• Disasters and conflicts
• Environment under review
• Environmental law and governance
• Extractives
• Fresh Water
• Green economy
• Ocean, seas and coasts
• Resource efficiency
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Youth, education and environment
• Publications & data

1. Spread the word

Encourage your friends, family and co-workers to reduce their carbon pollution. Join a global movement like  Count Us In, which aims to inspire 1 billion people to take practical steps and challenge their leaders to act more boldly on climate. Organizers of the platform say that if 1 billion people took action, they could reduce as much as 20 per cent of global carbon emissions. Or you could sign up to the UN’s  #ActNow campaign on climate change and sustainability and add your voice to this critical global debate.

2. Keep up the political pressure

Lobby local politicians and businesses to support efforts to cut emissions and reduce carbon pollution.  #ActNow Speak Up  has sections on political pressure and corporate action - and Count Us In also has  some handy tips  for how to do this. Pick an environmental issue you care about, decide on a specific request for change and then try to arrange a meeting with your local representative. It might seem intimidating but your voice deserves to be heard. If humanity is to succeed in tackling the climate emergency, politicians must be part of the solution. It’s up to all of us to keep up with the pressure. 

3. Transform your transport

Transport accounts for around a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions and across the world, many governments are implementing policies to decarbonize travel. You can get a head start: leave your car at home and walk or cycle whenever possible. If the distances are too great, choose public transport, preferably electric options. If you must drive, offer to carpool with others so that fewer cars are on the road. Get ahead of the curve and buy an electric car. Reduce the number of long-haul flights you take. 

4. Rein in your power use

If you can, switch to a zero-carbon or renewable energy provider. Install solar panels on your roof. Be more efficient: turn your heating down a degree or two, if possible. Switch off appliances and lights when you are not using them and better yet buy the most efficient products in the first place (hint: this will save you money!). Insulate your loft or roof: you’ll be warmer in the winter, cooler in the summer and save some money too. 

5. Tweak your diet

Eat more plant-based meals – your body and the planet will thank you. Today, around 60 per cent of the world’s agricultural land is used for livestock grazing and people in many countries are consuming more animal-sourced food than is healthy. Plant-rich diets can help reduce chronic illnesses, such as heart disease, stroke, diabetes and cancer.

The climate emergency demands action from all of us. We need to get to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and everyone has a role to play.

6. Shop local and buy sustainable

To reduce your food’s carbon footprint, buy local and seasonal foods. You’ll be helping small businesses and farms in your area and reducing fossil fuel emissions associated with transport and cold chain storage. Sustainable agriculture uses up to 56 per cent less energy, creates 64 per cent fewer emissions and allows for greater levels of biodiversity than conventional farming. Go one step further and try growing your own fruit, vegetables and herbs. You can plant them in a garden, on a balcony or even on a window sill. Set up a community garden in your neighbourhood to get others involved. 

7. Don’t waste food

One-third of all food produced is either lost or wasted. According to UNEP’s  Food Waste Index Report 2021 , people globally waste 1 billion tonnes of food each year, which accounts for around 8-10 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Avoid waste by only buying what you need. Take advantage of every edible part of the foods you purchase. Measure portion sizes of rice and other staples before cooking them, store food correctly (use your freezer if you have one), be creative with leftovers, share extras with your friends and neighbours and contribute to a local food-sharing scheme. Make compost out of inedible remnants and use it to fertilize your garden. Composting is one of the best options for managing organic waste while also reducing environmental impacts.

8. Dress (climate) smart

The fashion industry accounts for 8-10 per cent of global carbon emissions – more than all international flights and maritime shipping combined – and ‘fast fashion’ has created a throwaway culture that sees clothes quickly end up in landfills. But we can change this. Buy fewer new clothes and wear them longer. Seek out sustainable labels and use rental services for special occasions rather than buying new items that will only be worn once. Recycle pre-loved clothes and repair when necessary.

9. Plant trees  

Every year approximately 12 million hectares of forest are destroyed and this deforestation, together with agriculture and other land use changes, is responsible for roughly 25 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. We can all play a part in reversing this trend by planting trees, either individually or as part of a collective. For example, the Plant-for-the-Planet initiative allows people to sponsor tree-planting around the world.

Check out this UNEP guide to see what else you can do as part of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration , a global drive to halt the degradation of land and oceans, protect biodiversity, and rebuild ecosystems. 

10. Focus on planet-friendly investments

Individuals can also spur change through their savings and investments by choosing financial institutions that do not invest in carbon-polluting industries. #ActNow Speak Up  has a section on money and so does  Count Us In . This sends a clear signal to the market and already many financial institutions are offering more ethical investments, allowing you to use your money to support causes you believe in and avoid those you don’t. You can ask your financial institution about their responsible banking policies and find out how they rank in independent research. 

UNEP is at the front in support of the Paris Agreement goal of keeping the global temperature rise well below 2°C, and aiming - to be safe - for 1.5°C, compared to pre-industrial levels. To do this, UNEP has developed a Six-Sector Solution . The Six Sector Solution is a roadmap to reducing emissions across sectors in line with the Paris Agreement commitments and in pursuit of climate stability. The six sectors identified are Energy; Industry; Agriculture & Food; Forests & Land Use; Transport; and Buildings & Cities.

• Clean fuels
• Energy Efficiency
• Sustainable Development

Further Resources

• 7 climate action highlights to remember before COP26
• Climate Action Note - data you need to know
• Emissions Gap Report 2021
• Food Waste Index 2021
• Act Now: the UN campaign for individual action
• Count Us In
• Food Loss and Waste Website

Related Content

Related Sustainable Development Goals

© 2024 UNEP Terms of Use Privacy   Report Project Concern Report Scam Contact Us

• climate change

Climate Change’s Profound Effects on Eggs

W hen you think of an egg, what do you see in your mind’s eye? A chicken egg, hard-boiled? A mermaid’s purse, the egg of a shark or ray, entangled in seaweed thrown onto shore? Perhaps you see a human egg cell, prepared on a microscope slide telegraphed onto a TV screen in a laboratory? Or the majestic turquoise mottled eggs of the blue jay?

Each egg is unique, and that is one of the finest things about them. Each egg on Earth has its own charisma, allure, and evolutionary backstory, easily (I have learned from years of zoological research) as diverse and interesting as the animals that hatch from out of them. Every egg there has ever been, is an emblem of survival; a product whittled, chiselled, and crafted by the unthinking forces of natural selection for the purpose of passing genetic lineages forwards in time—days, weeks, months, sometimes years.

In the last 500 million years, eggs (like animals) have come a long way. As geological periods came and went, as climates changed, ecological disasters raged and animal fortunes waxed and waned, the egg has changed. In some animal groups, including birds, the egg cemented itself in a crystalline shell to harden itself to planet’s changing atmosphere. In others, most notably mammals and large sharks, the egg resided for longer and longer inside the body to stay warm. In some groups, like spiders, eggs were wrapped in silk; in others, such as insects, the egg was endowed with a breathable suit-of-armour that helped insects quietly pioneer even the driest and most inhospitable parts of Earth’s continents.

Eggs, I have learned, are survival machines unthinkingly sculpted by what the planet throws their way. And so, in the coming decades and centuries, what will this (our) impending period of climate change do to these astonishingly adaptive life-vessels?

There is some evidence that changes to eggs are already occurring.

Today, because of our changing climate, the eggs of insects, predictably, are adapting most quickly. In the UK, for instance, butterflies and moths hatch up to six days earlier than they did just ten years ago. In the U.S., wild bee activity begins 10 days earlier than it did 130 years ago. Many aphids, considered a pest upon trees and other plants, now hatch from their eggs a month earlier than they did half a century ago . Fast generation times and variation between insect populations is seeing natural selection work quickly in these species. Insect distributions are also altering because of human-induced climate change. Traditionally, cold winters (which kill off insect eggs) were a natural barrier to the movement of invasive species, but milder winters have seen their spread across countries and continents continue apace . This is why, entomologists argue, mosquitoes have brought new diseases to the European continent in the last decade, including dengue fever to France and Croatia, chikungunya in Italy and malaria in Greece.

Read More: How Climate Change Is Leading to an ‘Ecological Recession’

Mild winters are affecting other problematic invertebrates, too. In the U.S., cases of Lyme disease, spread through blood-sucking ticks whose eggs are no longer killed off in the winter months to the same degree, have increased three-fold in 25 years. There are similar concerns over populations of tree-munching ash borers and the invasive Asian giant hornet , a potential threat to honeybee populations across Europe and North America. As they have always done, invertebrate eggs are adapting quickly, sometimes unthinkingly profiting from the climate crisis.

Although their life history plays out at a slower pace, the life-history patterns of land vertebrates have also begun to shift in recent decades in response to shifts in climate. Information on birds, which have a long history of amateur study, best show the changes. Most notably it is very clear that, like insects, many bird species are adjusting the moment at which their eggs are laid and at which point they hatch, potentially to align themselves better with the seasonal availability of food. In North America, roughly a third of birds lay their eggs earlier, by about twenty-five days, than they did a century ago. In the UK, between 1971 and 1995, 63% of bird species nested earlier, by an average of 9 days.

Perhaps a more pernicious danger to vertebrate eggs today is that posed by extreme weather events. In sea turtles, for instance, we may point to warmer temperatures and thus more of their population turning female (a strange quirk of turtle embryos is that their sex is determined by temperature), but unpredictable storms and the flooding of shoreline nests is perhaps the far greater risk. Hurricane Irma in 2017, for instance, saw 56% of green turtle nests and 24% of loggerhead turtle nests on the coast of Florida destroyed. In 2019, Hurricane Floyd killed up to 100,000 turtle hatchlings in one fell swoop. The truth is that, for many species, there may not be time for the egg to adapt to environmental changes so sharp and jagged as this.

There are likely to be both many losers and perhaps a few winners in these turbulent times. The wolf spider, Pardosa glacialis, may become one of those that benefit from climate change, for example. In 1996, this tundra-living spider used to lay one clutch of eggs each year, but now it takes advantage of a longer spring and summer and regularly lays a second clutch of eggs later in the season , often with more eggs than the first. Because the spider has more months in which it can hunt, the size of adult spiders at the end of their season has also increased. The significance of just this one change to an ecosystem could be far reaching: a single square kilometer of tundra can be home to 1 million of these ground predators —spider-eating birds, perhaps, have a lot to gain. Finding a way to study these populations, to record ecosystem shifts happening due to climate change, will prove crucial to the human response.

For decades, museums have been one of the best tools we have to measure the impact that the climate crisis is having on eggs and the organisms that hatch from out of them. Globally, there are specimens, records, and data from 5 million bird eggs collected from as far back as 250 years. Eggs are different to other museum specimens. Carefully stored, they do not rot; they require very little by way of preservative fluids and, within each specimen is a chemical record, through fragments of DNA, of breeding biology and diet. Nowadays eggs can be scanned with electron microscopes and spectrophotometers; they can be genetically sequenced or scraped of their isotopes for carbon dating; they can be scanned and stored and shared in a digital format. There may be no more perfect kind of specimen in the world from which to gather data about our changing planet.

It was museum eggs, of course, that first helped scientists to prove the link between heavy DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) use and declining bird populations, a story detailed so eloquently in Rachel Carson’s landmark Silent Spring. By comparing eggshells from the late 1940s to the 1960s, when DDT use was high, with museum-curated eggshells before this time, scientists were able to show that DDT was pooling in birds, particularly those higher in the food chain such as birds of prey. This caused them to lay easily broken eggs with thin shells, causing wild populations to decline. The result was the agricultural use of DDT being banned in most developed countries. Over the years, other studies have seen environmental changes linked to eggshell thinning. Most notable are those that firmed up the causal link between ‘acid rain’ and eggshell malformation in birds. Studies have shown a long and drawn-out reduction in eggshell thickness in blackbirds, song thrushes and mistle thrushes , for instance, all linked to acidification of their lowland environments, mostly through pollutants such as sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. The main problem appears to be that acidification, which removes calcium carbonate from the soil, leads to a reduction in the number of snails, whose shells provide calcium for nesting birds readying themselves to lay. In each case, museum specimens act as the vital comparison group for the data that scientists collect from the field.

Eggs may, in part, help us better understand environmental changes, but the clock is clearly ticking. The agreements arising from global climate conferences, useful as they are, have so far failed to budge carbon dioxide emissions from their upward trajectory. Eggs cannot arrange summits or conferences and they make lousy politicians, but, I suspect, if we observe them more closely, take them more seriously, celebrate them where we can, they would have plenty more to tell us about how and why we might limit the impacts of the raging climate change we are now inflicting upon our world.

That an extinction crisis is approaching is obvious. The question is becoming, at this rate and trajectory of change, what kind of world do we want on the other side, in the next chapter? What level of impoverishment will we tolerate? How much suffering are we comfortable with?

The mud and silts laid down today will record the trials and evolutionary experiments of new eggs, as they always have. Baked and dried, hidden for millennia, the fossil strata will become the pages upon which the story of eggs is written in future chapters. As long as our nearest star shines, I have no doubt that there will be eggs on Earth. Their journey will never be finished.

I hope we will be around as long as possible to see it continue.

Adapted from Infinite Life: The Revolutionary Story of Eggs, Evolution, and Life on Earth by Jules Howard. Published by Pegasus Books, September 3rd 2024.

More Must-Reads from TIME

• How Nayib Bukele’s ‘Iron Fist’ Has Transformed El Salvador
• What Makes a Friendship Last Forever?
• How to Read Political Polls Like a Pro
• Long COVID Looks Different in Kids
• What a $129 Frying Pan Says About America’s Eating Habits
• How ‘Friendshoring’ Made Southeast Asia Pivotal to the AI Revolution
• Column: Your Cynicism Isn’t Helping Anybody
• The 32 Most Anticipated Books of Fall 2024

Contact us at [email protected]

The Health Effects of Climate Change

Learn how global warming impacts human health, and the ways we can diminish those impacts.

Associated Schools

Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

What you'll learn.

Climate change’s impacts on nutrition, migration, and infectious diseases

The research methods used in this field

Strategies to mitigate and adapt to the health impacts of climate change

How changes in Earth’s atmosphere affect health outcomes

How to assess the various ways of addressing the health effects of global warming

Course description

Our world’s climate is changing. Of the top twenty hottest years ever recorded, sixteen have occurred in the last two decades. This warming has already had a profound effect. Many feel powerless in the face of this challenge, but you can make a difference.

By looking at air quality, nutrition, infectious diseases, and human migration, this course will show you how increases in greenhouse gases impact public health. Experts working in a variety of settings will present their recommendations for responding to these challenges, and interested students will have the opportunity to learn about the research methods that measure the health effects of climate change.

Created with support from the Harvard Global Health Institute, this course will explain how climate change impacts people around the globe, but also how it directly affects you and your life. Though your risk rises with the rising global temperatures, climate change is a solvable problem, and there are things you can do to mitigate that risk.

This course is not an elegy for the planet, but a call to action. Enroll now to learn what you can do to reduce the harm caused by global warming.

Course Outline

Health — The Human Face of Climate Change

In this week you’ll meet the professors, get used to the edX environment, and receive an overview of the pathways from climate change to human health outcomes. This week also includes a Climate Science Mini-Course for those who haven’t studied the greenhouse effect or the effects of carbon dioxide before.

Heat & Air Quality

From here on, our course will be focused on answering a set of questions each week. This week: How does climate change affect heat-related illness? What does climate change have to do with air quality? What can be done to prevent heat exposure?

How does climate change impact water-borne diseases (like cholera and dysentery) and vector-borne diseases (such as malaria and dengue)? Will there be more outbreaks of water-borne diseases in a warming world? How will the range of disease vectors such as mosquitos and ticks shift with changes in temperature and rainfall?

Will we grow more crops or fewer in a hotter world? Will those crops be more nutritious, or less? What about the pests that feed on those crops? How will marine fisheries adapt to a warmer and more acidic ocean?

What happens when ambient temperatures exceed human tolerances? When storms, droughts and, extreme weather displace people - where do they go and what are the health consequences? What will happen to the inhabitants of small island states that will be wiped off the map by sea level rise? What is it like to live as a climate refugee, both mentally and physically?

Research Methods

Climate change’s impact on health can be gradual and progressive, emerging over years or even decades. How can one identify the relevant datasets to understand these emerging health impacts of climate change time series analysis? How can we address challenges of physical and temporal scale?

Responding to Climate Change

In our final week, we ask: What can nations, cities, and individuals do to respond to climate change? What are our options in terms of migration, adaptation, or even intervention? And given what we can do, what should we do?

Instructors

Aaron Bernstein

You may also like.

Applied Risk Communication for the 21st Century

Design effective risk communication messages to improve communication, increase trust in your organization, reduce public anxiety, and help stakeholders make better decisions.

6-Week Plan For Healthy Eating

This online course from Harvard Health Publishing outlines a simple, 6-week plan assembled by Harvard experts to overhaul your diet and nutrition.

Starting to Exercise

This Harvard Health Publishing online course propels you forward on your fitness journey, helping you create a personalized exercise plan for a healthy life. 

Join our list to learn more

• INNOVATION FESTIVAL
• Capital One

09-01-2024 IMPACT

This is what climate change does to your brain, according to a neuroscientist

Five reasons climate change brain is a real neurological landscape, from the author of ‘The Weight of Nature.’

[Photo: DOERS /Adobe Stock]

BY  Next Big Idea Club 9 minute read

Clayton Page Aldern is a former neuroscientist turned environmental journalist. He is currently a senior data reporter at the climate media site Grist. His work focuses on the intersection of climate change and human health, particularly the neurological impacts of environmental factors.

Below, Aldern shares five key insights from his new book,  The Weight of Nature: How a Changing Climate Changes Our Brains .  Listen to the audio version—read by Aldern himself—in the Next Big Idea App.

1. Your brain models the world.

To navigate your environment, you must possess an innate sense of how it all fits together. If you’re to survive out there in the concrete jungle, gravity can’t surprise you. You need to understand that when water falls from clouds, it doesn’t mean the sky is falling with it. Your brain helps build and store these kinds of predictions about the ways of the world.

These predictions are within you. In other words, you are a model—a picture of what’s out there. But the picture isn’t static. From moment to moment, to sustain your existence, your brain compares the predictions of its world model to the sensory information it receives, tweaking its inner workings to minimize surprise. You look around, feel about, move hither and thither—all the while expecting things to go a certain way. When they don’t, you update your model accordingly.

The goal is to minimize the mismatch between what you expect to experience at any given moment and what you actually experience. If your brain didn’t seek to minimize surprise, you’d be pathologically dumbstruck every moment of every day. You would forget that people generally have two arms; you would be terrified to learn your hands are attached to your body and that the sky is such a remarkable shade of blue.

But instead of surfacing a constant state of shock, your model learns to expect these kinds of things so it can focus on the interesting stuff. Modeling the world allows us to understand that we are still alive and that reality looks roughly the way we expect it to look.

Our conscious access to this model—our feelings and knowledge—allows us to use our brains and bodies as tools to sustain themselves. That’s an important point: An understanding of yourself as a model builder necessarily invokes the brain and the rest of the body. Cognition is literally embodied. The stuff of thought is physical stuff. It is exposed to the world and it makes itself in its image. As the environment changes, you should expect to change too. It is the job of your brain to model the world as it is. And the world is mutating.

2. Environmental factors drive behavior.

Heat can have a profound impact on behavior, often in subtle and surprising ways. As I discuss in the book, higher temperatures have been linked to increased aggression and impulsivity across a wide range of species. Lemon damselfish, for instance, become more aggressive when water temperatures rise—and the effect is seen in every individual fish. In humans, too, heat seems to short-circuit our senses and decision-making capacities. Studies have shown that on hotter days , baseball pitchers are more likely to hit batters in retaliation, and immigration judges reject more asylum applications.

The neurological mechanisms are complex but may involve heat’s ability to disrupt serotonin function in the brain, a phenomenon that has been tied to impulsive violence. Cognitively, heat also appears to act as a kind of “load” on our attention systems, making us more distractible and impairing functions like problem-solving and emotional regulation.

Ultimately, our brains prioritize survival in the heat—even if that means sacrificing some of our most prized cognitive abilities. It’s an evolutionary trade-off with major implications as the world warms. By understanding heat’s intimate effects on the mind, we can better grasp the human dimensions of climate change.

Air pollution, too, unleashed by wildfires for example, can infiltrate our minds and shape our behavior in alarming ways. Economically, it’s been shown to dampen productivity among everyone from farm workers to call center employees. But the effects run deeper: Air pollution has been linked to impaired learning and memory, reduced test scores in high schoolers, and even unethical behavior like cheating. The tiny particulates in polluted air can spark inflammation in the brain, impairing cognition and decision-making. These impacts often fall disproportionately on low-income communities, highlighting the entanglement of environmental and social justice. As with heat, confronting air pollution means reckoning with its unseen yet pervasive influence on our inner worlds.

3. Climate change spreads brain disease.

In the tangled web of global warming’s health impacts, one of the most insidious and unsettling threads is the spread of brain disease. As rising temperatures and shifting weather patterns reshape ecosystems, they’re not just altering landscapes—they’re creating new opportunities for neurological ailments to flourish and spread.

One major pathway is through the expansion of zoonotic diseases. As climate change nudges animal populations into new territories and closer proximity to humans, the potential for pathogen spillover grows. Mosquito-borne illnesses like Japanese encephalitis and Zika, for example, are hitching a ride into new regions as their insect vectors expand their ranges. Warmer temperatures are often a boon for these disease carriers, allowing them to live in once-inhospitable areas and reproduce more rapidly.

Climate change is also awakening dormant dangers like the brain-eating amoeba Naegleria fowleri . As waters warm, these microbes can bloom in freshwater sources, entering the brain via the nasal cavity and causing devastating meningoencephalitis. While infections are rare, they’re almost invariably fatal—a stark reminder of the high stakes in our warming world.

Another threat lurks in the rising tide of neurotoxins. As harmful algal blooms expand in both frequency and geographical spread, so too does the reach of toxins like BMAA—a compound linked to neurodegenerative diseases like ALS and Alzheimer’s. These toxins can bioaccumulate up the food chain. Even more troubling, though, evidence suggests these toxins may be going airborne, drifting in sea spray and dust. No longer confined to the dinner plate, they’re becoming an inescapable part of the atmosphere. Combined with the rising scourge of mercury, another potent neurotoxin being released from thawing permafrost, the neurological burden of climate change is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid.

Taken together, these threats paint a worrying picture. As the planet heats up, so too does the risk of brain diseases—and often it’s the most vulnerable among us who are at greatest risk. Tackling this challenge will require a concerted interdisciplinary effort: one that recognizes the deep interconnections between planetary and human health. It’s a tall order but one we cannot afford to ignore. After all, our minds may quite literally depend on it.

4. Mental health reflects planetary health.

In the intricate dance between mind and world, our mental well-being is intimately intertwined with the health of the planet. The psychological toll of a warming world is becoming increasingly apparent, etched into the contours of our collective psyche.

Consider the plight of communities on the front lines of environmental degradation. As rising seas swallow coastlines and drought parches fields, the mental health burden is immense. The existential distress caused by environmental change is an all-too-real phenomenon linked to heightened rates of anxiety, depression, and even suicide. For these communities, the scars of climate change are not just physical but deeply psychological.

Even for those not immediately in the path of, say, a hurricane, the specter of climate change looms large. Eco-anxiety, the chronic fear of environmental doom, is on the rise, particularly among young people. It’s a generational trauma, a weight carried by those who will inherit a world in chaos. This pervasive sense of dread and helplessness is a mirror held up to a planet in peril.

But the mental health impacts of climate change are not just about anxiety and despair. As natural disasters become more frequent and severe, rates of post-traumatic stress disorder are climbing. The terror of a wildfire or the devastation of a hurricane can leave deep psychological wounds long after the physical damage is repaired. These mental scars are a reflection of a world increasingly defined by upheaval and uncertainty. We also know that experiencing extreme environmental stress in utero (such as living through a hurricane) can drastically increase a child’s risk of anxiety, depression, conduct disorders, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD. These epigenetic effects are likely heritable as well.

Ultimately, our mental health is a barometer of planetary health. As the world around us unravels, so too do the threads of our psychological well-being. Addressing this crisis will require a paradigm shift—one that recognizes the fundamental interconnectedness of mind and nature. It’s a recognition that in healing the planet, we may also begin to heal ourselves. After all, as the adage goes, there is no health without mental health—and perhaps no mental health without a healthy planet.

5. Mindfulness matters.

At its core, mindfulness is about cultivating a deep embodied awareness—a way of being fully present to the reality of our experience. And in a world increasingly shaped by climate change, this capacity for presence has never been more essential.

On an individual level, the neuroscience of mindfulness offers a really compelling case for its transformative potential. Training the brain to focus on the present moment can serve as a powerful counterweight to the impulsivity and distractibility effects of environmental stressors, as well as the anxiety and despair that often accompany eco-distress. Studies have shown that mindfulness increases gray matter density in regions associated with learning, memory, and emotion regulation, such as the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, while reducing the size and reactivity of the amygdala, that primal seat of fear and reactivity. Functional connectivity between brain regions that regulate attention and executive control is enhanced, leading to better emotional regulation. Mindfulness also decreases activity in the default mode network, which is linked to mind-wandering, thereby improving present-moment awareness.

But the benefits of mindfulness extend far beyond the individual. In fostering a deeper awareness of our interconnectedness with the world around us, mindfulness can serve as a catalyst for action. By attuning us to the subtle web of cause and effect that binds us to the planet, it can inspire a renewed sense of responsibility and stewardship. Mindfulness, in this sense, is not just about finding inner peace—it’s about awakening to the reality of our ecological embeddedness.

This awakening is all the more crucial in light of the neurological impacts of climate change. Imagine a world where the mental health implications of climate change were given the same urgency as its physical impacts. Where awareness was not just a personal practice but a societal value woven into the fabric of our institutions and decision-making processes.

This is the world that mindfulness invites us to create. A world where we are fully present to the reality of the crisis yet not paralyzed by despair. Where we can hold the grief and the beauty, the fear and the possibility in equal measure. Where we can face the enormity of the challenge with clear eyes and maybe even open hearts.

In the end, mindfulness matters because it offers us a way to face the reality of climate change—to face it squarely without flinching, and respond with wisdom and compassion. It is a radical act of presence in a world that would rather look away. And in that presence, we may find the clarity and courage to build a better future—for ourselves, each other, and the planet we call home.

This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission.

Apply to the Most Innovative Companies Awards and be recognized as an organization driving the world forward through innovation. Final deadline: Friday, October 4.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The best new nonfiction book summaries in 15 minutes, directly from the authors. Book club curated by Malcolm Gladwell, Adam Grant, Susan Cain, and Daniel Pink.   More

Explore Topics

• Climate change
• Tech How Caitlin Covington made ‘Christian Girl Autumn’ an annual tradition
• Tech Lyft announces layoffs, will restructure its bike and scooter business
• Tech OpenAI cofounder’s new AI startup SSI raises $1 billion
• News Can you guess the best business schools for 2024? LinkedIn’s top MBA programs might surprise you
• News Dollar Tree and Family Dollar stock falls 20% as company puts blame on the economy
• News U.S. launches investigation into Shein and Temu over ‘deadly’ baby items
• Design You can bring moonlight indoors thanks to this $30,000 lamp that looks exactly like the moon
• Design These new Crocs are rock ’n’ roll in the street, comfort on your feet
• Design Tom Brady’s $200 million NFT startup Autograph relaunches without NFTs
• Work Life 9 practical tips for overcoming bias in performance reviews
• Work Life How to mentor a know-it-all effectively
• Work Life 3 ways to improve DEI efforts in the workplace

What do global climate change and global warming look like? Surface temperature statistics paint a compelling picture of the changing climate: 2023, according to the European Union (link resides outside of ibm.com) climate monitor Copernicus, was the warmest year on record—nearly 1.5 degrees Celsius warmer than pre-industrial levels.

To gain a holistic understanding of the current climate crisis and future climate implications, however, it’s important to look beyond global average temperature records. The impacts of climate change may be organized into three categories:

• Intensifying extreme weather events
• Changes to natural ecosystems
• Harm to human health and well-being

While climate change is defined as a shift in long-term weather patterns, its impacts include an increase in the severity of short-term weather events.

• Heat waves: Dangerous heat waves are becoming more common and are one of the most obvious effects of climate change as the Earth’s temperature continues to rise.
• Droughts: Higher temperatures can cause faster water evaporation, making arid regions even more dry. Climate change-linked shifts in atmospheric circulation can further exacerbate drought conditions as rain bypasses dry regions.
• Wildfires: Droughts and faster water evaporation can lead to drier vegetation, fueling larger and more frequent wildfires. According to NASA (link resides outside of ibm.com), even typically rainy regions will be more vulnerable to wildfires and wildfire seasons are extending around the globe.
• Heavy rain and tropical storms: Climate change alters precipitation patterns, with NASA reporting more frequent periods of excess precipitation. Scientists project further increases (link resides outside of ibm.com) in tropical cyclone rainfall in particular, due to greater atmospheric moisture content.
• Increased coastal flooding: Sea level rises associated with global warming are leaving low-lying coastal areas vulnerable to greater flooding, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, link resides outside of ibm.com).

Due to climate change, natural ecosystems are undergoing long-term changes and declines in biodiversity. Here are a few examples:

• Sea ice loss and melting ice sheets: Declining levels of Arctic sea ice threaten the habitats of species such as polar bears and walruses. Polar bears hunt seals in the Arctic sea ice habitat while walruses rely on the ice as a place to rest when they’re not diving for food. In Greenland and Antarctica, melting ice sheets are contributing to rising sea levels, endangering coastal ecosystems around the world.
• Damage to coral reefs: Ocean temperature increases in warmer climates from Australia to Florida are causing coral reefs to lose colorful algae, leading to what’s known as “coral bleaching.”
• Ocean acidification: Marine life is also at risk from ocean acidification, stemming from greenhouse gas emissions and the greater concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That carbon dioxide is absorbed by seawater, leading to chemical reactions that make oceans more acidic. Shellfish are especially vulnerable to ocean acidification, which NOAA describes as having “osteoporosis-like effects” on oysters and clams.
• Invasive species proliferation: Warmer temperatures allow invasive species to move to new areas, often to the detriment of native wildlife. The spread of the purple loosestrife plant in North America, for instance, has reduced nesting sites and resulted in the decline of some bird populations.
• Harm to estuarine ecosystems: Droughts reduce freshwater flows and increase salinity in estuaries, while greater precipitation increases stormwater runoff, introducing more sediment and pollution. These changes threaten the wildlife that rely on specific estuarine conditions to thrive.

Climate change is increasingly impacting the quality of life on Earth, affecting people’s health and economic well-being.

• Illnesses and fatalities: Rising global temperatures foster conditions for infectious diseases to spread, and extreme weather events cause tragic loss of life as well as illnesses. Poor air quality from wildfire smoke can exacerbate asthma and heart disease, for example, while heat waves can cause heat exhaustion. More than 60,000 people (link resides outside of ibm.com) died in European heat waves in 2022.
• Food insecurity: Droughts and scarcity of water supplies, severe storms, extreme heat and invasive species can cause crop failures and food insecurity. Most of those at risk of climate change-linked hunger are in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, according to the World Bank (link resides outside of ibm.com).
• Financial consequences: Climate change can hurt businesses and individuals’ financial well-being. For example, changing weather patterns have imperiled wine production in California, while rising sea levels threaten the future of Caribbean coastal resorts. Meanwhile, insurance companies are increasingly declining to provide property insurance in areas vulnerable to extreme weather, leaving homeowners there at greater financial risk.
• Damage to infrastructure: Wildfires, powerful storms and flooding can damage energy grids , leading to power outages, as well as transportation networks, hindering people’s ability to access services and goods to meet their daily needs. Damage to one type of infrastructure can lead to consequences for another: As noted by the U.S. government’s National Climate Assessment  (link resides outside of ibm.com), “failure of the electrical grid can affect everything from water treatment to public health.”

Though some of the impacts on Earth’s climate are irreversible, a wide range of organizations from the public and private sector are working on climate actions that address the causes of climate change. These include ongoing mitigation strategies and targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, such as emissions of carbon dioxide and methane.

Meeting these targets relies in part on the growth of clean, renewable energy production that reduces the world’s reliance on energy derived from the burning of fossil fuels. Other climate science innovation could also contribute to climate change mitigation measures, ranging from carbon capture technology to methods of neutralizing ocean acidity (link resides outside of ibm.com).

Existing sustainable technologies can also help companies lower their carbon footprint. Artificial intelligence-powered analysis, for example, can help companies identify what parts of their operations produce the most greenhouse gas emissions; carbon accounting can inform their strategies on reducing those emissions.

Of utmost importance, scientists say, is acting quickly.

“If we act now,” IPCC Chair Hoesung Lee said in a 2023 statement (link resides outside of ibm.com), “we can still secure a livable sustainable future for all.”

Put your sustainability initiatives into action by managing the economic impact of severe weather and climate change on your business practices through the IBM Environmental Intelligence Suite .

Explore sustainability strategy

Learn about climate and weather risk management

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Climate Change Can Cause Bridges to ‘Fall Apart Like Tinkertoys,’ Experts Say

Extreme heat and flooding are accelerating the deterioration of bridges, engineers say, posing a quiet but growing threat.

By Coral Davenport

Coral Davenport has reported on climate change policy and the impacts of climate change on the economy for 18 years.

On a 95-degree day this summer, New York City’s Third Avenue Bridge, connecting the Bronx and Manhattan, got stuck in the open position for hours. As heat and flooding scorched and scoured the Midwest, a steel railroad bridge connecting Iowa with South Dakota collapsed under surging waters. In Lewiston, Maine, a bridge closed after the pavement buckled from fluctuating temperatures.

America’s bridges, a quarter of which were built before 1960, were already in need of repair. But now, extreme heat and increased flooding linked to climate change are accelerating the disintegration of the nation’s bridges, engineers say, essentially causing them to age prematurely.

The result is a quiet but growing threat to the safe movement of people and goods around the country, and another example of how climate change is reshaping daily life in ways Americans may not realize .

“We have a bridge crisis that is specifically tied to extreme weather events,” said Paul Chinowsky, a professor of civil engineering at the University of Colorado Boulder who researches the effects of climate change on infrastructure. “These are not things that would happen under normal climate circumstances. These are not things that we’ve ever seen at this rate.”

Bridges designed and built decades ago with materials not intended to withstand sharp temperature swings are now rapidly swelling and contracting, leaving them weakened.

“It’s getting so hot that the pieces that hold the concrete and steel, those bridges can literally fall apart like Tinkertoys,” Dr. Chinowsky said.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

American Climate Policy Opinions

Aug. 27, 2024

Jon A. Krosnick and Bo MacInnis

Publication

Reading time

Introduction

In Climate Insights 2024: American Understanding of Climate Change, we showed that huge majorities of Americans believe that the earth has been warming, that the warming has been caused by human activity, that warming poses a significant threat to the nation and the world—especially to future generations—and that governments, businesses, and individuals should be taking steps to address it.

In this report, we turn to specific federal government opportunities to reduce future greenhouse gas emissions, often referred to as climate change mitigation. Policies to accomplish this goal fall into several categories, including:

• Consumer incentives that reward people for taking steps that reduce their use of fossil fuels and, by extension, reduce their carbon footprint
• Carbon pricing policies that require emitters to pay for their carbon emissions, such as a carbon tax (which would require carbon emitters to pay a tax for each ton of carbon they emit), or a cap-and-trade program (which would require businesses to have a permit for each ton of carbon they emit)
• Regulations that require manufacturers to increase energy efficiency of their products
• Tax incentives that encourage manufacturers to increase the energy efficiency of their products

This 2024 survey asked Americans about their opinions on a wide array of such policies, which allows us not only to assess current opinions, but to track changes in those opinions over the past two decades through comparisons with responses to comparable questions asked in earlier national surveys.

Explore the Data

Click here to explore the report's findings using our interactive data tool.

Overall emissions reduction strategies

In 2024, we asked for the first time whether Americans prefer using “carrots” to reduce emissions or “sticks.” The former entails offering incentives to reward companies for achieving desired outcomes, and the latter involves penalizing companies that fail to reach desired goals. 59 percent of Americans prefer a carrot approach in which government lowers taxes for companies that reduce emissions, and 35 percent prefer a stick approach such that government raises taxes on companies that do not reduce emissions (see Figure 1).

Overall emissions reduction principles

Over the past decades, a consistently large majority of Americans has wanted the government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by US businesses. In 2024, 74 percent of Americans endorse this mitigation policy principle (see Figure 2). This number is not significantly different from the 77 percent seen in 2020 and is about the same as it has been since 1997 when this series of surveys was launched.

Most Popular Policies (>60 percent approval)

Taxing imported emissions.

In 2024, we asked about import taxes tied to emissions; respondents were asked whether they would favor taxing foreign companies for importing products that put out more greenhouse gases than a comparable US product. A huge majority of Americans, 84 percent , favor the special tax (see Figure 3).

Assisting with job transitions

In 2024, we asked whether the federal government should spend money to help people who lose jobs due to a transition from fossil-based electricity generation to electricity generated from renewable sources. 78 percent of Americans favor the government paying those people to learn to do other kinds of work.

Filling abandoned oil wells

In 2024, we asked whether the federal government should spend money to close off abandoned oil wells that emit greenhouse gases; 76 percent of Americans favor the government spending money to fill these old wells.

Shifting energy generation to renewable power

Huge numbers of Americans favor government effort to shift electricity generation away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy sources.

In 2024, 72 percent of Americans believe that the US government should offer tax breaks to utilities in exchange for making more electricity from water, wind, and solar sources. However, this is a statistically significant decline from the 85 percent seen in 2020, and a record low since 2006 (see Figure 6).

13 percentage points fewer Americans believe that the US government should offer tax breaks to utilities in exchange for making more electricity from renewable sources in 2024 than 2020.

Slight changes to the question wording yielded similar results: 76 percent of Americans in 2024 favor either mandates or tax breaks for utilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. This number is not significantly different from the 82 percent seen in 2020 and is about the same as it has been since 2009. Before 2009, this proportion was slightly higher: 86 percent and 88 percent in 2006 and 2007, respectively (see Figure 7).

Increasing the energy efficiency of products

About two-thirds of Americans favor government efforts through tax breaks or mandates to improve the energy efficiency of various consumer products (see Figure 8).

Specifically, 62 percent of Americans in 2024 favor increasing the fuel efficiency of automobiles, a statistically significant drop from the 72 percent seen in 2020.

68 percent favor increasing the energy efficiency of appliances, similar to the 71 percent observed in 2020.

69 percent favor increasing the energy efficiency of new buildings, a statistically significant decline from the 76 percent in 2020.

Sequestering carbon

In 2024, 63 percent of Americans favor reducing emissions by sequestering (i.e., capturing and storing) carbon released by burning coal. This level of support has been steady over the past 15 years (see Figure 9).

84% of respondents favor import taxes tied to emissions, making it the most popular policy we surveyed.

Moderately Popular Policies (50–60 percent approval)

Reducing subsidies for fossil fuels.

In 2024, we asked for the first time whether the federal government should continue its long-standing practice of offering subsidies to oil and natural gas companies by reducing their taxes.

61 percent of Americans favor ending government reduction of oil companies’ taxes, and 37 percent believe these subsidies should continue.

42 percent of Americans favor ending government reduction of natural gas companies’ taxes, and 56 percent believe that these subsidies should continue.

Taxing greenhouse gases

When asked whether companies should be charged a tax for every ton of greenhouse gases they emit, 54 percent of respondents were in favor in 2024, a statistically significant decline from the 66 percent observed in 2020 (figure 10).

Creating a cap-and-trade program

Although economists generally assert that a carbon tax incentivizes companies to reduce emissions (Baumol and Oates, 1971; Climate Leadership Council, 2019; Marron and Toder, 2014; Montgomery, 1972; World Bank, 2017), a carbon tax does not guarantee that such emissions reductions will happen.

A cap-and-trade or cap-and-dividend policy, on the other hand, are alternative policies in which a government sets a limit, or ‘cap,’ on emissions. The cap is imposed by government-issued permits that limit emissions. The government gives, sells, or auctions the permits to companies, creating an opportunity to generate revenue. A cap-and-dividend program would return this revenue to consumers through a rebate.

The logic in asking this question about cap and trade is to assess whether more Americans would favor a greenhouse gas tax if assured that it would result in emissions reductions. However, we show cap-and-trade and cap-and-dividend policies are not notably more popular than straightforward taxes.

In 2024, 52 percent of Americans favor a cap-and-dividend policy, a statistically significant decline from the 63 percent observed in 2020 (see FIgure 11).

Subsidizing solar panels

In 2024, we asked respondents whether the federal government should spend money to help people install solar panels on houses and apartment buildings. Respondents were randomly assigned to be asked one of four versions of the question. Two versions asked about the government paying all of the installation costs, and the other two versions asked about the government paying some of the costs.

For half of each group (chosen randomly), the question was preceded by this introduction:

“Solar panels can generate electricity when the sun is shining, and that electricity can be stored in batteries to be used when the sun is not out. However, companies that make electricity cannot install enough solar panels to make all of the electricity needed in the country. People can put solar panels on the roofs of many houses and apartment buildings so much more of America’s electricity can be made from the sun. But it is expensive to do this, and most people cannot afford to pay that amount of money.”

Among people who did not hear the introduction, 51 percent favor the government paying some of the cost, and 42 percent favor the government paying all of the costs.

Among people who did hear the introduction, 77 percent favor the government paying some of the cost, and 74 percent favor the government paying all of the costs.

Permitting reform

In 2024, we asked whether the federal government should expedite the process of granting permits to build new power plants that make electricity from sources other than coal and petroleum. 52 percent of Americans favor expediting this process.

Least Popular Policies (<50 percent approval)

Nuclear power tax breaks.

Although nuclear power does not directly emit greenhouse gases, tax breaks for the construction of new nuclear power plants are among the least popular policies asked about in 2024. 47 percent of Americans favor this policy; however, it is notable that this is a statistically significant increase from the 37 percent observed in 2020 (see FIgure 12).

All-electric vehicle tax breaks

In 2024, 46 percent of Americans—a record low—think the government should require or give tax breaks to companies to build all-electric vehicles, a statistically significant decline from the 60 percent observed in 2015 when this question was last asked (see Figure 13).

Taxes on consumers

The least popular policies impose new taxes on consumers to incentivize them to consume less fossil fuel. Few Americans favor increasing taxes on retail gasoline and electricity purchases for this purpose. 15 percent approve increasing taxes on electricity, a statistically significant decline from the 28 percent observed in 2020. Likewise, 28 percent approve increasing taxes on gasoline, a statistically significant decline from the 41 percent observed in 2020 (see Figure 14).

Economic Effects of Mitigation Policies

Perceived effect on the economy.

Implementing many policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will cost consumers and companies in the short term. Implementing such policies may also increase the cost of American-made goods and services relative to the costs of those goods and services produced elsewhere. This has led some observers to urge caution about implementing greenhouse gas emissions reduction policies (e.g., Cassidy, 2023; Gross, 2021), because they may result in undesirable economic side effects.

However, this argument does not appear to have taken hold with the majority of Americans. For example, only 36 percent of Americans in 2024 believe that taking action to address global warming will hurt the US economy, about the same as was observed in 2013 (30 percent), though this is a statistically significant increase from the 29 percent observed in 2020 (see FIgure 15). Likewise, in 2024, 34 percent believed that these efforts would hurt their state economy, a statistically significant increase from the 24 percent observed in 2020.

More Americans believe that climate action will help the economy. 44 percent of Americans believe this in 2024, about the same as was observed in 2020 (48 percent) and 15 years ago (46 percent) (see Figure 15). 39 percent of Americans believe that efforts to reduce global warming will help their state economy in 2024, a statistically significant decrease from 46 percent in 2020.

Job availability

A similar picture emerged regarding beliefs about how climate action will affect job availability. Only 27 percent of Americans believe that efforts to reduce emissions will reduce the number of jobs in the nation—the same as was observed in 2020 (see Figure 16). And in 2024, 35 percent of Americans believe that climate change action will increase the number of jobs in the country, similar to the 39 percent observed in 2020.

28 percent of Americans believe that climate change action will reduce the number of jobs in their state, similar to the 23 percent observed in 2020 (see Figure 16). And 32 percent of Americans in 2024 believe that climate action will increase the number of jobs in their state, about the same as the 35 percent observed in 2020.

27 percent of Americans believe that efforts to reduce emissions will reduce the number of jobs in the nation

Personal economic impacts

In 2024, we asked respondents about the likely impact of mitigation efforts on their own personal economic situation. A majority of Americans believe that they will have the same amount of money regardless of mitigation efforts (54 percent). 36 percent believe their wealth will decrease, a statistically significant increase over the 20 percent observed in 2020 (see Figure 17). But 8 percent believe that climate change mitigation will increase their wealth, similar to the 10 percent observed in 2020.

Likewise, a majority (64 percent) believe that mitigation efforts will have no impact on their chance of getting a good-paying job. 17 percent believe that mitigation efforts will make them less likely to get a good-paying job, a statistically significant increase from the 12 percent observed in 2020 (see Figure 17). 17 percent believe that mitigation efforts will increase their ability to get a good-paying job, similar to the 16 percent observed in 2020.

Voting in the 2024 Election

Are the many policy preferences outlined in this report just talk, or do they inspire action in the voting booth? We turn to that question next and describe the findings from a test.

Respondents were read a statement by a hypothetical candidate running for a seat in the US Senate and were asked whether hearing that statement makes the respondents more likely to vote for the candidate, less likely to vote for the candidate, or has no impact.

One statement expressed “green views” that summarized opinions expressed by majorities of Americans:

“I believe that global warming has been happening for the past 100 years, mainly because we have been burning fossil fuels and putting out greenhouse gases. Now is the time for us to be using new forms of energy that are made in America and will be renewable forever. We can manufacture better cars that use less gasoline and build better appliances that use less electricity. We need to transform the outdated ways of generating energy into new ones that create jobs and entire industries and stop the damage we’ve been doing to the environment.”

The other statement proposed expanding production of energy from traditionally used fossil fuels:

“The science on global warming is a hoax and is an attempt to perpetrate a fraud on the American people. I don’t buy into the whole man-caused global warming mantra. We must spend no effort to deal with something that is not a problem at all. We should not invest in windmills and solar panels as alternative energy sources. Instead, we should continue to focus on our traditional sources of energy: coal, oil, and natural gas. We should expand energy production in our country, including continuing to mine our coal and doing more drilling for oil here at home.”

Hearing a green view makes 57 percent of Americans more likely to vote for the candidate, a statistically significant decline from the 65 percent observed in 2020 (see Figure 18). Democrats are significantly more likely to be attracted to a “green” candidate (83 percent) than are Independents (56 percent) and Republicans (23 percent) (see Figure 19).

Hearing the green statement makes only 18 percent of Americans less likely to vote for the candidate (see Figure 18).

Hearing the candidate make a “not-green” statement makes only 21 percent more likely to vote for the candidate (see Figure 18). 43 percent of Republicans are more likely to support the candidate, compared to 20 percent of Independents and 5 percent of Democrats (see Figure 19).

Hearing the “not-green” statement makes 63 percent of Americans less likely to vote for the candidate, similar to the 66 percent observed in 2020 (see FIgure 18). This proportion is greatest among Democrats (88 percent), smaller among Independents (62 percent), and still smaller among Republicans (29 percent) (see Figure 19).

Because almost all Republican citizens vote for Republican candidates and almost all Democratic citizens vote for Democratic candidates, the greatest impact of candidate statements in shaping election outcomes is among Independents. Among them, the same pattern appears that appears among all Americans: taking a “green” position helped a candidate and taking a “not-green” position hurt the candidate.

Taken together, these results point to climate change mitigation policies that may be pursued in the future with widespread public support (such as efforts to reduce emissions from power plants). Furthermore, these results also identify a few policy directions that are well received by few Americans, despite being plausible in theory and in practice (like taxes on electricity and gasoline).

For decades, one school of thought commonly followed by some scholars and policymakers is that economic growth and environmental protection are incompatible, and that any efforts to grow the economy must, of necessity, take resources away from helping the environment. Such a presumption creates an “either the economy or the environment” mindset. This mindset has been reinforced by survey questions asking Americans (e.g., Mildenberger & Leiserowitz, 2017), for example: “With which one of these statements about the environment and the economy do you most agree? ‘Protection of the environment should be given priority, even at the risk of curbing economic growth.’ Or: ‘Economic growth should be given priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent’” (Gallup, 2024).

If Americans do perceive this trade-off as inevitable, the COVID-19 pandemic and associated economic crisis a few years ago might have tilted them away from environmental protection generally and away from efforts to mitigate climate change; the subsequent recovery might have increased support for such efforts. The present study refutes that notion resoundingly. In fact, we see small changes in the opposite direction: slightly less public support for some emissions-reducing policies than four years ago.

Few people believe that taking steps to reduce emissions will hurt the national economy, their state’s economy, or their personal finances, and more Americans believe that such policies will improve these economic outcomes.

Finally, we saw that the policy positions candidates take on this issue are likely to influence the votes of many Americans. Thus, policymakers and their challengers have opportunities to use these issues to help assemble the coalitions needed to accomplish electoral victories. By taking “green” positions, candidates gain considerably more votes than they lost.

Download the Report

Click here to view the full report with citations.

PDF — 5.2 MB

Download the Technical Report

Click here to read more about the methodology and survey questions.

PDF — 716.3 KB

Click here to read the report press release.

• Federal Climate Policy
• Comprehensive Climate Strategies
• Climate Insights

Jon A. Krosnick

University Fellow

Jon A. Krosnick is an RFF university fellow and Stanford University-based social psychologist who does research on attitude formation, change, and effects, on the psychology of political behavior, and on survey research methods.

Bo MacInnis

Lecturer, Political Psychology Research, Stanford University

Related Content

Report — Jul 15, 2024

Climate Insights 2024: American Understanding of Climate Change

This first report in the 2024 Climate Insights report series by researchers at Stanford University and RFF examines American public opinion on issues related to climate change.

Press Release — Sep 3, 2024

How Would More Federal Oil and Gas Leasing Increase Global Emissions?

As US elections loom and policymakers contemplate the United States’ energy future, a new issue brief explores what a federal oil and gas leasing boom, carried out under existing federal law, could mean for global emissions.

Issue Brief — Sep 3, 2024

How Much Would Expanding Federal Oil and Gas Leasing Increase Global Carbon Emissions?

This issue brief models the impacts of expanding oil and gas production on US federal lands.

Resources Radio — Sep 3, 2024

Implications of the Supreme Court Overturning the Chevron Decision, with Daniel Farber

Daniel Farber discusses the Supreme Court decision Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned the legal precedent known as the Chevron deference, along with the implications of this decision for environmental regulation and policymaking.

We use cookies to provide you with a better service. Carry on browsing if you're happy with this, or find out more.