trad

We can’t know how long the war in the Middle East will last. Nor can we know who will “win” it, and in which terms. What we know is that the destruction already wreaked on things and people is immense, and it keeps escalating. The longer the war, the bleaker their perspectives in a region already plagued by all sorts of problems, including drought, soil degradation, ecosystem damage, scarce agricultural resources, declining fertility rates, and more.

What is currently happening in Brussels under the guise of regulatory simplification is being presented as something technical and logical. Less regulatory pressure, more competitiveness. A series of so-called omnibus bills are intended to streamline legislation. Reporting obligations are being limited and reassessments of raw materials postponed. It sounds like administrative efficiency. In Washington, things are moving even faster: Trump is dismantling the basis for climate laws while the world continues to warm up. The framing is the same: rules slow down businesses, and a slowed-down business community makes us poor. But that reasoning assumes something that is not true: that everyone wants the same thing from the market.

Three major Defence Agencies are quietly admitting what most still refuse to face: climate breakdown is coming for our food, and the cracks are already spreading. While the wealthy cling to logistics and illusion, the real defence strategy is soil and local growers who refuse to let their communities starve.

Doyne Farmer says a super-simulator of the global economy would accelerate the transition to a green, clean world

Climate change is causing measurable harm globally1,2. Political and legal efforts seek to link these damages with specific emissions, including in discussions of loss and damage (L&D)3,4; however, no quantitative definition of L&D exists5,6, nor is there a framework to link past and future emissions from specific sources to monetized, location-specific damages. Here we develop such a framework, which is integrated with recent efforts to estimate the social cost of carbon7. Using empirical estimates of the non-linear relationship between temperature and aggregate economic output, we show that future damages from past emissions—one component of L&D—are at least an order of magnitude larger than historical damages from the same emissions. For instance, one tonne of CO2 emitted in 1990 caused US$180 in discounted global damages by 2020 ($40–530) and will cause an additional $1,840 through 2100 ($500–5,700). Thus, settling debts for past damages will not settle debts for past emissions. In other illustrative esti

As climate change accelerates, its effects are being felt in every corner of the world. A comprehensive global index developed by researchers at the University of Notre Dame has assessed the climate vulnerability and adaptive readiness of nearly 200 countries, revealing stark and troubling disparities between the world’s wealthiest and most impoverished nations.

Even as weather extremes worsen, the voices calling for the rolling back of environmental rules have grown louder and more influential

The activist and author of Here Comes the Sun discusses rapid advances in solar and wind power and how the US ceded leadership in the sector to its main rival

The reality of coming to terms with the end of industrial civilisation

This article examines the technocentric bias that characterizes climate mitigation literature, focusing on the reports of the IPCC's Working Group III. This bias stems from structural features of the scientific field that prioritizes innovation, leading to the overrepresentation of technological solutions in climate research. Funding mechanisms further reinforce this tendency by incentivizing collaboration with industrial R&D, creating a self-reinforcing loop in which scientific authority and industrial interests converge. The IPCC's institutional positioning—as a policy-relevant yet politically cautious body—amplifies this dynamic by favoring allegedly “cost-effective” technological pathways that lack practical feasibility.

This is not a call to despair, but an invitation to understand the forces driving the process of collapse, and to explore how we might navigate the descent with integrity, purpose, and care for the living world.