May 2025

LOCAL

1) Media articles written by CKM members since the last newsletter. 

01/03/2025 - Is growth, growth, growth really the way to go?

"It is common for people to think of the climate and environmental crises as being problems to be solved. Unfortunately it is not that simple. The situation is better thought of as a predicament. A predicament does not have clear answers or ways to be resolved. This is the quandary we find ourselves in now. Do we want to face the reality of our predicament?
Can we choose to discourage tourism and helicopter flights to view the vineyards, or the multitude of other high emissions discretionary activities we can manage without?
Can we have an informed debate about what an ecologically and socially sustainable future might look like? If this is too big a step to take, then we will be left with the consequences of our collective actions and unfortunately that means increasing extreme weather events, environmental breakdown and damage to our social fabric."

15/04/2025 - We will be tested: Rising to the challenge of global warming.

"Outdoor programmes like Girl Guides, Scouts Aotearoa and Outward Bound teach many of the needed skills and help develop a young person’s confidence and resilience. They also teach teamwork, which will help future communities work together to rescue, resource and rebuild after the disasters that will be all the more frequent in the coming years.

This last point – working together - bears emphasis. People will need to put aside their differences and work together and care for each other, in order for humanity to have the best chance of making it through to a sustainable future. We need to resist the influences that would polarise us into antagonistic social and political camps. In the testing years ahead, we would be wise to heed the ancient wisdom: “United we stand, divided we fall.”

This is a test humanity can’t afford to fail."

09/05/2025 - How to define success as the cost of climate disruption rises.

"A growing number of writers and thinkers have proposed that the way to remain happy in the face of economic loss is to change our story – change it from one of individual prosperity to one of collective support and meaning. What if we planned and worked toward a situation of community well-being, where we each did our part to support our community and our community, in return, supported us? What if, instead of savouring the pride in a new possession or position, we savoured the pride of a meaningful community contribution, helping to make ours and our neighbour’s lives just a little bit better?

In the coming years, survival may actually depend upon a story of community care and collective action. The growing community of climate crisis ‘preppers’ – people preparing for climate disasters - are taking a different tack than the usual doomsday preppers. Instead of guns and bunkers, they talk about the need for strong, close-knit communities. We will be far better off facing the difficult times ahead together rather than on our own. This new story might not just give us fulfilment in the difficult times ahead, it might keep us alive, as well."

I have just accessed Tom's May article, which was published on "The Press" website, and found that I can't get full access to it without subscribing. I have though been able to access the March and April articles with no problem. If you have the same problem here are links to the full articles. "Is growth, growth, growth really the way to go?" , "We will be tested," and "How to define success as the cost of climate disruption rises." .

2) Marlborough Council Tackles Next Stage Of Climate Action.

MDC recently completed a review of the 2020 Climate Action Plan and a report titled, "Marlborough Climate Change & Adaptation Action Plan",  was presented to the Environment and Planning Committee on March 13th. It is impressive. Considerable effort has gone into producing it and it is far more comprehensive in its scope than the original Plan.

The review - ....details the coordinated actions underway across the Marlborough region related to the following four key topics:

• Climate Change, and Natural Hazards exacerbated by Climate Change.
• Natural Hazards.
• Adaptation, Vulnerability, Risk, and Resilience.
• Emissions, Renewable Energy and Waste.

It has many commendable aims such as -

• Considering how best to assess the intersection of hazards referred to as ‘cascading risk’ across multiple climate change or hazard projects,
• The action plan intends for consistent lines of communication and that all outcomes are shared with key stakeholders, and to the wider community in a clear and concise manner, recognising the highly technical nature of the work, the embedded risk, and at times the uncertainty that accompanies the work. 
• The updated action plan presents an opportunity for strategic and structured responses to how we understand, approach and tackle climate change considerations now and into the future.
• Strategic opportunities are identified by the action plan, a key focus of the action plan is not just the collection of information but also strategically do something with it. The challenge in this space is to integrate ongoing climate change considerations into existing Council processes.

If you wish to read my full summary report presented to the CKM April meeting you can download a copy.

If you wish to view the video here is the link to the presentation to E&P committee. The relevant item starts at 28 minutes -

If interested you can also check out this informative article about the updated Action Plan written by Maia Hart.

Jamie Sigmund was the lead staff person who worked on the report with input from all levels of staff from management down. Tom and I met with him and had a good discussion for about an hour and a half. The Plan identifies information gathering as the first priority in their program. In our discussion Jamie focussed quite a lot on sea level rise (SLR) and the extra work MDC is planning to do to refine SLR projections particularly in the Lower Wairau, including the hydro-dynamic modelling referred to below. This is part of a wider Risk Assessment that is seen as an important first step in any longer term planning for Climate Change impacts and adaptation strategies.

Some of you may remember the Marlborough District Sea Level Rise Assessment that was presented to Council in October 2023 by NIWA. For approximately 90% of the Marlborough assessment area (including the Marlborough Sounds and the East Coast south of White Bluffs / Te Parinui o Whiti) NIWA have high confidence that the report and spatial modelling is an appropriate representation of future SLR scenarios.

The NIWA assessment uses a “bathtub” model to produce inundation maps that show the spatial extent. The inundation data is generated by projecting an extreme sea level value across land, with any land that lies below the extreme sea level deemed to be inundated. However, this simplified bathtub approach does come with caveats. Storm-tide peaks may typically last for only 1 to 3 hours around the time of high tide. This duration may not provide sufficient time to inundate large land areas, particularly if seawater ingress rates are affected by narrow constrictions, such as drainage channels and culverts. Therefore, bathtub type models do not fully capture the dynamic and time-variant processes that occur during an inundation event, and usually result in an over estimation of coastal inundation. For the Lower Wairau Plain (including Blenheim, Rārangi to Te Pokohiwi / Boulder Bank) NIWA recommends undertaking further refinement work. This is because both the Wairau and Opaoa rivers and Vernon Lagoon heavily influence the tidal ebb and flow and more robust hydro-dynamic modelling is expected to greatly improve the confidence in representing future SLR scenarios.
 
There are two initial pieces of work that a budget is being sought for, thru the 2025/26 annual plan process.  
 
1) Environmental Monitoring Network Resilience Improvements. This is to assess how council can continue to deliver an effective flood warning network to the community under the current and future effects of climate change.
 
2) The second is a wider risk assessment where "First Pass" assessments for each climate change and natural hazard project in the Action Plan are undertaken.

This budget is for staff time and Environmental Science work. Initially Jamie advised us there was to be an opportunity for public input, but later he let us know a new process and approach was used, which did not follow the process he was more familiar with.

He has let us know -

"The positive news to come out of the process used was that both papers I presented were verbally approved for funding. This included the first pass risk assessment for each climate change and natural hazard project. More on this to come, pointing out I must also wait for the formal acknowledgment of approval. Movement in the positive direction."

3) Freshwater management and the Marlborough economy.

This report, released in the middle of May, describes how primary production depends on our region’s freshwater and land. It was commissioned for the Council’s implementation of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM) 2020. It says this is an important way that Council continues to increase its knowledge base while the Government works on the latest version of the NPSFM 2020.

I noted the important following statement from lead author Emma Moran, in the Council media release -

"One critical insight from the report is the correlation between changing climatic conditions and water availability. Climate forecasts predict more extreme weather, which could significantly alter the local economy. Understanding these dynamics is crucial in considering policy changes for fresh water”.

If you wish to see more you can download the full report from the MDC website.

4) Proposed Waste Fees and Charges for 2025-26.

MDC posted this information on May 26th which will affect all users of the Marlborough waste disposal service. I was interested to note that over half the proposed increase is due to government requirements and in particular to the increase in the cost of carbon credits. You can read the overview document and access the full consultation document on the MDC website.

For 2025-26 Council has set a new fee structure for the Bluegums Landfill to ensure costs are recovered for each waste stream. Council has determined a weighted average pricing structure as the fairest and most accurate system to use.

The proposed average increase from 1 September 2025 at the Bluegums landfill is 17.82% for all waste types except for grass clippings and green waste. It is proposed that the price for grass clippings remains the same as it is currently and green waste will increase more to help realign these two types of waste.

Almost half of the increase is related to Government requirements, including an increase in the Waste Levy, a change in the method of calculating of the Unique Emissions Factor (UEF) and an increase in the cost of carbon credits to offset the greenhouse gas emissions that the landfill produces. These increases are outside of Council’s control.

The balance is made up of increases in landfill aftercare and reserve provisions including operational and capital costs and post closure expenses.

Council has budgeted $22M for the 2025-26 year to cover the costs of Marlborough’s waste services.

NATIONAL

5) Kiwi citizens’ assembly succeeds in ‘experiment’ to find climate solutions.

A citizens’ assembly of 100 Porirua locals has provided the city council with more than a dozen recommendations about how to tackle climate change and make sure the region is resilient to worsening extreme weather events. Ranging from expanding access to renewable energy and incentivising the planting of native trees through to the establishment of a Youth Council and creating a marae resilience programme, the recommendations go beyond just the environment to social and economic considerations as well.

Ngāti Toa Rangatira chief executive Helmut Modlik, who helped create the Porirua Assembly, hails it as a successful demonstration of the power of deliberative democracy. “It was a journey for everybody of increased awareness of each other as fellow citizens in our city, we have a shared interest in our people and our place. In particular, a highlight was seeing the young people, the rangatahi who embraced really passionately this opportunity for their voice to be heard,” he says.

You can check out the full article by Marc Daalder on the Newsroom website.

6) As insurance gets harder to buy, NZ has 3 choices for disaster recovery – and we keep choosing the worst one.

This article in The Conversation was particularly interesting, as I believe insurance companies substantially increasing premiums in high risk areas or even pulling out altogether, will accelerate in the next few years. Our whole economic system relies on insurance to function effectively. Without property insurance home buyers can not secure mortgages and that is just one of the outcomes of this trend.

Ilan Noy and Belinda Storey have done a very good job of identifying the major issues facing policy makers.

With the retreat of insurance companies a future certainty in some communities, the government must decide how to respond. In our new research, we developed the “trilemma” framework, outlining the policy trade-offs governments face in adapting to climate change.

We found effective adaptation policy needs to achieve three goals:

• incentivise risk reduction
• be fiscally affordable
• increase equity and wellbeing and reduce hardship.

But any policy can satisfy only two of these three goals. The government has to make trade-offs.

When it comes to responding to the retreat of private insurance, the options include:

• doing nothing and letting “the market” adjust (with sharp price declines for affected properties)
• replacing private insurance with a publicly-funded alternative
• offering government-funded defences (for example, stopbanks) or buyouts to properties that can no longer be insured.

Each one of these options involves giving up on at least one of the three policy goals.

For a fuller explanation of this trilemma check out the full article.  

7) Climate target failure would bring overseas scrutiny, government warned.

The next two items are must read articles from the wonderful Eloise Gibson if you wish to understand where NZ currently stands with it's Paris climate commitments. Thank goodness there are still some dedicated journalists who are committed to putting in the legwork to provide such damning information that highlights the government's absolute obfuscation and dishonesty about NZ meeting it's 2030 emissions commitments. It is clear there is no intention to meet the target either onshore or offshore and we can be sure that, as we approach 2030 there will be multiple reasons given for kicking the can down the road yet again. I confidently predict this is exactly what will happen, not just in NZ but all over the world as 2030 gets closer. This quote from Simon Watts is evidence it seems! "You have to have the intent to meet it and if you don't meet it, no one sends you an invoice - and that's why it's not a liability on the government's books,"

The government was warned to expect overseas scrutiny over a huge shortfall in plans for meeting the country's international climate target.
The 84 million-tonne gap is because the current government has not committed to buying carbon credits from overseas. Although Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says he is committed to meeting the target of cutting emissions by 50 percent by 2030, the country is currently more than a whole year's worth of emissions short of that.

This was highlighted late last year, when New Zealand was preparing its first-ever report on its progress at meeting its Paris Agreement commitments. Environment officials warned Climate Change Minister Simon Watts that countries were expected to explain how they would close their emissions gaps. New Zealand had not announced a plan then, and still has not. Its shortfall was also large when compared with other countries, officials told Watts. They said this was "an area where New Zealand can expect to receive some scrutiny".

They also presented Watts with a list of decisions by previous Cabinets dating back to 2015, agreeing to use offshore carbon credits. They invited him to get the current Cabinet to either confirm this or make a different decision - however it's not clear how that worked out. The briefing was released to RNZ under the Official Information Act.

Check out the full article on the RNZ website.

8) What are New Zealand's international climate targets and do we really have to meet them?

This article published on March 20th is again from Eloise Gibson and is a very comprehensive analysis of the issue covered in the previous item. Highly recommended if you wish to get a fuller understanding of the current situation regarding our Paris climate commitments. The important fact to keep in mind is that our efforts to cut emissions here in NZ are "only about one third of the picture when it comes to meeting the Paris target."

Both the Key-era and Ardern-era versions of the target had two parts: cutting emissions here at home, and buying help from overseas. Politicians tend to confuse the two as often as the rest of us. Generally, if you hear about how the country is faring at meeting its "emissions budgets" from, say, 2021-2025 or any other five year period, that is probably a reference to action that's happening inside New Zealand to achieve the domestic part of the target. That means things like retiring coal boilers, encouraging people to buy clean cars, getting better public transport, planting truckloads of pine trees etc, or failing to do those things.

However that activity close to home is only about one third of the picture when it comes to meeting the Paris target - sometimes called our international climate target. Fully two thirds of that work was always expected to be done overseas... that is, until after the last election. It is no secret that National resented the size of the target, and the heavy reliance on buying in help, despite the fact that previous National governments planned to buy help too. Watts pointed out New Zealand has an unusually high reliance on international trading - possibly the highest in the world. Yet that reliance has been built-in to our targets since 2016, meaning it is now too late to turn around to the domestic economy and tell it to deeply decarbonise in four years. Even planting trees at home would be much too slow to make any real dent in the problem.

While Singapore, Switzerland and others have signed international deals, New Zealand hasn't started. That is despite officials warning Watts the cost per tonne could quadruple if he waits until closer to 2030. With coalition partner NZ First openly opposed to such spending and some in National barely less so the current government seems unwilling or unable to move forward. Yet with its UK and EU Free Trade deals explicitly mentioning abiding by its Paris targets, it does not want to say it is willing to renege, either.

That leaves Ministers repeating three seemingly incompatible things.

Yes, the government is committing to meeting its Paris agreement target for 2030, but, no, it is "unrealistic" spending large sums on overseas help ... but, yes, it admits New Zealand cannot meet the target without overseas help. It is beginning to look like the coalition has nowhere to go, unless it has a secret plan that is unknown to voters. Expert opinion appears to be split on whether the government will be forced to shell out eventually, or whether it plans to curl into a ball and run down the clock until 2030, when it will claim it cannot meet its target despite best efforts.

Check out the full article on the RNZ website.

9) Economic and environmental vandalism as foreign companies convert farms to forests.

A recent article related to the previous two items was written by Murray Horton from Campaign against foreign control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) and addresses the issue of productive farmland being converted into pine plantations.

Here are a couple of extracts from the article - "New Zealand’s commitment to the flawed Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) is causing environmental, economic and social damage as foreign companies buy up productive farmland to plant pine forests. The Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) says the sale of farmland to overseas interests who aim to convert it to forestry is by far the most common type of consent that the Overseas Investment Office issues. CAFCA Secretary Murray Horton says foreign companies are eager to convert hill country farms to forests it in order to make a quick buck by selling carbon credits to polluters under the ETS.

“Flogging off Aotearoa’s New Zealand’s forestry rights goes back to the 1980s, when the Rogernomics Labour government sold cutting rights to overseas companies. It was only the Treaty of Waitangi that stopped them from selling the Crown land that the forests grew on,” Horton says. “Since the creation of the ETS in 2008, however, the Government has approved the sale of a huge amount of private agricultural land to overseas companies – much of it sheep and beef farms in eastern regions of the North Island".

I also note this quote in the article saying - "Manufacturers, airlines and other businesses can offset carbon dioxide emissions by purchasing carbon credits, which allows them to escape sanctions and carry on polluting,” he says. “Because of this the European Union now says companies that rely on carbon offsetting cannot claim to be carbon zero.”

You can check out the full article on the Daily Blog website. 

10) Our plan for the planet can’t be the lesser of two evils. 

If you didn't catch up with Mike Joy's excellent article published on the Newsroom website recently I highly recommend it. As usual Mike doesn't pull his punches and goes right to the heart of the debate around "Green Growth" - When will we shape our lives around what the planet can support rather than try to make it give us the lifestyles we have become accustomed to?

Below is an extract. 

The vexed issue of the mining and material requirements for a renewable energy transition has been making the news.

The well-known green growth and clean energy champion Hannah Ritchie claimed that clean energy requires substantially less mining and material use than our existing fossil fuel energy systems. This made the news globally and was picked up in New Zealand with similar claims appearing in LinkedIn posts, blogs and social media posts from Rewiring Aotearoa.

This is one of these messy lesser-of-two-evils arguments I usually try to steer clear of because I can see that ‘less harm’ (and I will argue here that the ‘less harm’ claim is far from settled) is turned into a ‘better for the planet’ meme on social media. This lesser-of-two-evils meme is often used by companies as a greenwashing tactic.

The point missed when this argument is used is that growth, regardless of its colour (green, black, or purple) requires taking ever more from a stressed finite planet and this is no longer an option. The historian and philosopher Hannah Arendt nailed my thoughts when she said: “Those who choose the lesser evil forget very quickly that they chose evil.”

Behind the whole debate around materials is the all-pervasive assumption that we must do everything and anything – no matter the risk – to maintain status quo, which is ever-increasing consumption.

So are we going to dig up what’s left of the planet and threaten the very life supporting systems we can’t live without to power ever more gadgets? Will we jeopardise our futures for the sake of artificial intelligence and data centres to hold our pet and family holiday pictures? When will we shape our lives around what the planet can support rather than try to make it give us the lifestyles we have become accustomed to?

Instead of trying to keep up supply, surely we must look at the energy and material demand side and reduce consumption to a level that the planet can support. The fossil fuel-powered lives of excess we in the wealthy world see as normal are not. The reduction in consumption required in the wealthy world is radical – but also necessary to meet biophysical limits. This will not be convenient, but we must realise that how we in the wealthy world live is radical.

INTERNATIONAL

11) To solve climate change, we need to restore our Sponge Planet.

CKM member Catherine van der Muelen shared this article with the comment "I just read this great article relating to water and how our approach all along may not have been the right one."
 
Climate strategies focus primarily on carbon, largely ignoring the destabilized water cycle that’s amplifying disasters and accelerating climate change. Slow Water projects can reverse this trend. Getting off fossil fuels is undeniably a critical step in slowing climate change. But even if  we did that tomorrow, it would not be enough. Agriculture, forestry, grazing, mining and building has degraded 75% of land on Earth, significantly altering the water cycle. That’s a problem because a healthy water cycle plays a key role in stabilizing the climate. Yes, water vapour is a greenhouse gas that can amplify the impact of excess carbon dioxide. But water is also the primary way the planet cools itself, via the reflection of solar energy off clouds and via its phase change from gas to liquid, which releases heat high in the atmosphere, where some escapes to outer space.

Sponge Planet is climate adaptation. In absorbing high flows, it reduces upstream and downstream flood risk. In recharging groundwater and storing it locally, it increases the water released into streams during the dry season 7,8 . Sponge Planet is also climate mitigation because ecosystems such as wetlands and mangroves store carbon at rates higher than many terrestrial forests.

Decision makers or engineers will sometimes say that nature-based approaches are “nice, but can’t be a significant part of the solution”. That is a fundamental misunderstanding of scale. Because humans have degraded 75% of the land on Earth, thereby altering the water cycle, we need Slow Water projects distributed across watersheds, countries and continents, ultimately recreating a Sponge Planet. Slow Water strategies are unique to each place, working with local geology, hydrology, ecology and cultures. Because they are distributed, rather than centralized, they avoid the ‘tragedy of the commons’ in which many governments shirk their responsibility for climate change. Instead, local communities or even individual families are motivated and empowered to undertake projects to protect themselves from water extremes. This decentralized approach is cheaper, nature water lowers waterborne disease risks, and fosters community engagement in sustainable practices. It also increases food and water security amidst unpredictable climate patterns.

While climate change is ramping up floods and droughts, development choices, including grey infrastructure designed to control water, have made these disasters worse. And sooner or later, water always wins. To reduce human losses and suffering, it’s time to change our relationship with water: rather than trying to control it, we must collaborate. In so doing, we can reduce impacts from floods and droughts, store
carbon, support other forms of life, and create more liveable spaces for ourselves. Measuring the value of these projects’ multiple benefits — and tallying the harm caused by traditional grey infrastructure — can show the cost-effectiveness of such investments. The toll of mounting climate disasters while global leaders stall can feel overwhelming and hopeless. But Slow Water projects empower people to collaborate with their neighbours and with water to make their own communities more resilient. Family by family, community by community, the success of their local projects inspires others, and piece by distributed piece, we can restore a Sponge Planet.

The full article is well worth a read. It is some very interesting research.

12) Food and Environment Myths.

Long time CKM member James Wilson shared some information on Food and Environment myths in response to the above article.

James says -

"...having matured from a heavily stocked livestock farmer, through to an organic one and finally to a committed vegan, I really appreciate the Sponge Planet article introduced by Catherine.  It has long been my contention that almost all agricultural land in NZ has been disastrously modified and on a per-head basis, we are perhaps more culpable for land damage than even the despoiling of the Amazon.

The sooner we, as a nation, recognise this the better.  In fact, I presently hold to the belief, emphasised by many scientists, that dairying will be in severe decline by 2040 and given my perception of the damage wrought, I cannot wait to see this happen. 

Thus I was coincidentally reading another email that emphasises the importance of eliminating livestock farming and thought that the statistics shown in these articles are equally worth sharing."

13) Welcome to the Chaoscene.

The climate crisis is here. In order to thrive in these dangerous and precarious times, we must build resilient communities.

This essay published on the Aeon website expands on the theme of climate preparedness and the importance of community solidarity as the best way of building resilience. 

Our society became individualistic to some extent simply because it was able to, because of a fossil-fuel pulse in the stable conditions of the Holocene. In the rough times that are coming, the fate I term the Chaoscene, that atomisation will be seen clearly as an increasingly unaffordable luxury. Strong ties within community will often make the difference, henceforth, between flourishing and failing and even, gradually but increasingly, between living and dying. As stretched states creak, as commercial insurance withdraws, we will need each other again – not least as first responders, as a safety net, and as mutual meaning-makers.

Whatever you do to rebuild community solidarity is an act of climate preparedness.

Once adaptation is taken seriously, we can admit the hard truth that climate policy thus far has largely failed.

But too much of the climate policy space and of the ‘climate movement’ has failed to register or announce these points. For too long, it has been assumed that humanity would, at some point, suddenly start acting in a fully rational, long-term, ethical manner on climate, and ‘fix’ the ‘problem’. Either that or, somehow, a radical technological ‘solution’ would emerge. Neither was ever going to happen. So we have lost precious time, and the potential of adaptation to mobilise more effectively has been almost completely missed. Until now: now, we are having to cope with the results of our collective failure to date.

14) Net Zero and Other Delusions: What Can't, Won't and Might Happen.

This twenty minute presentation was the topic for one of Nate Hagen's regular "Frankly" sessions. These are relatively short videos addressing a range of topics associated with humanity's predicament. 

Language is one of humanity’s most unique and powerful tools. We are amazingly good at imagining the pictures created through words - almost to the point that even the most fantastical things can seem real. But how might this extraordinary ability backfire as we try to chart the course for the 21st century? In this Frankly, Nate explores the limitations of using our imaginations to shape our understanding of what's possible through the use of three categories: what can’t happen, what won’t happen, and what might happen. Nate demonstrates how this framework can be used by going through one example of the many hurdles standing in the way of humanity - as we currently consume today - reaching Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050. How are today’s societal goals shaped by unrealistic expectations of what’s possible under our current biophysical reality? What ‘bottlenecks’ constrain the possibilities of the future, and how might these change our expectations and preparations for what’s to come? Finally, how can we use the logic of aggregate probability in our own lives to push the initial conditions of the future towards the best likelihoods for all life on Earth?

"Why the World feels like it's falling apart"

Here is Nates's most recent "Frankly". It's only ten minutes long and an excellent summary of Nate's concept of the Superorganism and why we need to greatly simplify our lives to reduce the impacts on te taiao. 

In a world grappling with converging crises, we often look outward – for new tech, new markets, new distractions. But the deeper issue lies within: our relationship with energy, nature, and each other. What if we step back far enough to see human civilization itself as an organism that is growing without a plan? In this week’s Frankly — adapted from a recent TED talk like presentation (called Ignite) — Nate outlines how humanity is part of a global economic superorganism, driven by abundant energy and the emergent properties of billions of humans working towards the same goal. Rather than focusing on surface-level solutions, Nate invites us to confront the underlying dynamics of consumption and profit. It’s a perspective that defies soundbite culture — requiring not a slogan, but a deeper reckoning with how the world actually works. These are not quick-fix questions, but the kinds that demand slow thinking in a world hooked on speed. What if infinite growth on a finite planet isn't just unrealistic – but the root of our unfolding crisis? In a system designed for more, how do we begin to value enough? And at this civilizational crossroads, what will you choose to nurture: power, or life?

15) All Hail the Planet.

I wanted to give people a heads up about the "All Hail the Planet" series broadcast on the Al Jazeera channel. This series is fronted by Ali Rae who says it is a program dedicated to explaining the social, economic and political forces that hold power in our everyday lives. She covers a wide range of topics in the half hour programs and some of the recent ones are well worth checking out. They have titles such as "We are part of nature, not apart from it," "Green tech can't save us from climate change," and "Why we can't offset our way out of climate change". They are well researched and presented and if you're interested you can access them on the Al Jazeera website.

16) Mine copper without destroying the planet? London-based project gives scientists hope.

I have previously posted items in this newsletter on the global limits we are hitting, as we attempt to source the huge quantities of critical minerals required to feed the renewable energy revolution. One of those critical minerals is copper and this article from The Guardian proposes a new way of accessing copper resources. 

One key project is seeking new ways to mine copper. “We typically extract it from minerals that have crystallised out of very saline, copper-rich brines,” said Professor Matthew Jackson, chair in geological fluid dynamics at Imperial College. “However, this process requires huge amounts of energy to break open the rocks and bring them to the surface and also generates a lot of waste as we extract copper from its source ores.”

To get round this issue, Jackson, working with international partners, has been searching for underground sites where copper-rich brines are still in liquid form. These brines are created by volcanic systems which can, crucially, provide geothermal energy for extraction.

“That means we can extract the copper by pumping the brines to the surface via boreholes – which is relatively easy – and also use local energy to power the mine itself and possibly provide excess energy for nearby communities,” Jackson said. “Essentially, we are seeking to build self-powered mines and have already pinpointed promising sites in New Zealand, and there is potential to explore conventionally barren areas such as Japan.”

This statement from the article confirms my previously expressed concerns. How humans seriously think they can maintain our current trajectory of accelerating resource use is a marvel to me. MORE COPPER IS REQUIRED IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS THAN HAS BEEN MINED IN THE WHOLE OF THE LAST CENTURY. I think it's called "putting your head in the sand!"

“The world will need more copper in the next 10 years than has been mined in the whole of the last century. Currently, we do not have enough in circulation to meet this demand. We therefore need to both reduce our demand for copper and work out how to extract it in the most sustainable way possible, and that is what we aim to help to achieve at the centre.”

17) Greenpeace NZ$1.1b damages ruling shocks global NGOs.

Civil society groups are condemning a US court order that Greenpeace pay over US$660 million (NZ$1.1 billion) in damages to an oil pipeline company as a chilling attack on climate action around the globe. Environmental defenders rallied behind Greenpeace after the shock ruling by a North Dakota jury fuelled concerns that courtrooms were increasingly being used to smother critics.

"It sends a dangerous message: that fossil fuel giants can weaponise the courts to bankrupt and silence those who challenge the destruction of our planet," Anne Jellema, executive director of advocacy group 350.org, said.

Check out the full article on the RNZ website.

AND this article from the Guardian -

I was an independent observer in the Greenpeace trial. What I saw was shocking.

What we observed was shocking. Greenpeace lost, not because it did something wrong, but because it was denied a fair trial. The legendary US human rights attorney Marty Garbus, a member of our team who has practiced law for more than six decades and who represented Nelson Mandela and Václav Havel, said it was the most unfair trial he had ever witnessed. This is precisely why many of us on the monitoring team believe there is a good chance Greenpeace will not pay the first dollar of the judgment and might actually recoup significant damages from Energy Transfer in a separate case in Europe. That case, currently being heard in Dutch courts, would entitle Greenpeace to compensation based on a finding that the North Dakota case is an illegitimate attempt to squelch free speech.

18) Sea level rise will cause ‘catastrophic inland migration’, scientists warn.

Rising oceans will force millions away from coasts even if global temperature rise remains below 1.5C, analysis finds.

I've included this article because I believe it is worth noting it in the context of James Hansen's recent work, which I've gone into in some detail in the final item. If James is indeed correct about the IPCC climate sensitivity calculations being incorrect then the implications of this article are greater than the authors say.

Check out the full article in the Guardian.

19) Council of Europe Assembly Advances Historic Ecocide Treaty.

The information below from the Stop Ecocide website gives the detail of another of the slow but incremental steps being taken globally to have Ecocide added to the Rome statute. 

• In a historic move, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), the deliberative body of Europe’s foremost human rights organisation, has adopted a resolution endorsing the Draft Convention on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law. 
• If adopted and ratified by member states, the Convention would become the first legally binding international treaty to criminalise severe and large-scale environmental destruction — “conduct that many term ecocide.”
• The Assembly also recommends including the  definition of ecocide proposed in 2021 by the Independent Expert Panel to help guide states in shaping national legislation. 
• The resolution — passed on 10 April 2025 with 79 in favour, 11 against and 1 abstention — signals strong support within the Council of Europe’s parliamentary body, but is not a final approval. The decisive next step will be the Convention’s formal adoption by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe due on 14 May 2025, after which it will be open for signature and ratification by member states.

Yuliia Ovchynnykova, Member of Parliament of Ukraine (Servant of the People), and Member of the Ukrainian Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), said: 

“I believe it is essential not only to acknowledge ecocide as a profound harm to both nature and humanity — we must call for its codification in both domestic and international law. With this resolution, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe takes a significant step toward that goal, endorsing a Convention that explicitly includes particularly serious environmental offences — conduct that many term ‘ecocide’ — and aims to ensure robust and inclusive protection for the natural world. By tackling such offences alongside illegal logging, unlawful fishing, and the destruction of all forms of biodiversity — including fungi — the Assembly sends a clear and decisive message to governments: environmental crimes can no longer, and will no longer, be tolerated.”

For those who need a small reminder of the importance of this initiative here is a statement from the Stop Ecocide website. 

While we wholeheartedly support ecocide legislation at national and regional levels, our work aims ultimately to support recognition of ecocide as a standalone crime in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. At present, the Statute lists four crimes: Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes and the Crime of Aggression. The Statute can be amended to include a fifth crime of Ecocide.

20) Oil and silence: Time to champion ecocide law and hold power to account.

This article written by Voke Ighorodje is a call for Nigeria to take a stand and support the inclusion of Ecocide on the Rome Statute.

He says -

Supporting ecocide legislation is not just an act of justice; it is a move toward a future where Nigeria helps shape the legal and moral boundaries of global civilisation. Across continents, ecocide is being recognised for what it is: a crime that strikes at the heart of human and planetary wellbeing. By championing this law — nationally and internationally — Nigeria can move from the exploited periphery to the vanguard of legal transformation.

21) Where EV batteries go to die – and be reborn.

The Altilium company based in the UK have developed technology to fully recycle EV batteries. We will have to wait and see if this technology can be scaled to the level where millions of batteries can be processed. There are challenges but this method does look promising.

Check out the full article on the BBC website.

22) Godfather of climate science decries Trump plan to shut Nasa lab above Seinfeld diner: ‘It’s crazy’

Nasa’s top climate and space monitoring lab, called the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss), has been housed in six floors of a leased building owned by Columbia University on Manhattan’s Upper West Side since 1966. Since then, it has launched the career of a Nobel prize winner, aided missions to Venus and Jupiter, mapped the Milky Way and alerted the world to global heating by creating one of the first climate models. The climate model ran on an IBM computer, the fastest in the world in the 1970s and so gargantuan it took up the entire second floor.

But this storied history has meant little to the Trump administration, which is ending the lab’s lease on 31 May, releasing 130 staff to work from home with an uncertain future ahead. Donald Trump, who has called climate science “bullshit” and a “giant hoax” in the past, wants to slash Nasa’s Earth science budget in half. “They are trying to kill the messenger with the bad news, it’s crazy,” said Dr James Hansen, known as the godfather of climate science and previously director of Giss for more than 30 years.

Check on the full article on the Guardian website. 

23) Important recent postings from James Hansen.

I've put this item last as it contains a lot to digest and is only for those, who like me are science nerds and consider that the work of James Hansen and his colleagues should be taken seriously. The implications if they are correct is great. They have posted four papers during April and May, which contain important research and conclusions. It is sobering stuff and challenges the IPCC view of our predicament. Essentially their research concludes that climate sensitivity is 4.5 ± 0.5°C. The IPCC states that is it 3.0 ± 0.5°C. If you understand climate sensitivity you will know this is a big difference and has very big consequences. If not, read the papers, which explain it well.

I have noted before in this newsletter what I believe is the inherent problem with the IPCC. That is the fact that any conclusions reached by them must first gain the consensus of a wide range of scientists from many different countries. If consensus cannot be gained then the material is excluded. I give a lot of credence to the work from James and his small team and highly recommend checking it out.  Full copies of each of the postings can be downloaded from their website. 

I was interested to note this statement at the end of the second paper - It is difficult to develop and present an alternative perspective – alternative to that of IPCC – when such an organization has been granted overwhelming authority and has grown a global army of disciples. We much appreciate support of our organization.

Here are Abstracts and extracts from the four papers - 

Global Warming Acceleration: Impact on Sea Ice.

Abstract. Global warming has accelerated.[2] Warming melts sea ice, but it also melts ice sheets, ice shelves, ice caps and glaciers, which affects sea ice cover. Injection of cold freshwater and icebergs into the ocean tends to increase sea ice cover during a transient period until the climate forcing stabilizes and a new climate state is approached. Sea ice melt due to the warming ocean has the upper hand over freshwater injection in both hemispheres today, and thus global sea ice cover is near a historic low (Fig. 1). Arctic sea ice has been relatively stable for the past 10-20 years while Antarctic sea ice has declined, but global warming acceleration may alter both cases. In the Arctic, warm Atlantic water is intruding under the cold Arctic surface layer and warm Pacific water is spilling over the Aleutian sill into the Arctic Basin. Paleoclimate data show that warming at depth can lead to sudden loss of sea ice near Greenland, with consequences for the Greenland ice sheet. In the Antarctic, accelerated ocean warming increases melting of ice shelves and freshwater injection, which can cause temporary growth of sea ice cover. Global climate models employed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have failed to account well for the freshwater effect on sea ice cover, thus contributing to IPCC’s underestimate of climate sensitivity. Overall, accelerated global warming does not bode well for stability of the ice sheets, the ocean’s overturning circulations, and global sea level in coming decades – despite the complexity of sea ice changes and uncertainty about the growth rate of ice sheet mass loss.

Here is an extract from the first paper.

Recently, we concluded that climate sensitivity is high, ECS = 4.5 ± 0.5°C (1σ) for doubled atmospheric CO2, based on three independent analyses (glacial-interglacial climate change, 1850-2024 global warming, and Earth’s darkening during 2000-2024). High ECS changes everything: it fundamentally alters expectations for continued climate change. Why? Because “fast” feedbacks are not really fast: they come into play in proportion to temperature change, not in direct response to climate forcing. Thus, climate response time is approximately proportional to climate sensitivity squared. One consequence is that the “fast” feedback response to ship aerosol reduction is still growing significantly after five years, which is the reason we expect 2025 global temperature to be about as high as in 2024, despite the El Nino having faded to the ENSO-neutral state. A second result is that we must simultaneously consider “fast” and “slow” feedback effects because their timescales overlap.

Reading this paper I realised I did not understand why sea ice melt is freshwater, so I did a little research to improve my understanding.

Sea ice melt is a freshwater injection into the ocean because when sea ice melts, the fresh water from the ice is released into the seawater, which is different from the salty water that already exists in the ocean. This added freshwater lowers the salinity and density of the surface water, impacting ocean circulation and other ocean properties.

Here's a more detailed explanation:

Sea ice formation and brine rejection: When sea ice forms from seawater, salt is excluded from the ice as it freezes. This process, called brine rejection, concentrates the remaining seawater and makes it denser and saltier. This dense, salty water sinks, contributing to deep ocean circulation.

Melting sea ice and freshwater input: When sea ice melts, it releases fresh water (water with a low salt content) into the surrounding seawater. This fresh water is less dense than the surrounding seawater and tends to stay at the surface, creating a layer of less dense freshwater.

Impact on ocean circulation: The influx of fresh water from melting sea ice can disrupt the normal patterns of ocean circulation, particularly in high-latitude regions where the formation of dense, salty water is a key driver of deep-ocean currents. The reduced density due to the freshwater input can affect the sinking of cold, salty water, potentially slowing down or even interrupting the global conveyor belt of ocean currents.

Consequences for global climate: Changes in ocean circulation can have significant consequences for global climate patterns, including regional temperature variations, sea level rise, and the distribution of heat and carbon dioxide in the oceans.

2025 Global Temperature.

Abstract. Global temperature for 2025 should decline little, if at all, from the record 2024 level. Absence of a large temperature decline after the huge El Nino-spurred temperature increase in 2023-24 will provide further confirmation that IPCC’s best estimates for climate sensitivity and aerosol climate forcing were both underestimates. Specifically, 2025 global temperature should remain near or above +1.5C relative to 1880-1920, and, if the tropics remain ENSO-neutral, there is good chance that 2025 may even exceed the 2024 record high global temperature.
Global temperature in February and March 2025 fell below the record highs for those months in 2024 (Fig. 1) and such relative decline is likely in most of the next few months. However, the decline has been modest and the 2024 vs 2025 ranks of several months later in the year might be reversed.

Large Cloud Feedback Confirms High Climate Sensitivity.

Abstract. Earth’s albedo (reflectivity) declined over the 25 years of precise satellite data, with the decline so large that this change must be mainly reduced reflection of sunlight by clouds. Part of the cloud change is caused by reduction of human-made atmospheric aerosols, which act as condensation nuclei for cloud formation, but most of the cloud change is cloud feedback that occurs with global warming. The observed albedo change proves that clouds provide a large, amplifying, climate feedback. This large cloud feedback confirms high climate sensitivity, consistent with paleoclimate data and with the rate of global warming in the past century.

Our analysis puts equal emphasis on information on climate change extracted from (1) observations of ongoing climate change, (2) global climate models (GCMs), and (3) Earth’s long-term climate history (paleoclimate data). We used all three of these methods in our paper to arrive at three independent analyses of climate sensitivity, with each method concluding that climate sensitivity is high, much higher than the best estimate (3°C for doubled atmospheric CO2) of IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

We have lamented the absence of scientists with the breadth of understanding of say Jule Charney or Francis Bretherton, or our beloved, sometimes crotchety, former colleague, Wally Broecker. However, the truth is that there are many scientists out there with a depth of understanding at least as great as the clique of scientists that the media rely on. Given the success of this clique in painting us as outliers, we are dependent on the larger community being willing to help educate the media about the current climate situation. For that purpose, we will discuss – one-by-one in upcoming communications – several of the matters that are raised in our papers. Thanks for your attention.

End of an Era.

I've included this final posting from May 22nd. It has a very personal touch to it, which I appreciated. James and his wife have made the big decision to move from their longtime rural home in Pennsylvania to live in an apartment at Columbia University, so he can continue on with the critical research he leads. He recently turned 84 so making such a move at this time of his life says a lot about his commitment to continuing this work for the benefit of all of humanity and our amazing planet.

Remarkable new data has advanced and refined understanding of global climate sensitivity and the path that humanity is on with current climate policies. We must do a better job of communicating the climate story, given current attempts to kill the message. Reality of climate change is becoming obvious to most people and there are a huge number of capable scientists supporting the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which advises the United Nations. IPCC reports contain a great amount of useful information. The problem, as I see it and will describe in detail, is that the process of communicating the climate situation with the public is hindered by the combination of an undue role of something described as “scientific reticence,” and a small clique of self-appointed spokesmen for the climate research community, whom the media has chosen to give voice to as if they had unquestioned, superior, expertise.  

Download the full postings on their website. 







.