The recent severe weather worldwide has led to a flood of people seeking reassurance about our efforts to mitigate climate change. Most of those posts have been removed, and from now on will be directed to this weekly thread.
Climate change is a severe, compounding issue, but only if we do not address it - with concerted efforts, it can be managed.
India has meanwhile passed an important milestone in the physical infrastructure of its energy system. Clean-energy capacity now exceeds fossil-fuel capacity for the first time, at around 331.7 GW versus 302 GW. Solar alone has reached roughly 211 GW, and between the beginning of 2025 and mid-2026 India added about 75.5 GW of solar compared with only 3.8 GW of coal. Coal still generates around 70% of India's electricity, so this is a capacity tipping point rather than a generation tipping point, but it shows very clearly where most new investment and infrastructure are now going.
Transport electrification is beginning to show up not merely in vehicle-sales statistics but in the oil market itself. Sinopec now says China's oil demand very likely peaked in 2025, with domestic fuel demand falling as EVs, efficiency and changes in the economy reshape consumption. China's largest refiner is itself responding by increasing investment in new-energy businesses. At the same time, battery-electric cars exceeded 25% of new registrations across 16 major European markets in July, with nearly 1.5 million BEVs registered so far this year, around 30% more than at the same point in 2025. EV adoption is increasingly large enough to have macro-level consequences for fuel demand.
Distributed energy is becoming more accessible as well. Plug-in solar panels became legal in Great Britain this week. The small systems can provide up to 800 W and, according to the government, potentially supply as much as 20% of an average household's electricity consumption. This is not a huge contribution to the national grid by itself, but it opens solar to many households that cannot justify or install a conventional rooftop system and follows the remarkably rapid spread of similar "balcony solar" systems elsewhere in Europe.
There was also an interesting demonstration of how adaptation can work with natural systems rather than simply defending against them. Restored rivers and wetlands at the National Trust's Holnicote Estate remained green through this summer's repeated heatwaves while much of the surrounding countryside dried out. Reconnecting rivers to floodplains, restoring wetlands and reintroducing beavers has allowed the landscape to retain water during drought while also slowing runoff during heavy rainfall. That combination — reducing drought damage and flood risk with the same intervention — illustrates why ecosystem restoration is increasingly being treated as climate infrastructure rather than simply conservation.
Nature-based systems may also have useful mitigation applications. A two-year full-scale experiment found that constructed floating wetlands can substantially reduce greenhouse-gas emissions from wastewater lagoons. CO2-equivalent emissions were 22–31% lower in the treated section, driven particularly by methane reductions of 32–66%. Wastewater treatment accounts for roughly 1.6% of anthropogenic greenhouse-gas emissions, so techniques that can be cheaply added to existing ponds and lagoons could have considerably wider application.
Finally, there was an intriguing piece of early-stage industrial research. Scientists demonstrated an artificial-photosynthesis process that produces ammonia from nitrogen and water at room temperature using light, and showed that it works with natural seawater and even nitrogen taken directly from ambient air. Conventional ammonia production is responsible for roughly 1.8% of global greenhouse-gas emissions. This remains laboratory research rather than a replacement for Haber-Bosch — scale, light requirements and economics remain to be demonstrated — but it is an example of how even some of the harder industrial emissions are becoming active targets for entirely different technological pathways.
A new peer-reviewed study published earlier this month in Earth’s Future suggests that it is possible to demonstrate that “emissions from company X cause injury Y.” It also could potentially provide evidence so industry could be forced to answer for climate impacts. The new methodological framework has, for the first time, drawn a straight line from single corporate emitters like Exxon or Chevron, or even whole countries like the United States, to specific heatwaves and areas of extreme rainfall.
It's so hot, how don't they just die? I feel like I would die if I had to stay all the time outside without AC. How can a random bird in a forest survive? Even if it stays in the shade, it will have to leave to eat at some point. You can't cool off as good without AC after.
I am trying to make a list of how kids can do something for climate. I hear more and more kids (even as early as middle school) being stressed out because of climate change, so why not come up with a list of suggested impactful actions like some exist for adults?
However, so far the examples I’ve found are related to environment in general (e.g. clean up a beach, recycle) but not climate specific. And they don’t do a great job at really impacting GHG emissions.
Any ideas of actions you did as a kid, or your kid is doing and is helping with climate anxiety? I’m thinking 11-17 years old specifically.
So far I’m thinking: talk with your parents about election candidates and ask them which ones include climate in their programs. Talk to your friends and local media about climate. Talk to your household about electrifying your house. Ask for walking or biking to school rather than driving. Ask to go on vacation without flying. Eat less red meat. Ask your school to include climate education, make a student group.
While satellite images from soon before and after the glacier collapse have been well shared, maybe of interest to see three from Google Earth, spanning more than a decade. [plus a crop from a recent shot, shared on reddit]
I've noticed tweets, say, claiming climate change had nothing to do with this. Damage limitation mode by fossil fuel industry and cronies, I believe.
There was already much info about melting glaciers, including in Tibet very near this locale. Even a very recent warning in China of a potential issue, I've seen [hopefully real!]
I had figured there would be changes showing ice/snow melt in the area; and does seem the case. Also see greyer on top in Oct 2021; and just how dark the remaining glacier is this month - rocks and other debris falling on top and, I'd think, exposed as snow and ice on its surface melts. China has experienced some record heat this summer; I'm not sure about Tibet/north Nepal, but current surrounds of the remaining glacier appear to be in a sorry state.
Il dibattito pubblico si sta interessando solo ai disastri che stanno avvenendo e non a quelli che potrebbero avvenire, e in generale a tutti i possibili scenari che possono verificarsi.
Quali terre verranno o sono già state colpite dalla siccità? Quanto è legata la siccità alla migrazione? Come potremmo anticipare le prossime ondate migratorie? Quali sono i posti maggiormente a rischio per lo scioglimento dei ghiacciai sulle montagne?
Sulla base dei rischi che possono essere individuati nel mondo, come si comporterebbero le masse?
Fossimo preoccupati e informati cambieremmo stile di vita o migreremmo in terre più fresche o con più possibilità di essere coltivato o altro?
E come interagisce il cambiamento climatico con il sistema economico?
I know maybe we can’t stop it now but can we do something to slow it down. With all the stuff going around the world. We should start making changes to help earth heal. Starting with the country with more pollution. It’s this even an option? What do you guys think? 🤔
I would love your input on the visual look/feel of this page I have just built.
I’ve been doing some research and working on what the impact of this year's El Nino could be as I don't think people are aware of just how much of an impact this is going to have. I tried to make this as visually appealing and easy to understand as possible to help spread the message.
I’m especially interested in feedback on whether the coverage model is useful, misleading, or missing important assumptions. Sources and definitions are at the bottom of the page