climate change facts for essays

Read the March magazine issue on nuclear testing

Facts and opinions about climate change

By Richard C. J. Somerville , December 7, 2020

Carbon dioxide concentrations at Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii, by year. Source: Scripps Institution of Oceanography SIO

Editor’s note: This article is adapted from a public lecture for the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, Calif. [1]

When the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was founded, climate change science was in its infancy. There were no global climate models, no supercomputers, and no satellite remote-sensing data. Only a few visionaries understood that man-made increases in the amount of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) might cause large global climate changes. The definitive summary of atmospheric science in the decade after World War II was the Compendium of Meteorology , a large multi-authored volume published in 1951 by the American Meteorological Society. Its article on climate change, written by the distinguished British climatologist C. E. P. Brooks, reflects the prevailing expert opinion of that time.

The article began with this statement:

“In the past hundred years the burning of coal has increased the amount of CO 2 by a measurable amount (from 0.028 to 0.030 per cent), and Callendar (1939) sees in this an explanation of the recent rise in world temperature. But during the past 7,000 years there have been greater fluctuations of temperature without the intervention of man, and there seems to be no reason to regard the recent rise as more than a coincidence. This theory is not considered further.”

It is important to distinguish between facts and opinions. “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynihan , who said that, was a wise and accomplished American politician, sociologist, and diplomat. Like everybody, I know some facts, and I have some opinions. I will first summarize the facts that we have learned from the science of climate change. Then I will give some opinions about what people and governments should do.

I think any rational response to climate change involves first knowing what the facts and evidence are. That is the province of science. There are many indicators measured globally over many decades that show that the Earth’s climate is warming. All the indicators expected to increase in a warming world are increasing, and all those expected to decrease in a warming world are decreasing. It’s definitely warming. It’s not a hoax. We observe it and measure it. The atmosphere is warming. So is the ocean. Sea level is rising. Ice sheets and glaciers and snow cover are shrinking. The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is increasing. Climate change is real and serious. It’s not a remote threat for the distant future. It’s here and now.

It’s us. We’ve done the detective work. Just as wildfire experts can say whether a fire was caused by lightning, or by a campfire accidentally left burning, or by arson, we can show what is now causing the world to warm. Yes, some past climate change was natural, like ice ages coming and going, but the warming we have observed in recent decades is clearly caused by human activities. The evidence for that is overwhelming.

We now know what paces the beginnings and ends of ice ages. It is slow changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, that alter how sunlight is distributed over the surface of the Earth. We understand these changes in the orbit, and they take thousands of years to have an effect. They cannot possibly produce the climate changes that we observe occurring in just a few decades. Similarly, we can rule out other natural processes, such as changes in the energy in sunlight. They are quantitatively too small. Human activities, such as burning coal and oil and natural gas, are the dominant cause of the rapid climate change we now observe.

It hasn’t stopped. The warming is still continuing. We have good estimates of the global average temperature of the Earth’s surface from 1880 until the present; 1880 is about the time when we first had enough good thermometers located in enough places around the Earth to enable us to calculate a meaningful global average. The modern data is the most accurate. During about the last 50 years, from the 1970s until now, we know there has been a warming of about 1 degree Celsius, or 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit. All the warmest years on record are recent years.

The heat is mainly in the sea. Over 90 percent of the heat added to the climate system is in the oceans. How do we measure the heat stored in the ocean? That’s a good question, and it has a fascinating answer.

We now measure this increase in ocean heat content from an array of about 4,000 autonomous floats deployed throughout the world ocean under an international program called Argo . They have no engines and no propellers, but they move with the ocean currents at a depth of 1,000 meters, which is about 10 football fields. That’s where they are usually parked, and they are programmed to periodically sink another 1,000 meters lower and then rise to the surface while measuring quantities such as water temperature and salinity. They rise and sink by changing their volume. This is accomplished by pumping fluid into or out of a bladder on the float.

The floats store the measurements, and then, when they are on the surface, they locate by GPS and transmit the stored data via satellites to scientists. The change in float locations between one transmission and the next provides information on the currents at the depth where the floats were parked. As their batteries fail, the floats end their useful lives and must be replaced by new floats. The Argo floats have revolutionized our ability to observe the oceans. Argo data are available to everyone for free in near real time. New floats, allowing sampling to much greater depths, are now being developed.

Sea level is rising globally. We measure it from altimeters on satellites. There has been a rise of about 100 millimeters, which is about 4 inches, over the last 30 years or so. The rate of sea level rise is increasing too. Future sea level rise will be much greater than past sea level rise. The sea level rise is different at different locations on the Earth. Local sea level is affected by whether the land at that location is rising or sinking, and also by ocean currents, tides and other factors.

Ice is shrinking. Ice sheets on Greenland and Antarctica and almost every glacier worldwide are all shrinking. We know this from satellite missions called GRACE (the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment ). These satellites determine the mass of the ice accurately by measuring the effect of the ice sheet on the Earth’s gravity. The technology of the GRACE missions involves two satellites in the same orbit which have a means of measuring the distance between the two satellites extremely accurately. This distance changes when gravity varies, which occurs when passing over ice sheets, and measuring the tiny change in the inter-satellite distance allows scientists to determine the mass of the ice.

Carbon dioxide absorbed by the ocean makes it more nearly acidic. That can affect the marine ecosystem and the food chain. The ocean absorbs some of the CO 2 that we emit into the atmosphere. Measurements show that the acidity parameter called pH is decreasing. Seawater is slightly basic (its pH is greater than 7), and we observe a shift towards neutral conditions (pH = 7), rather than to truly acidic conditions (pH less than 7).

Carbon dioxide amounts in the atmosphere, because of human activities, are now about 45 percent higher than they were in the early 1800s. We have good measurements of atmospheric CO 2 amounts over the last 800,000 years. These data come from analyzing fossil air trapped in ice in Greenland and Antarctica. They reveal large variations in CO 2 amounts, associated with ice ages starting and ending. Orbital variations pace the ice ages, causing the CO 2 amounts to change, and initiating a feedback that increases the magnitude of the temperature change.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now is the highest it has been in millions of years. The atmospheric CO 2 amounts in the even more distant geological past, many million years ago, sometimes have been even higher than at present, but the world was a very different place then, which was long before any human beings existed.

Cumulative emissions of carbon dioxide set the amount of warming. The warming caused by CO 2 in recent decades is, to a good approximation, just linearly proportional to the total cumulative amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere. We do not know exactly how much added CO2 will produce how much warming—that is, the climate sensitivity question—but we can estimate a range of possible answers to this question, constrained by different kinds of observations. For the middle of the range, 1 trillion metric tons of carbon emitted produces a warming of about 2 degrees Celsius above the temperatures of the early 1800s. We have already emitted about half of this amount. At present, the warming we observe is caused by CO 2 plus several other heat-trapping substances that human activities have also added to the atmosphere. The amounts in the atmosphere of these other substances will decrease rapidly when and if their sources are eliminated, but some of the carbon dioxide will remain in the atmosphere for thousands of years. Because of the difference in the amount of time that different heat-trapping substances stay in the atmosphere, carbon dioxide is truly the key “control knob” for climate.

Reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping substances will limit the warming. We can estimate the cumulative amount of carbon emitted that would give us a good chance of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius (that’s 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above the pre-industrial temperatures of the early 1800s. This is the warming target endorsed by the Paris Agreement of 2015. If emissions had peaked and began to decline several decades ago, then emissions reductions could be gradual, and by 2050 emissions would not yet need to have entirely stopped. Because emissions are still increasing, drastic emissions reductions need to occur quickly and reach zero by 2040.

“Negative emissions,” meaning removing some carbon dioxide from the air, are likely to be necessary. This fact illustrates the urgency of acting. Finding a way of removing some of the carbon dioxide is one approach to geoengineering. Here by “geoengineering” we mean the intentional modification of the climate system with the goal of reducing or mitigating climate change. However, nobody has yet demonstrated a way of economically removing large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

The longer we wait before acting, the more drastic the action has to be. The result of failing to act is to increase the likelihood of dangerous climate change.

Because it takes so long for the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to decrease, climate change will last for centuries. After emissions completely stop, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere decreases only slowly for several centuries, and about 25 percent of it remains in the atmosphere for the next 10,000 years or so. The science relevant to this topic is not simple. Several complex processes for carbon removal are involved. The key take-away message is that the climate change caused by adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere can have very long-lasting effects.

The conclusions I have just recounted are facts. They are fundamental findings from extensive scientific research. They are all well-supported by abundant evidence.

The science is never complete. There is always more to learn. But the science that we have now is already good enough to help us make wise decisions. The many unknowns in the science, such as exactly how fast the Antarctic ice sheet will shrink or exactly how El Niño might be affected, are not the biggest unknowns about future climate. The biggest unknown about future climate is human behavior. Everything depends on what people and their governments do.

The scientific consensus is overwhelming. Climate change is already happening, here and now. About 97 percent of climate experts—the scientists who are most active in carrying out and publishing research on climate change—agree that the observed recent warming is real and serious and overwhelmingly human-caused, and that it will become even more serious unless we make big changes in how we generate energy. Nevertheless, some people remain unconvinced. They continue to repeat climate myths and falsehoods.

People often ask me, “I’m only one person. What can I do about climate change?” Here is my answer. We need to persuade more people that this problem is serious. Governments tend to respond when enough people become concerned, and when they vote their concerns. I urge everyone to engage with people you may know—family, friends, colleagues—who don’t accept the fundamental findings of climate science. Explain to them the facts you have learned about our changing climate. Listen to them respectfully and carefully. Be alert to the common climate myths and falsehoods that they may think are true. If you see something, say something. Have a civil conversation. Have many conversations. In their hearts, almost all of us would surely agree that everybody is entitled to his own opinions, but not to his own facts. And it is science that supplies the facts about climate change.

We humans have become the dominant actors in causing the rapid climate change we now observe. Human actions now overwhelm all the natural processes. This may seem counter-intuitive, but it’s true. You and I, and all the people who are alive today, now have our hands on the thermostat that controls the climate of our children and grandchildren. Metaphors can be superb communication tools. The thermostat is a powerful metaphor.

Think about medical metaphors. Here are a few: We climate scientists are planetary physicians. Climate science and medical science will both always be imperfect and incomplete, but both are already very useful.

When your doctor tells you to stop smoking and lose weight and exercise more, you don’t argue with her. You don’t call her a radical alarmist. You don’t ask her to name the date when you will have a heart attack.

Physicians have advanced academic credentials and many years of training and experience. We climate scientists have the same. We’re not conspiring to fool people. Do you really think your doctor is a crook? She’s not. Neither are we.

A fever of only a few degrees can indicate a serious disease. Global warming is just a symptom of planetary ill health, like a fever.

Prevention is better than cure. Quitting smoking, like quitting using fossil fuels, is not easy to do. And the main benefits of quitting come in the long-term future.

Choosing to have major surgery involves cost and risk. People know that choosing to do nothing also has costs and risks.

The laws of climate science and medical science are all immune from political tampering. You can’t fool Mother Nature. Mother Nature always bats last.

Here’s an effective metaphor. Imagine you are watching a major-league baseball game. The slugger who is thought to be on performance-enhancing drugs hits a home run. The person next to you asks, did the steroids cause it? That’s really the wrong question. You can’t be sure they caused it, because he was already a big-league slugger when he was clean. And even with the drugs, he can still strike out now and then. But at the end of the season, you see in his statistics that he hit more homers than he used to. The steroids increase the odds of home runs. Climate is the statistics of weather, and carbon dioxide is the steroids of climate. [2] It changes the odds. The odds are higher now for all sorts of extreme weather, because climate change has altered the environment in which all weather occurs.

This metaphor works for other sports too. For example, baseball isn’t popular in France, but bicycle racing is very popular there, and French people know that a bike racer on drugs won’t win every race, but the drugs do change the odds and increase his probability of winning.

The main barriers to action on climate change are a lack of widespread political will and a lack of wise and inspiring leadership. Science can help to inform policy, but only concerned people and responsive, capable governments can first decide what policies are best, and then implement them. Today, despite a strong scientific consensus, climate change is controversial politically.

We do not have to accept a future with devastating climate damage and disruption. If we continue to use more and more fossil fuels to generate the world’s energy, we will be sentencing our children and grandchildren to many centuries with a severely damaged climate and great suffering. In your conversations, try to help people understand that this bleak future is entirely preventable.

Faced with these threats, almost all the nations of the world agreed in Paris in late 2015 to limit the warming to a specific maximum amount. That amount is 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, above the average global temperature in the early 1800s, before human activities began to have a large effect

After Paris, is the glass half-empty or half-full? I am guardedly optimistic, for these reasons:

• World leaders are now engaged; at least almost all of them are.
• Emissions of heat-trapping gases have begun to decline in some places.
• Solar and wind energy are getting cheaper every year.
• Renewable energy use is increasing rapidly.
• Many corporations are now acting to reduce emissions.
• State and local governments in the United States are acting too, despite federal inaction.
• Many other countries are showing rapid progress.

Recent polling shows that in the United States, many more people accept the science and are very concerned about global warming or climate change than was the case only a few years ago. However, the issue has become extremely partisan. Recent polls show that the substantial increase in the number of Americans calling climate change a top priority has been limited to the Democratic side of the political spectrum. However, about 80 percent of Republicans, including virtually the entire leadership of the Republican party, have not changed their minds and still reject the science. We have a long way to go. I think we should keep climate change science separated from climate change policy.

There is no silver bullet that solves all the challenges of climate change, but there is a lot of silver buckshot, including increased energy efficiency and energy conservation, and much more use of sun, wind and water to provide the energy the world needs. These renewable resources are widely available now and already cost-competitive with fossil fuels. We have the technology, and it is improving. In the United States, even without energetic action by the federal government, I am guardedly optimistic.

Market forces now favor carbon-free energy. Coal companies are going bankrupt. Solar and wind energy without subsidies are in many cases already cheaper than fossil fuels. Electric vehicles are happening fast. Much energy policy in the US is set at state and local levels, not in Washington.

Always remember why we want to have conversations about climate change science. We want to inform people. We want to motivate them. We want them to act.

Research suggests that messages that may invoke fear or dismay are better received if they also include hope. We should include positive messages about our ability to solve the problem. We can explain that future climate is in our hands.

Politics and priorities and values do have a role to play in deciding which actions are best, but any rational policy begins by accepting the science. People are entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.

This article is being written in 2020 during the global coronavirus pandemic, and I have a few gentle words to say about some climate change lessons that we might learn from the pandemic now gripping the entire world.

One obvious point is that climate change science, like coronavirus epidemiology, is incomplete, still developing but already extremely useful. In both domains, we have learned we can trust scientists more than politicians or pundits or anybody else who is not really an expert on the science of the subject, whether the subject is climate change or infectious diseases. We have also learned that the challenges in both climate change and the pandemic are global. The entire world is affected. The solutions have to be global too.

The pandemic also illustrates the wisdom of the statement that, “Everybody is entitled to his own opinions, but not to his own facts.” The facts about climate change, and about COVID-19, are objective truth, and they should be the same for everybody, regardless of people’s ideology or politics. When it comes to making policy, sound science can inform wise policy. However, policy can also depend on many other factors, such as people’s priorities, their convictions about economics, what they regard as the proper role of governments, their risk tolerance, and, of course, public opinion. That’s true for meeting the challenge of climate change, just as for meeting the challenge of COVID-19.

The pandemic reminds us how valuable science and scientists are. The recent discussions in the news—such as about how clinical trials of drugs and vaccines work—are very educational. The medical scientists who develop new medicines do their best to make sure they are safe and effective, and they won’t release them for widespread use to the public until they are absolutely convinced of that. They are real experts and are very careful.

So are climate scientists.

Tony Fauci, who has often been on television recently in the United States, is a good example of a person who is a real expert on pandemics. He says simply, “I’m a physician and a scientist.” People get that. When Fauci speaks to the public, he is not trying to be popular or make people happy or brag about himself or make money. He is just telling people the facts that scientists have discovered, and he describes these facts in a way that is honest and transparent and understandable. He has spent his entire career accumulating expertise and experience and wisdom about infectious diseases and pandemics. People should trust him, and polls show that the great majority of people do trust him. Science is absolutely essential. That’s true for pandemics.

It’s also true for climate change.

Like many interested people, I watched Warren Buffett’s 2020 Berkshire Hathaway stockholders meeting online. Warren Buffett, the brilliant investor and one of the richest people in the world, agrees with me. Here’s what he said:

“I think, personally I feel extraordinarily good about being able to listen to Dr. Fauci, who I had never heard of a year ago. But I think we’re very, very fortunate as a country to have somebody at 79 years of age who appears to be able to work 24 hours a day and keep a good humor about him and communicate in a very, very straightforward matter about fairly complex subjects and tell you when he knows something and when he doesn’t know something. So, I’m not going to talk about any political figures at all or our politics generally this afternoon, but I do feel that I owe a huge debt of gratitude to Dr. Fauci for educating and informing me, actually along with my friend Bill Gates, too, as to what’s going on. I know I get it from a straight shooter when I get it from either one of those. So, thank you Dr. Fauci.”

[1] See https://youtu.be/DmUWPn6GCEg

[2] See https://youtu.be/MW3b8jSX7ec

Together, we make the world safer.

The Bulletin elevates expert voices above the noise. But as an independent nonprofit organization, our operations depend on the support of readers like you. Help us continue to deliver quality journalism that holds leaders accountable. Your support of our work at any level is important . In return, we promise our coverage will be understandable, influential, vigilant, solution-oriented, and fair-minded. Together we can make a difference.

Keywords: Aquarium of the Pacific , GRACE , Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment , climate change facts , climate change metaphors Topics: Climate Change , Multimedia

• Copy link Linked copied

I have difficulty putting much stock in the opinion of a scientist who only points to CO2 emissions from fossil fuels as the cause of climate change and fails to mention deforestation and shrinking of mangroves around the world.

Richard C. J. Somerville

Richard C. J. Somerville is an internationally recognized climate scientist. He has been a professor at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at... Read More

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE

Science diplomacy: The essential interdisciplinary approach

By Rose Gottemoeller

1995: Hiroshima Memories: One sunny day, a young girl learned about darkness

By Hideko Tamura Friedman

Introduction: An innovative and determined future for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

By John Mecklin

2003: North Korea: No bygones at Yongbyon

By Robert Alvarez

1950: What the scientists are saying about the H-bomb

By Albert Einstein , Edward Teller

Interview: Nobel chemistry laureate Jennifer Doudna on the promise and peril of the genetic editing revolution

Related posts.

“The world has already ended”: Britt Wray on living with the horror and trauma of climate crisis

By Jessica McKenzie

Why a mindset of stubborn optimism about the climate crisis is needed, now more than ever

By Christiana Figueres

Bill McKibben explains what individuals can do to win the climate fight. Together.

Introduction: What you can do to turn back the hands of the Doomsday Clock

By Dan Drollette Jr

Charging ahead: Steven Chu, Nobel Prize-winner and former Energy Secretary, on today’s battery research—and more

“Like writing the biography of a ghost”—Interview with Jeff Goodell, author of The Heat Will Kill You First

Bulletin daily.

The problem with decarbonization tunnel vision

By Peter Sutoris

How nongovernmental entities are tailoring their outreach to address nuclear escalation

By Clara Sherwood , Jamie Withorne

The enormous risks and uncertain benefits of an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities

By Assaf Zoran

Russia plans to restart Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia embattled nuclear power plant. That won’t make the plant safer

By Ali Alkis

Listen up, UN: Soldiers aren’t fans of killer robots

By Catherine Sarkis

Nukes, political violence, and environmental exploitation: The enduring relevance of Dune

By Erik English

The short march to China’s hydrogen bomb

By Hui Zhang

International reactions to China’s nuclear weapon: ‘A Bomb for all Asians and Africans’

By Nicola Leveringhaus

Climate change facts

What do you need to know about climate change?

We’re already seeing the effects of human-caused climate change — but nature can help. Protecting nature today ensures a more sustainable future.

SHARE THESE FACTS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE:​

Fact 1: 421 parts per million.

The concentration of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in our atmosphere, as of May 2022 Jump to references 1 , is the highest it has been in human history. Tweet this fact

Fact 2: 2023 was the hottest year on record

Analysis by NOAA shows that average global temperatures in 2023 were 2.12 degrees F (1.18 degrees C) warmer than the 20th-century average — and higher than any other year since records began in 1850. Jump to references 2 What's more, the 10 warmest years on record have all been in the past decade. Tweet this fact

Fact 3: 20% of emissions

As much as 20 percent of all global greenhouse gas emissions caused by humans are due to deforestation Jump to references 3 — exceeding the emissions from all of the passenger vehicles on the planet. Jump to references 4 Tweet this fact

Fact 4: Nature is an untapped solution

Tropical forests are incredibly effective at storing carbon , providing at least a third of the mitigation action needed Jump to references 5 to prevent the worst climate change scenarios. Yet nature-based solutions receive only 3 percent of all climate funding. Jump to references 6 Tweet this fact

Fact 5: Fight climate change, improve livelihoods — naturally

Scaling up natural climate solutions , such as restoring degraded forests, could create as many as 20 million new jobs. Jump to references 7 In total, ecosystem restoration creates 3.7 times as many jobs as oil and gas production per dollar. Jump to references 8 Tweet this fact

Fact 6: A disturbing trend

According to the European Union's Copernicus Climate Change Service, average global temperatures in July 2023 were higher than any other month on record Jump to references 9 — and beat the 1991-2020 average temperature for July by 0.72°C. Tweet this fact

Fact 7: 3.6 billion people

As many as 3.6 billion people live in areas of high vulnerability to climate change impacts Jump to references 10 such as droughts, floods, heat waves, extreme weather events and sea-level rise. Tweet this fact

Fact 8: Coastal ecosystems are critical

In a single square mile, mangroves hold as much carbon as the annual emissions of 90,000 cars . If they are destroyed, all that carbon is released into the atmosphere, contributing to climate change. Jump to references 11 Tweet this fact

Fact 9: It’s cheaper to protect nature

Conserving ecosystems is often more cost-effective than human-made interventions. Mangrove trees, which thrive in salty, coastal areas around the world, provide flood protection benefits exceeding US$ 65 billion per year. Jump to references 12 Tweet this fact

Fact 10: Nations are uniting

One hundred ninety-three countries and the European Union have ratified the 2015 Paris Agreement Jump to references 13 , agreeing to limit global warming and adapt to climate change, partly by protecting nature. Tweet this fact

FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE

Join the thousands who have stepped up to protect nature like mangroves, which trap carbon and safeguard coastal communities against sea-level rise and storms.

More Of Our Work

• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2022, June). Carbon dioxide now more than 50% higher than pre-industrial levels. U.S. Department of Commerce. https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/carbon-dioxide-now-more-than-50-higher-than-pre-industrial-levels
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2024, January). 2023 was the world’s warmest year on record, by far U.S. Department of Commerce. https://www.noaa.gov/news/2023-was-worlds-warmest-year-on-record-by-far
• Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. (2023, February). What is the role of deforestation in climate change and how can 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation' (REDD+) help?. The London School of Economics and Political Science. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/whats-redd-and-will-it-help-tackle-climate-change/
• DeCicco, J., Fung, F., An, F. (2006). Global Warming on the Road: The climate impact of America’s automobiles. Environmental Defense. https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/5301_Globalwarmingontheroad_0.pdf
• Correction to Supporting Information for Griscom et al., Natural climate solutions. (2019). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(7), 2776–2776. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900868116
• Buchner, B., Clark, A., Falconer, A., Macquarie, R., Meattle, C., Wetherbee, C. (2019). Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2019. Climate Policy Initiative. https://climatepolicyinitiative.org/publication/global-landscape-of-climate-finance-2019/
• United Nations Environment Programme. (2022, December 8). Nature-based Solutions can generate 20 million new jobs, but “just transition” policies needed [Press release]. https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/nature-based-solutions-can-generate-20-million-new-jobs-just
• Jaeger, J. (2021, October 18). Climate-friendly Investments Can Create More Jobs Per Dollar than Polluting Alternatives. World Resources Institute. https://www.wri.org/insights/green-investments-create-more-jobs-polluting-alternatives #:~:text=Ecosystem%20restoration%20creates%203.7%20times,as%20fossil%20fuels%20per%20dollar
• Copernicus Climate Change Service. (2023, August 8). July 2023: Global air and ocean temperatures reach new record highs [Press release]. https://climate.copernicus.eu/july-2023-global-air-and-ocean-temperatures-reach-new-record-highs
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2022). Key Findings of the AR6 Report on Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability [Report]. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2022/06/WGII_AR6_Presentation_SB56.pdf
• Conservation International. Protect Our Oceans. https://www.conservation.org/act/protect-our-oceans Accessed: 2023-03-10
• Menéndez, P., Losada, I.J., Torres-Ortega, S. et al. The Global Flood Protection Benefits of Mangroves. Sci Rep 10 , 4404 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61136-6
• United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Paris Agreement - Status of Ratification. https://unfccc.int/process/the-paris-agreement/status-of-ratification. Accessed: 2020-06-09.

Earth Day Match: Donate to Defend Our Planet

Drilling on public lands, mass wildlife extinctions, worsening climate change—our planet is in crisis. Help us fight back this Earth Day and your gift will be matched $1 for $1.

Global Warming 101

Everything you wanted to know about our changing climate but were too afraid to ask.

Temperatures in Beijing rose above 104 degrees Fahrenheit on July 6, 2023.

Jia Tianyong/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images

• Share this page block

What is global warming?

What causes global warming, how is global warming linked to extreme weather, what are the other effects of global warming, where does the united states stand in terms of global-warming contributors, is the united states doing anything to prevent global warming, is global warming too big a problem for me to help tackle.

A: Since the Industrial Revolution, the global annual temperature has increased in total by a little more than 1 degree Celsius, or about 2 degrees Fahrenheit. Between 1880—the year that accurate recordkeeping began—and 1980, it rose on average by 0.07 degrees Celsius (0.13 degrees Fahrenheit) every 10 years. Since 1981, however, the rate of increase has more than doubled: For the last 40 years, we’ve seen the global annual temperature rise by 0.18 degrees Celsius, or 0.32 degrees Fahrenheit, per decade.

The result? A planet that has never been hotter . Nine of the 10 warmest years since 1880 have occurred since 2005—and the 5 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2015. Climate change deniers have argued that there has been a “pause” or a “slowdown” in rising global temperatures, but numerous studies, including a 2018 paper published in the journal Environmental Research Letters , have disproved this claim. The impacts of global warming are already harming people around the world.

Now climate scientists have concluded that we must limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2040 if we are to avoid a future in which everyday life around the world is marked by its worst, most devastating effects: the extreme droughts, wildfires, floods, tropical storms, and other disasters that we refer to collectively as climate change . These effects are felt by all people in one way or another but are experienced most acutely by the underprivileged, the economically marginalized, and people of color, for whom climate change is often a key driver of poverty, displacement, hunger, and social unrest.

A: Global warming occurs when carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and other air pollutants collect in the atmosphere and absorb sunlight and solar radiation that have bounced off the earth’s surface. Normally this radiation would escape into space, but these pollutants, which can last for years to centuries in the atmosphere, trap the heat and cause the planet to get hotter. These heat-trapping pollutants—specifically carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, water vapor, and synthetic fluorinated gases—are known as greenhouse gases, and their impact is called the greenhouse effect.

Though natural cycles and fluctuations have caused the earth’s climate to change several times over the last 800,000 years, our current era of global warming is directly attributable to human activity—specifically to our burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, gasoline, and natural gas, which results in the greenhouse effect. In the United States, the largest source of greenhouse gases is transportation (29 percent), followed closely by electricity production (28 percent) and industrial activity (22 percent). Learn about the natural and human causes of climate change .

Curbing dangerous climate change requires very deep cuts in emissions, as well as the use of alternatives to fossil fuels worldwide. The good news is that countries around the globe have formally committed—as part of the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement —to lower their emissions by setting new standards and crafting new policies to meet or even exceed those standards. The not-so-good news is that we’re not working fast enough. To avoid the worst impacts of climate change, scientists tell us that we need to reduce global carbon emissions by as much as 40 percent by 2030. For that to happen, the global community must take immediate, concrete steps: to decarbonize electricity generation by equitably transitioning from fossil fuel–based production to renewable energy sources like wind and solar; to electrify our cars and trucks; and to maximize energy efficiency in our buildings, appliances, and industries.

A: Scientists agree that the earth’s rising temperatures are fueling longer and hotter heat waves , more frequent droughts , heavier rainfall , and more powerful hurricanes .

In 2015, for example, scientists concluded that a lengthy drought in California—the state’s worst water shortage in 1,200 years —had been intensified by 15 to 20 percent by global warming. They also said the odds of similar droughts happening in the future had roughly doubled over the past century. And in 2016, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine announced that we can now confidently attribute some extreme weather events, like heat waves, droughts, and heavy precipitation, directly to climate change.

The earth’s ocean temperatures are getting warmer, too—which means that tropical storms can pick up more energy. In other words, global warming has the ability to turn a category 3 storm into a more dangerous category 4 storm. In fact, scientists have found that the frequency of North Atlantic hurricanes has increased since the early 1980s, as has the number of storms that reach categories 4 and 5. The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season included a record-breaking 30 tropical storms, 6 major hurricanes, and 13 hurricanes altogether. With increased intensity come increased damage and death. The United States saw an unprecedented 22 weather and climate disasters that caused at least a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 2020, but, according to NOAA, 2017 was the costliest on record and among the deadliest as well: Taken together, that year's tropical storms (including Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria) caused nearly $300 billion in damage and led to more than 3,300 fatalities.

The impacts of global warming are being felt everywhere. Extreme heat waves have caused tens of thousands of deaths around the world in recent years. And in an alarming sign of events to come, Antarctica has lost nearly four trillion metric tons of ice since the 1990s. The rate of loss could speed up if we keep burning fossil fuels at our current pace, some experts say, causing sea levels to rise several meters in the next 50 to 150 years and wreaking havoc on coastal communities worldwide.

A: Each year scientists learn more about the consequences of global warming , and each year we also gain new evidence of its devastating impact on people and the planet. As the heat waves, droughts, and floods associated with climate change become more frequent and more intense, communities suffer and death tolls rise. If we’re unable to reduce our emissions, scientists believe that climate change could lead to the deaths of more than 250,000 people around the globe every year and force 100 million people into poverty by 2030.

Global warming is already taking a toll on the United States. And if we aren’t able to get a handle on our emissions, here’s just a smattering of what we can look forward to:

• Disappearing glaciers, early snowmelt, and severe droughts will cause more dramatic water shortages and continue to increase the risk of wildfires in the American West.
• Rising sea levels will lead to even more coastal flooding on the Eastern Seaboard, especially in Florida, and in other areas such as the Gulf of Mexico.
• Forests, farms, and cities will face troublesome new pests , heat waves, heavy downpours, and increased flooding . All of these can damage or destroy agriculture and fisheries.
• Disruption of habitats such as coral reefs and alpine meadows could drive many plant and animal species to extinction.
• Allergies, asthma, and infectious disease outbreaks will become more common due to increased growth of pollen-producing ragweed , higher levels of air pollution , and the spread of conditions favorable to pathogens and mosquitoes.

Though everyone is affected by climate change, not everyone is affected equally. Indigenous people, people of color, and the economically marginalized are typically hit the hardest. Inequities built into our housing , health care , and labor systems make these communities more vulnerable to the worst impacts of climate change—even though these same communities have done the least to contribute to it.

A: In recent years, China has taken the lead in global-warming pollution , producing about 26 percent of all CO2 emissions. The United States comes in second. Despite making up just 4 percent of the world’s population, our nation produces a sobering 13 percent of all global CO2 emissions—nearly as much as the European Union and India (third and fourth place) combined. And America is still number one, by far, in cumulative emissions over the past 150 years. As a top contributor to global warming, the United States has an obligation to help propel the world to a cleaner, safer, and more equitable future. Our responsibility matters to other countries, and it should matter to us, too.

A: We’ve started. But in order to avoid the worsening effects of climate change, we need to do a lot more—together with other countries—to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and transition to clean energy sources.

Under the administration of President Donald Trump (a man who falsely referred to global warming as a “hoax”), the United States withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement, rolled back or eliminated dozens of clean air protections, and opened up federally managed lands, including culturally sacred national monuments, to fossil fuel development. Although President Biden has pledged to get the country back on track, years of inaction during and before the Trump administration—and our increased understanding of global warming’s serious impacts—mean we must accelerate our efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Despite the lack of cooperation from the Trump administration, local and state governments made great strides during this period through efforts like the American Cities Climate Challenge and ongoing collaborations like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative . Meanwhile, industry and business leaders have been working with the public sector, creating and adopting new clean-energy technologies and increasing energy efficiency in buildings, appliances, and industrial processes. 

Today the American automotive industry is finding new ways to produce cars and trucks that are more fuel efficient and is committing itself to putting more and more zero-emission electric vehicles on the road. Developers, cities, and community advocates are coming together to make sure that new affordable housing is built with efficiency in mind , reducing energy consumption and lowering electric and heating bills for residents. And renewable energy continues to surge as the costs associated with its production and distribution keep falling. In 2020 renewable energy sources such as wind and solar provided more electricity than coal for the very first time in U.S. history.

President Biden has made action on global warming a high priority. On his first day in office, he recommitted the United States to the Paris Climate Agreement, sending the world community a strong signal that we were determined to join other nations in cutting our carbon pollution to support the shared goal of preventing the average global temperature from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. (Scientists say we must stay below a 2-degree increase to avoid catastrophic climate impacts.) And significantly, the president has assembled a climate team of experts and advocates who have been tasked with pursuing action both abroad and at home while furthering the cause of environmental justice and investing in nature-based solutions.

A: No! While we can’t win the fight without large-scale government action at the national level , we also can’t do it without the help of individuals who are willing to use their voices, hold government and industry leaders to account, and make changes in their daily habits.

Wondering how you can be a part of the fight against global warming? Reduce your own carbon footprint by taking a few easy steps: Make conserving energy a part of your daily routine and your decisions as a consumer. When you shop for new appliances like refrigerators, washers, and dryers, look for products with the government’s ENERGY STAR ® label; they meet a higher standard for energy efficiency than the minimum federal requirements. When you buy a car, look for one with the highest gas mileage and lowest emissions. You can also reduce your emissions by taking public transportation or carpooling when possible.

And while new federal and state standards are a step in the right direction, much more needs to be done. Voice your support of climate-friendly and climate change preparedness policies, and tell your representatives that equitably transitioning from dirty fossil fuels to clean power should be a top priority—because it’s vital to building healthy, more secure communities.

You don’t have to go it alone, either. Movements across the country are showing how climate action can build community , be led by those on the front lines of its impacts, and create a future that’s equitable and just for all .

This story was originally published on March 11, 2016 and has been updated with new information and links.

This NRDC.org story is available for online republication by news media outlets or nonprofits under these conditions: The writer(s) must be credited with a byline; you must note prominently that the story was originally published by NRDC.org and link to the original; the story cannot be edited (beyond simple things such as grammar); you can’t resell the story in any form or grant republishing rights to other outlets; you can’t republish our material wholesale or automatically—you need to select stories individually; you can’t republish the photos or graphics on our site without specific permission; you should drop us a note to let us know when you’ve used one of our stories.

Related Stories

Liquefied Natural Gas 101

What’s the Most Energy-Efficient Water Heater?

What Do “Better” Batteries Look Like?

When you sign up, you’ll become a member of NRDC’s Activist Network. We will keep you informed with the latest alerts and progress reports.

ENCYCLOPEDIC ENTRY

Global warming.

The causes, effects, and complexities of global warming are important to understand so that we can fight for the health of our planet.

Earth Science, Climatology

Tennessee Power Plant

Ash spews from a coal-fueled power plant in New Johnsonville, Tennessee, United States.

Photograph by Emory Kristof/ National Geographic

Global warming is the long-term warming of the planet’s overall temperature. Though this warming trend has been going on for a long time, its pace has significantly increased in the last hundred years due to the burning of fossil fuels . As the human population has increased, so has the volume of fossil fuels burned. Fossil fuels include coal, oil, and natural gas, and burning them causes what is known as the “greenhouse effect” in Earth’s atmosphere.

The greenhouse effect is when the sun’s rays penetrate the atmosphere, but when that heat is reflected off the surface cannot escape back into space. Gases produced by the burning of fossil fuels prevent the heat from leaving the atmosphere. These greenhouse gasses are carbon dioxide , chlorofluorocarbons, water vapor , methane , and nitrous oxide . The excess heat in the atmosphere has caused the average global temperature to rise overtime, otherwise known as global warming.

Global warming has presented another issue called climate change. Sometimes these phrases are used interchangeably, however, they are different. Climate change refers to changes in weather patterns and growing seasons around the world. It also refers to sea level rise caused by the expansion of warmer seas and melting ice sheets and glaciers . Global warming causes climate change, which poses a serious threat to life on Earth in the forms of widespread flooding and extreme weather. Scientists continue to study global warming and its impact on Earth.

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.

February 21, 2024

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

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

What Is Climate Change?

Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. Such shifts can be natural, due to changes in the sun’s activity or large volcanic eruptions. But since the 1800s, human activities have been the main driver of climate change , primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas.

Burning fossil fuels generates greenhouse gas emissions that act like a blanket wrapped around the Earth, trapping the sun’s heat and raising temperatures.

The main greenhouse gases that are causing climate change include carbon dioxide and methane. These come from using gasoline for driving a car or coal for heating a building, for example. Clearing land and cutting down forests can also release carbon dioxide. Agriculture, oil and gas operations are major sources of methane emissions. Energy, industry, transport, buildings, agriculture and land use are among the main sectors  causing greenhouse gases.

Humans are responsible for global warming

Climate scientists have showed that humans are responsible for virtually all global heating over the last 200 years. Human activities like the ones mentioned above are causing greenhouse gases that are warming the world faster than at any time in at least the last two thousand years.

The average temperature of the Earth’s surface is now about 1.1°C warmer than it was in the late 1800s (before the industrial revolution) and warmer than at any time in the last 100,000 years. The last decade (2011-2020) was the warmest on record , and each of the last four decades has been warmer than any previous decade since 1850.

Many people think climate change mainly means warmer temperatures. But temperature rise is only the beginning of the story. Because the Earth is a system, where everything is connected, changes in one area can influence changes in all others.

The consequences of climate change now include, among others, intense droughts, water scarcity, severe fires, rising sea levels, flooding, melting polar ice, catastrophic storms and declining biodiversity.

People are experiencing climate change in diverse ways

Climate change can affect our health , ability to grow food, housing, safety and work. Some of us are already more vulnerable to climate impacts, such as people living in small island nations and other developing countries. Conditions like sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion have advanced to the point where whole communities have had to relocate, and protracted droughts are putting people at risk of famine. In the future, the number of people displaced by weather-related events is expected to rise.

Every increase in global warming matters

In a series of UN reports , thousands of scientists and government reviewers agreed that limiting global temperature rise to no more than 1.5°C would help us avoid the worst climate impacts and maintain a livable climate. Yet policies currently in place point to a 3°C temperature rise by the end of the century.

The emissions that cause climate change come from every part of the world and affect everyone, but some countries produce much more than others .The seven biggest emitters alone (China, the United States of America, India, the European Union, Indonesia, the Russian Federation, and Brazil) accounted for about half of all global greenhouse gas emissions in 2020.

Everyone must take climate action, but people and countries creating more of the problem have a greater responsibility to act first.

We face a huge challenge but already know many solutions

Many climate change solutions can deliver economic benefits while improving our lives and protecting the environment. We also have global frameworks and agreements to guide progress, such as the Sustainable Development Goals , the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement . Three broad categories of action are: cutting emissions, adapting to climate impacts and financing required adjustments.

Switching energy systems from fossil fuels to renewables like solar or wind will reduce the emissions driving climate change. But we have to act now. While a growing number of countries is committing to net zero emissions by 2050, emissions must be cut in half by 2030 to keep warming below 1.5°C. Achieving this means huge declines in the use of coal, oil and gas: over two-thirds of today’s proven reserves of fossil fuels need to be kept in the ground by 2050 in order to prevent catastrophic levels of climate change.

Adapting to climate consequences protects people, homes, businesses, livelihoods, infrastructure and natural ecosystems. It covers current impacts and those likely in the future. Adaptation will be required everywhere, but must be prioritized now for the most vulnerable people with the fewest resources to cope with climate hazards. The rate of return can be high. Early warning systems for disasters, for instance, save lives and property, and can deliver benefits up to 10 times the initial cost.

We can pay the bill now, or pay dearly in the future

Climate action requires significant financial investments by governments and businesses. But climate inaction is vastly more expensive. One critical step is for industrialized countries to fulfil their commitment to provide $100 billion a year to developing countries so they can adapt and move towards greener economies.

To get familiar with some of the more technical terms used in connection with climate change, consult the Climate Dictionary .

Learn more about…

The facts on climate and energy

Climate change is a hot topic – with myths and falsehoods circulating widely. Find some essential facts here .

The science

See the latest climate reports from the United Nations as well as climate action facts .

Causes and Effects

Fossil fuels are by far the largest contributor to the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change, which poses many risks to all forms of life on Earth. Learn more .

From the Secretary-General

Read the UN Chief’s latest statements on climate action.

What is net zero? Why is it important? Our  net-zero page  explains why we need steep emissions cuts now and what efforts are underway.

Renewable energy – powering a safer future

What is renewable energy and why does it matter? Learn more about why the shift to renewables is our only hope for a brighter and safer world.

How will the world foot the bill? We explain the issues and the value of financing climate action.

What is climate adaptation? Why is it so important for every country? Find out how we can protect lives and livelihoods as the climate changes.

Climate Issues

Learn more about how climate change impacts are felt across different sectors and ecosystems.

Why women are key to climate action

Women and girls are on the frontlines of the climate crisis and uniquely situated to drive action. Find out why it’s time to invest in women.

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

The importance of storytelling in fighting climate change

In a webinar on April 19, we'll explore how climate organizations are currently using storytelling in their work, the impacts of these stories, and lessons learned from other movements.

Knowledge is power

Stay in the know about climate impacts and solutions. Subscribe to our weekly newsletter.

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Yale Climate Connections

Scientists agree: Climate change is real and caused by people

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)

[Leer en español aquí]

The scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that it is human-caused is strong. Scientific investigation of global warming began in the 19th century , and by the early 2000s, this research began to coalesce into confidence about the reality, causes, and general range of adverse effects of global warming. This conclusion was drawn from studying air and ocean temperatures, the atmosphere’s composition, satellite records, ice cores, modeling, and more.

In 1988 the United Nations and World Meteorological Organization founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, to provide regular updates on the scientific evidence on global warming. In a 2013 report , the IPCC concluded that scientific evidence of warming is “unequivocal” and that the largest cause is an increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as a result of humans burning fossil fuels. The IPCC continues to assess this science, periodically issuing new reports.

Climate change is real and caused by humans

The IPCC is not the only scientific group that has reached a clear consensus on the scientific evidence of human-caused global warming. As this NASA page points out, 200 global scientific organizations, 11 international science academies, and 18 American science associations have released statements in alignment with this consensus.

Amanda Staudt is the senior director for climate, atmospheric and polar sciences at the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, where she has worked since 2001. The Academies, she said, first began studying climate change in 1979, researching how much warming would likely happen if the amount of carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere were doubled.

Four decades later, those findings have held up and have been strengthened based on scores of continued studies and analysis. “The remarkable thing about that study,” she said, “is that they basically got the right answer” from the start. This 1979 study by the National Research Council, Staudt said, led to investment in climate science in the U.S. 

Though this consensus has been thoroughly established, scientific research and new findings continue. Staudt said countless attempted rebuttals of climate science findings have been researched and disproved.

“We did a lot of studies in that time period, looking at those questions,” she said, ”and one by one, putting them to bed and convincing ourselves over and over again, that humans were affecting climate, and that we could document that effect.”

At the National Academies, reaching consensus requires open sessions and dialogue with scientists and agreement from committees, which typically consist of 12-15 experts. Their draft reports go through peer review, and reviewers’ concerns are resolved before publication is approved. The goal is for the complex science of climate change to become as thoroughly researched and substantiated as possible.

“One of the things I think about scientists is that we’re all inherently skeptics at some level,” Staudt said. “That’s what drives us to science, that we have questions about the world around us. And we want to prove that for ourselves.”

Scientists consistently reaffirm evidence that climate change is happening

Climate scientists worldwide go through similar processes before their findings are published. And their research papers, too, show a strong consensus about global warming. As NASA states on its website , “Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.” (By sound practice, scientists resist saying science is for all times “certain” or that its findings are “final,” and the “extremely likely” language respects that practice.)

One of the studies about the consensus was led by John Cook, a fellow at the Climate Change Communication Research Hub at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. Cook and colleagues reviewed nearly 12,000 scientific papers to examine how aligned published research is on major findings on climate change. That study found that 97 percent of scholarly papers that take a position on climate change do endorse the consensus. The papers that rejected the consensus position contained errors, according to subsequent research .

In reviewing the papers, Cook has said he and his colleagues found the consensus to have been so widely accepted by 2013 that many researchers by then no longer felt a need to mention or reaffirm it in their research papers.

Also see: Causes of global warming: How scientists know that humans are responsible

Samantha Harrington

Samantha Harrington, director of audience experience for Yale Climate Connections, is a journalist and graphic designer with a background in digital media and entrepreneurship. Sam is especially interested... More by Samantha Harrington

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• School Education /

Essay on Climate Change: Check Samples in 100, 250 Words

• Updated on  
• Sep 21, 2023

Writing an essay on climate change is crucial to raise awareness and advocate for action. The world is facing environmental challenges, so in a situation like this such essay topics can serve as s platform to discuss the causes, effects, and solutions to this pressing issue. They offer an opportunity to engage readers in understanding the urgency of mitigating climate change for the sake of our planet’s future.

Must Read: Essay On Environment  

Table of Contents

• 1 What Is Climate Change?
• 2 What are the Causes of Climate Change?
• 3 What are the effects of Climate Change?
• 4 How to fight climate change?
• 5 Essay On Climate Change in 100 Words
• 6 Climate Change Sample Essay 250 Words

What Is Climate Change?

Climate change is the significant variation of average weather conditions becoming, for example, warmer, wetter, or drier—over several decades or longer. It may be natural or anthropogenic. However, in recent times, it’s been in the top headlines due to escalations caused by human interference.

What are the Causes of Climate Change?

Obama at the First Session of COP21 rightly quoted “We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change, and the last generation that can do something about it.”.Identifying the causes of climate change is the first step to take in our fight against climate change. Below stated are some of the causes of climate change:

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Mainly from burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) for energy and transportation.
• Deforestation: The cutting down of trees reduces the planet’s capacity to absorb carbon dioxide.
• Industrial Processes: Certain manufacturing activities release potent greenhouse gases.
• Agriculture: Livestock and rice cultivation emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

What are the effects of Climate Change?

Climate change poses a huge risk to almost all life forms on Earth. The effects of climate change are listed below:

• Global Warming: Increased temperatures due to trapped heat from greenhouse gases.
• Melting Ice and Rising Sea Levels: Ice caps and glaciers melt, causing oceans to rise.
• Extreme Weather Events: More frequent and severe hurricanes, droughts, and wildfires.
• Ocean Acidification: Oceans absorb excess CO2, leading to more acidic waters harming marine life.
• Disrupted Ecosystems: Shifting climate patterns disrupt habitats and threaten biodiversity.
• Food and Water Scarcity: Altered weather affects crop yields and strains water resources.
• Human Health Risks: Heat-related illnesses and the spread of diseases.
• Economic Impact: Damage to infrastructure and increased disaster-related costs.
• Migration and Conflict: Climate-induced displacement and resource competition.

How to fight climate change?

‘Climate change is a terrible problem, and it absolutely needs to be solved. It deserves to be a huge priority,’ says Bill Gates. The below points highlight key actions to combat climate change effectively.

• Energy Efficiency: Improve energy efficiency in all sectors.
• Protect Forests: Stop deforestation and promote reforestation.
• Sustainable Agriculture: Adopt eco-friendly farming practices.
• Advocacy: Raise awareness and advocate for climate-friendly policies.
• Innovation: Invest in green technologies and research.
• Government Policies: Enforce climate-friendly regulations and targets.
• Corporate Responsibility: Encourage sustainable business practices.
• Individual Action: Reduce personal carbon footprint and inspire others.

Essay On Climate Change in 100 Words

Climate change refers to long-term alterations in Earth’s climate patterns, primarily driven by human activities, such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation, which release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. These gases trap heat, leading to global warming. The consequences of climate change are widespread and devastating. Rising temperatures cause polar ice caps to melt, contributing to sea level rise and threatening coastal communities. Extreme weather events, like hurricanes and wildfires, become more frequent and severe, endangering lives and livelihoods. Additionally, shifts in weather patterns can disrupt agriculture, leading to food shortages. To combat climate change, global cooperation, renewable energy adoption, and sustainable practices are crucial for a more sustainable future.

Must Read: Essay On Global Warming

Climate Change Sample Essay 250 Words

Climate change represents a pressing global challenge that demands immediate attention and concerted efforts. Human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation, have significantly increased the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This results in a greenhouse effect, trapping heat and leading to a rise in global temperatures, commonly referred to as global warming.

The consequences of climate change are far-reaching and profound. Rising sea levels threaten coastal communities, displacing millions and endangering vital infrastructure. Extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, droughts, and wildfires, have become more frequent and severe, causing devastating economic and human losses. Disrupted ecosystems affect biodiversity and the availability of vital resources, from clean water to agricultural yields.

Moreover, climate change has serious implications for food and water security. Changing weather patterns disrupt traditional farming practices and strain freshwater resources, potentially leading to conflicts over access to essential commodities.

Addressing climate change necessitates a multifaceted approach. First, countries must reduce their greenhouse gas emissions through the transition to renewable energy sources, increased energy efficiency, and reforestation efforts. International cooperation is crucial to set emission reduction targets and hold nations accountable for meeting them.

In conclusion, climate change is a global crisis with profound and immediate consequences. Urgent action is needed to mitigate its impacts and secure a sustainable future for our planet. By reducing emissions and implementing adaptation strategies, we can protect vulnerable communities, preserve ecosystems, and ensure a livable planet for future generations. The time to act is now.

Climate change refers to long-term shifts in Earth’s climate patterns, primarily driven by human activities like burning fossil fuels and deforestation.

Five key causes of climate change include excessive greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, notably burning fossil fuels and deforestation. 

We hope this blog gave you an idea about how to write and present an essay on climate change that puts forth your opinions. The skill of writing an essay comes in handy when appearing for standardized language tests. Thinking of taking one soon? Leverage Edu provides the best online test prep for the same via Leverage Live . Register today to know more!

Amisha Khushara

Hey there! I'm a content writer who turns complex ideas into clear, engaging stories. Think of me as your translator, taking expert knowledge and making it interesting and relatable for everyone.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today.

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2024

September 2024

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Have something on your mind?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

India's Biggest Virtual University Fair

Essex Direct Admission Day

Why attend .

Don't Miss Out

5 Alarming Facts About Climate Change

Climate Action can be defined as the preservation of the environment and potential solutions to climate change. These efforts are more crucial than ever. In the words of our Secretary-General, the severity of climate change has reached “code red” for humanity. We need climate action now. Our environmental crisis is threefold: we face climate change, biodiversity loss and rising pollution. Policymakers must transform current systems to limit global warming. World leaders must honour their commitments made in the Paris Agreement to confront climate change for people and the planet. Here are 5 alarming facts about our current state of climate change:

• Global Warming: we’re on the path to double the 1.5 °C/2.7°F limit - ( Source )

The last few years have experienced the highest global temperatures in history. Heatwaves, droughts and natural disasters will become more frequent and severe if we don’t take action on reducing emissions. To prevent the most extreme consequences, we must limit global temperature rise to 1.5 ° C. Yet The planet has already warmed by as much as 1.2 degrees. We need to cut  emissions immediately.

First, all countries must boost their national climate ambition (their Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs) every year, until we are on track. The G20 is responsible for 80% of global emissions. Second, we must end our addiction to fossil fuels. This means no further investments in fossil fuel infrastructures; phasing out coal by 2030 for OECD members, and by 2040 for non-members; and accelerating the development of renewable energy.

• Oceans: 99% of coral reefs will be lost if we exceed  2 degrees Celsiu of warming.  ( Source )

The United Nations has issued an official warning that the plastic waste in our oceans will cause irreparable damage to marine life.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report states with high confidence that 99% of coral reefs will be lost with just a 2 °C increase in temperature . Coral reefs are home to 30% of marine life, and hubs of crucial biodiversity. Their loss will have major consequences for the health of the Ocean. ( Source )

Even minor policy adjustments could “help the ocean produce as much as six times more food and generate 40 times more renewable energy than it currently does,” as stated by Secretary-General, António Guterres. ( Source )

To achieve this, we should prevent marine pollution by increasing conservation efforts and coastal zone management.

• Loss of Biodiversity: “Three-quarters of the land-based environment and about 66% of the marine environment have been significantly altered by human actions.” ( Source )

Biodiversity provides us with oxygen, clean air, water, and sustenance. “Fish provide 20 percent of animal protein to about 3 billion people; plants provide over 80 percent of the human diet; and as many as 80 percent of people living in rural areas in developing countries rely on traditional plant‐based medicines for primary healthcare.” ( Source )

However, around 1 million plants and animals are currently under the threat of extinction, and climate change is a key driver, along with other forms of habitat destruction. Biodiversity loss produces numerous, sometimes unpredictable, threats. For example, it can increase the likelihood of animals passing diseases onto humans.

Taking climate action also means we must prepare for and prevent future zoonotic diseases from developing with the right environmental tools. ( Source )

• Refugee crisis: “We are faced with an intolerable tide of people moving from their homes due to the impacts of climate change.” ( Source )

Climate change is contributing to the current migration crisis. Many communities - including a disproportionately high number of  indigenous peoples, children and women - now  face tremendous risk from the impacts of climate change. ( Source )

For example, in 2020, climate disasters forced 30 million people to flee their homes – three times more than those displaced by war and violence.

Pakistan recently experienced record-breaking rains and flooding in the past few weeks alone that impacted over 33 million people (Source) . Consequently, more than 1,500 people were killed (Source). Moreover, 1.7 million homes and 18,590 schools were destroyed (Source) .

• Irreversible damage - “It’s now or never, if we want to limit global warming to 1.5°C (2.7°F); without immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors, the world’s climate goals will soon slip out of reach.” ( Source )

Our window of time to prevent the worst impacts of the climate crisis is closing quickly. The key to keeping the 1.5-degree goal is reducing emissions by 45 per cent by 2030. Yet, in the last year global energy-related CO2 emissions grew by 6 per cent. We need to make history by shifting to renewable energy and reaching net zero emissions by mid-century.

  So, where do we go from here? We need all countries to boost their climate ambition. We need to cut the addiction to fossil fuels. We need a wave of renewables around the world. Change starts with us.

We invite you to join us at the SDG Moment to learn more about the Sustainable Development Goals or, as we like to call them, “The Worlds To-Do List”. It is not too late to take action - the time is now.

• Mark your calendars for the SDG Moment on 19 September, starting at 7:45 AM EST.
• Tune into the webcast on WebTV and YouTube .
• Use the hashtag #SDGMoment to share how you take action for the Sustainable Development Goals!
• Follow @UN_Partnerships on Twitter and @un_partners on Instagram.

• GREAT ENERGY CHALLENGE

Climate Change Myths: Sorting Fact from Fiction

There’s no consensus on global warming. Climate models are inaccurate. Temperature records are unreliable. Earth’s climate has changed before. Oceans are cooling. Human CO2 emissions represent a tiny percentage of overall CO2. Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas.

And so on, and so on. We’ve heard them all.

Climate change is one of the most contentious issues facing society today. The question of how (or whether) we respond to climate change ultimately is a matter for policymakers to decide, but politics cannot (and should not) be separated from good science.

With that in mind, Marc Airhart with the University of Texas at Austin has developed a series of reports that track research conducted by climate scientists’ at the Jackson School of Geosciences on eight of the most common myths about climate change. All told, the reports provide an informed perspective on this important public policy debate.

Myth No. 1: What global warming? Earth has actually been cooling since 1998. Some people skeptical of global warming claim that Earth’s global surface temperatures have been falling or have leveled off since 1998. They point to data now several years out of date from U.K. researchers that put 1998 as the warmest year on record. They also point to an unusually cool summer in North America in 2009 followed by an abnormally cold winter across the northern hemisphere. People who had to shovel record snows from their driveways or live without power during ferocious snowstorms in the northeastern United States began to doubt decades of scientific evidence on global warming. Continue reading this myth …

Myth No. 2: Increased carbon dioxide (CO2) can’t contribute to global warming: It’s already maxed out as a factor and besides, water vapor is more consequential. Some climate skeptics claim that the carbon dioxide (CO2) currently in the atmosphere is already “saturated” in its ability to absorb longwave radiation from Earth and therefore additional CO2 in the air won’t make a difference — won’t, that is, absorb more heat. They also argue that water vapor is a more potent greenhouse gas and therefore increases in CO2 shouldn’t be a concern. These claims have been made in recent years by Hungarian physicist Ferenc Miskoczi and other scientists. They were repeated in the Skeptic Handbook, published in 2009 by science writer Joanne Nova. Yet the seed of the argument actually goes back more than a century. Continue reading this myth …

FREE BONUS ISSUE

Myth No. 3: You can’t trust climate models because they do a lousy job representing clouds and aerosols. Climate modelers have traditionally had a hard time incorporating clouds because clouds are very complex. On the one hand, by reflecting sunlight, they tend to cool Earth. On the other, they tend to hold in heat from the surface, which is why cloudy nights tend to be warmer than clear nights. The models also divide the atmosphere up into blocks much larger than clouds, so it’s difficult to create realistically sized clouds. Continue reading this myth …

Myth No. 4: There have been big climate changes in the past, such as the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period, so why can’t recent climate changes just be explained by natural variability?

People who dispute evidence of recent global warming sometimes point to two episodes in the past 1,000 years called the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period — times when northern hemisphere temperatures were higher or lower than average for decades or even centuries — as examples of internal variability, a kind of natural randomness in the climate system that can’t be explained by any specific forcing. If true, perhaps internal variability could explain the current rapid global warming, skeptics argue. In other words, maybe our current warming is just an unlucky roll of the dice, a blip rather than a long term trend. Continue reading this myth …

Myth No. 5: Natural forces such as solar variability, cosmic rays or volcanic eruptions can explain the observed warming.

Nearly all of the heat at the surface of Earth comes from radiation from the sun. Perhaps, as one hypothesis goes, that radiation has become more intense in recent decades and is making the planet warmer. A second, more complicated hypothesis involving the sun proposes that higher solar activity tends to suppress the levels of cosmic rays, high energy particles from space, hitting our atmosphere. Cosmic rays help form water droplets and clouds. Clouds are thought to have an overall cooling effect on the planet. Still with us? So in this view, if the sun is more active, then there are fewer cosmic rays, less cloud cover, and a warmer Earth. Continue reading this myth …

Myth 6. The urban heat island effect or other land use changes can explain the observed warming.

The urban heat island effect is a well documented phenomenon caused by roads and buildings absorbing more heat than undeveloped land and vegetation. It causes cities to be warmer than surrounding countryside and can even influence rainfall patterns. Perhaps, the argument goes, ground based weather stations have been systematically measuring a rise in temperature not from a global effect but from local land use changes. Continue reading this myth …

Myth 7. Natural ocean variability can explain the observed warming.

The oceans are the largest single reservoir of heat in the climate system. And they do have internal cycles of variability, such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation (AMO). These cycles have impacts on the sea surface temperature in specific regions that vary from year to year and even from decade to decade. So perhaps, the argument goes, we just happen to be in a warm period that will last a few decades and the oceans will eventually switch back to a cool period. Continue reading this myth …

Myth No. 8: In the past, global temperatures rose first and then carbon dioxide levels rose later. Therefore, rising temperatures cause higher CO2 levels, not the other way around.

Ice cores from Dome C in Antarctica record surface temperatures and atmospheric concentrations of CO2 going back over 800,000 years. During that time, several ice ages came and went. After each ice age ended, temperatures rose first and then several centuries later, CO2 concentrations rose. This lag, some skeptics conclude, proves that CO2 increases are caused by global warming, not the other way around. Continue reading this myth …

Related Topics

• CLIMATE CHANGE
• CLIMATOLOGY
• TEMPERATURE
• Perpetual Planet
• Environment
• History & Culture
• Paid Content

History & Culture

• Photography
• 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

Yale Program on Climate Change Communication

• About YPCCC
• Yale Climate Connections
• Student Employment
• For The Media
• Past Events
• YPCCC in the News
• Climate Change in the American Mind (CCAM)

Publications

• Climate Opinion Maps
• Climate Opinion Factsheets
• Six Americas Super Short Survey (SASSY)
• Resources for Educators
• All Tools & Interactives
• Partner with YPCCC

Home / What do Americans want to know about climate change?

Climate Note · Apr 16, 2024

What do americans want to know about climate change, by matthew ballew , marija verner , jennifer carman , teresa myers , seth rosenthal , john kotcher , edward maibach and anthony leiserowitz, filed under: audiences , beliefs & attitudes and policy & politics.

Most Americans think global warming is happening and human-caused ;  however, there are important knowledge gaps and misconceptions . For example, only one in five Americans understand that nearly all climate scientists (more than 90%) agree that human-caused global warming is happening. Understanding these knowledge gaps and what people want to know can help communicators identify what topics to emphasize.

In Fall 2023 , we asked Americans what questions they would ask a global warming expert if they had the opportunity. We found that overall, people would ask how scientists know that global warming is human-caused and what can be done to limit it. 

In this analysis, we investigate how the questions people would ask an expert vary across different subgroups, including demographic and political groups and Global Warming’s Six Americas . The Six Americas framework categorizes people into six distinct audiences based on their opinions about climate change, ranging from the Alarmed (who are the most worried and supportive of action) to the Dismissive (who do not believe climate change is happening or human caused and are often opposed to action). 

Respondents were asked, “If you had the opportunity to talk to an expert on global warming, which of the following questions would you like to ask?” Then, they were provided a list of 13 potential questions to choose from. Next, respondents were asked to choose the one question they were most interested in. The responses were then categorized into four overarching topics.

• Evidence includes three questions about the existence of global warming: “Is global warming really happening?” “How do you know that global warming is happening?” and “Is global warming a hoax?”
• Causes refers to two questions about the primary causes of global warming: “What causes global warming?” and “How do you know that global warming is caused mostly by human activities, not natural changes in the environment?”
• Impacts refers to three questions about the harms from global warming: “What harm will global warming cause?” “Will global warming harm people?” and “When will global warming begin to harm people?”
• Solutions includes five questions about the actions needed to reduce global warming: “What can the United States do to reduce global warming?” “What can I do to reduce global warming?” “How much would it cost the United States to reduce global warming?” “What can the nations of the world do to reduce global warming?” and “Is there still time to reduce global warming, or is it too late?”

Americans are most interested in learning about solutions to global warming (44%), followed by evidence that it is happening (20%) or information about the causes (18%). Fewer Americans (11%) would ask first about the impacts of global warming.

The topics people would ask about differ across demographic and political groups. The groups most likely to ask about solutions include liberal Democrats (71%), moderate/conservative Democrats (59%), people with a Bachelor’s degree or higher (55%), and urban residents (53%). By contrast, the groups most likely to ask questions about evidence include conservative Republicans (37%), rural residents (28%), liberal/moderate Republicans (28%), people with high school or less education (27%), and people who earn less than $50,000 annually (27%). Additionally, compared to the general U.S. population, liberal/moderate Republicans (18%) and Independents (17%) are more likely to ask about impacts, and conservative Republicans (33%) are more likely to ask about causes.

Topics also vary across Global Warming’s Six Americas. A large majority of the Alarmed (82%) and about half of the Concerned (53%) would ask about solutions, while fewer of the Cautious (26%), Disengaged (10%), Doubtful (12%), and Dismissive (3%) would do so. Conversely, these latter four segments most want to ask about either the causes of global warming or evidence that it is happening (about half or more of these segments would ask about either of these topics). Compared with the general U.S. population, the Dismissive (50%) are more likely to ask about the evidence, followed by the Disengaged (40%), Doubtful (30%), and Cautious (28%). Also, the Doubtful (35%) are more likely than the general U.S. population to ask about causes, followed by the Cautious (28%) and Dismissive (28%). The Concerned (16%) are more likely than the general U.S. population to ask about the impacts from global warming.

Looking at each of the 13 specific questions independently, the top questions the Alarmed and Concerned would ask are “Is there still time to reduce global warming, or is it too late?” (28% and 13% respectively), “What can the nations of the world do to reduce global warming?” (25% and 16%), and “What can the United States do to reduce global warming?” (16% and 12%). The Cautious would most likely ask “How do you know that global warming is caused mostly by human activities, not natural changes in the environment?” (25%) and the Disengaged would most likely ask “Is global warming really happening?” (21%). Similarly, the Doubtful would most likely ask “How do you know that global warming is caused mostly by human activities, not natural changes in the environment?” (32%) and the Dismissive would most likely ask “Is global warming a hoax?” (30%). The top questions people would ask across demographic and political groups are available in the data tables .

The results show that Americans are interested in learning more about climate change. However, the topics and specific questions people would ask a global warming expert differ by their prior beliefs about climate change and other characteristics like political views, education, and where people live. On average, people who are more worried about climate change (e.g., the Alarmed and Concerned) are more interested in learning about solutions, while those who are less worried (e.g., the Doubtful and Dismissive) are more interested in learning about the evidence that it is happening or human-caused.

Educating the U.S. public about solutions and the actions needed to reduce global warming (e.g., transitioning to clean energy) and what individuals can do (e.g., voting) can support audiences who are worried about climate change, including the Alarmed and Concerned. This is an important opportunity because few Americans search for solutions: only about three in ten say they look for global warming solutions several times a year or more often. 

Among audiences who are less worried (particularly the Cautious and Doubtful), education about the evidence that global warming is happening and human-caused (e.g., the scientific consensus ) can promote pro-climate views and support for action. These communications may also help protect against the influence of misinformation. Our research has found that when messaging about the scientific consensus is paired with “inoculation” strategies (e.g., debunking common misconceptions and emphasizing that some people are actively trying to mislead the public), it can counteract the negative effects of misinformation about climate change. 

While Americans are less likely to ask first about the impacts of climate change, certain audiences (e.g., the Concerned, liberal/moderate Republicans, Independents) are more interested in this topic than the average American. Communicating about the harms of climate change is still critical, because many people tend to perceive climate risks as distant in time and space. Research has found that emphasizing climate change as an urgent threat happening “here and now” and causing harm to many people (e.g., children, local communities) can promote public support for climate action.

These findings indicate that it is vital to communicate the five key facts about climate change: scientists agree, it’s real, it’s us, it’s bad, and there’s hope.

The results of this report are based on Fall 2023 data from the Climate Change in the American Mind survey ( n = 1,033) – a biannual nationally representative survey of U.S. public opinion on climate change conducted by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication . Data were collected October 20 – 26, 2023. Survey data collection was conducted using the Ipsos KnowledgePanel®, a representative online panel of U.S. adults ages 18 and older. The questionnaires were self-administered online by respondents in a web-based environment. 

Respondents were asked “If you had the opportunity to talk to an expert on global warming, which of the following questions would you like to ask?” (Yes, No) and provided a list of 13 questions. As a follow-up, respondents were provided with the list of questions they said “Yes” to, and asked “If you could ask the expert on global warming ONLY ONE QUESTION, which question would you ask?” The same questions were asked in the May 2011 wave of the Climate Change in the American Mind survey. The questions were categorized into one of four topics based on a coding scheme used in previous research that included nine of the 13 questions investigated in the present analysis. As presented here, they were categorized as Evidence (3 questions), Causes, (2 questions), Impacts (3 questions), or Solutions (5 questions). Respondents who did not choose any question or provided no response to the follow-up question were categorized as “No Response / No Question Asked.” 

The audience segmentation analysis used the Six Americas Super Short Survey (SASSY) tool . Data for each survey wave were weighted to align with demographic parameters in the United States. Following Pew Research Center’s approach, generational cohort and year of birth were calculated based on the age of respondents at the time of data collection (Gen Z: 1997-2012; Millennial: 1981-1996; Gen X: 1965-1980; Baby Boomer: 1946-1964; and Silent Generation: 1928-1945). Because generational cohort classification was based on respondents’ age at the time they took the survey (rather than birth year, which was not known), some respondents on the cusp of two generations may be miscategorized. We are unable to describe the views of other racial/ethnic groups (including Asian Americans, Native Americans, and adults who identify with 2+ races) because of sample size limitations.

References to Republicans and Democrats include respondents who initially identify as either a Republican or Democrat, as well as those who do not initially identify as a Republican or Democrat but who say they “are closer to” one of those parties (i.e., “leaners”) in a follow-up question. The category “Independents” does not include any of these “leaners.”

In figures/data tables, bases specified are unweighted, while percentages are weighted to match national population parameters. Group differences were  tested for statistical significance using the weighted proportions and unweighted sample sizes of each group. For tabulation purposes, percentage points are rounded to the nearest whole number. The average margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points at the 95% confidence interval for the full sample of U.S. adults ( n = 1,033), +/- 5.7 for Alarmed ( n = 294), +/- 5.8 for Concerned ( n = 283), +/- 7.9 for Cautious ( n = 154), +/- 14 for Disengaged ( n = 49), +/- 8.6 for Doubtful ( n = 130), and +/- 8.9 for Dismissive ( n = 120). The margins of error for all other subgroups and the data tables used to develop the charts/figures   can be found here .

Ballew, M., Verner, M., Carman, J., Myers, T., Rosenthal, S., Kotcher, J., Maibach, E., & Leiserowitz, A. (2024). What do Americans want to know about climate change? Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

Funding Sources

The research was funded by the Schmidt Family Foundation, the U.S. Energy Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, the Heising-Simons Foundation, King Philanthropies, and the Grantham Foundation.

Climate Change in the American Mind

Related Work

Peer-reviewed article · apr 3, 2024, climate change belief systems across pol..., peer-reviewed article · mar 28, 2024, emotional signatures of climate policy s..., report · mar 26, 2024, international public opinion on climate ..., climate note · mar 21, 2024, the attitude-behavior gap on climate act..., report · mar 7, 2024, climate change in the irish mind, 2023, climate note · jan 17, 2024, support for climate justice across globa..., report · jan 11, 2024, climate change in the american mind: bel..., climate note · dec 14, 2023, global warming’s six americas, fall 20..., peer-reviewed article · dec 13, 2023, what predicts u.s. public support for cl..., report · nov 29, 2023, climate change in the american mind: pol..., climate note · nov 16, 2023, how many americans want an electric home..., report · nov 14, 2023, climate note · nov 7, 2023, who supports climate justice in the u.s...., climate note · oct 26, 2023, which republicans are worried about glob..., climate note · oct 18, 2023, what do americans think is the biggest t..., report · oct 3, 2023, climate change in the indonesian mind, report · sep 12, 2023, climate change in the american mind: cli..., climate note · aug 3, 2023, is distress about climate change associa..., climate note · aug 1, 2023, global warming’s six audiences: a cros..., climate note · jul 27, 2023, americans are becoming more worried abou..., climate note · jul 25, 2023, the prevalence of climate change psychol..., climate note · jul 20, 2023, messages about harms of fossil fuels inc..., climate note · jul 11, 2023, does climate change make you sneeze, report · jun 28, 2023, subscribe to our mailing list.

Please select all the ways you would like to hear from Yale Program on Climate Change Communication:

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please visit our website.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.

• climate change

America’s Young Farmers Are Burning Out. I Quit, Too

I n 2023, Scott Chang-Fleeman—a young farmer like me—put down his shovel. A post on his Instagram read, “Shao Shan Farm, in its current form, is going on indefinite hiatus.” From the outside, the burgeoning farm had the makeup of one that could stand the test of time. In reality, his experience of farm ownership was wrought with challenges.

A farmer in his late 20s, Chang-Fleeman started Shao Shan Farm in 2019 to reconnect with his roots and provide a source of locally grown heritage Asian vegetables to the Bay Area. He quickly secured a clientele and fan base—two of the greatest hurdles of starting a farm—and became the go-to for San Francisco’s high-end Asian eateries.

But after four years of creative pivots to withstand unexpected hurdles that included financial stress, severe drought, and a global pandemic, Chang-Fleeman made a choice that many young farmers are considering: to leave farming behind. Why he left and what could have kept him on the land are critical questions we must address if we are to have a sustainable and food-secure future.

The USDA Census of Agriculture reported that in 2017, nearly 1 in 4 of the 3.4 million agricultural producers in the US were new and beginning farmers. Many of these new farmers are doing exactly what it seems American agriculture needs: starting small farms. According to the most recent data from the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) in 2019 , farms with annual sales of less than $100,000 accounted for about 85% of all U.S. farms. And though not all of these small-scale farms are necessarily organic, small farms are more likely to grow a diversity of crop types, use methods that reduce negative impacts on the climate, increase carbon sequestration, and tend to be more resilient in the face of climate change.

Read More: How Extreme Weather Is Affecting Small Farmers Across the U.S.

There has been a growing interest among younger people in recent years in sustainable and organic farming practices, as well as in local food systems. This interest has led people in their 20s and 30s to enter into small-scale farming, particularly in niche markets such as organic produce, specialty crops, and direct-to-consumer sales.

As a result, both congressional Democrats and Republicans have maintained that encouraging young people to farm is of utmost importance in ensuring the stability of our food system. But getting young people into farming may not be the problem. Keeping them on the farm may be the hardest part.

I should know. I quit too.

Chang-Fleeman got his start in agriculture right out of college, where he spent several years working at the on-campus farm. As a third-generation Chinese American, he noticed a distinct lack of Asian vegetables at local farmers markets, particularly those that were grown organically, and suspected there would be a demand should a supply exist. He started trialing some varieties, and his suspicions were quickly affirmed when samples of his choy sum caught the attention of chef Brandon Jew of Mister Jiu’s, a contemporary Chinese eatery with a Michelin star in the heart of San Francisco’s Chinatown. Jew provided some seed funds for what was to become Shao Shan Farm in 2019.

During the first year running his farm, Chang-Fleeman focused his sales on his relationships with local restaurants, while attending some farmers' markets sales to supplement income. But when the COVID-19 pandemic hit in early 2020, he lost all of his restaurant accounts overnight.

Like many farmers at that time, he pivoted to a CSA model, offering farm boxes that provide a household with an assortment of vegetables for the week.

“So literally over a night, I reworked my crop plan” he told me. “Just to get through that year, or through that season, not knowing how long [the pandemic was going to] last.”

As if a global pandemic wasn’t enough, in 2021, California entered a drought, and he lost the ability to irrigate his crops come mid-summer, which meant a hard stop for production.

“I was hoping to hit some sort of a rhythm, and every year felt a bit like starting from scratch,” Chang-Fleeman reflected.

Throughout farm ownership, he worked side jobs to compensate for the slow build of business income and the fact that he could only afford to pay himself a monthly salary of $2,000. He regularly worked 90 hours a week. At the same time, farm expenses were on the rise.

“The cost of our packaging went up like three times in one year and the cost of the produce didn't change,” he explained. “Our operating expenses went up like 30%, after COVID.”

In four short years, Chang-Fleeman experienced an avalanche of extenuating circumstances that would bring most farm businesses to their knees. But the thing that finally catalyzed the closing of his business was burnout. He relayed the experience of the exhaustion and stress building over time until he reached a breaking point. “If I don’t stop now, it’s going to kill me,” he recalled thinking.

Chang-Fleeman’s burnout reminded me of my own story. In the fall of 2018, I took what ended up being a two-month medical leave from an organic farm I managed in Northern California in order to try to try to resolve a set of weird symptoms that included dizzy spells and heart palpitations. If you know anything about farming, fall is not the time to be absent. It’s peak harvest time and the culmination of all of your work is underway. But as my medical anomaly continued to worsen, I came no closer to getting back to work. After many doctor visits, several trips to the specialist, a flurry of blood tests, and a week of heart monitoring, it took one Xanax to solve the mystery.

Read More: ‘ They’re Trying to Wipe Us Off the Map.’ Small American Farmers Are Nearing Extinction

The prolonged physical stress that I had been harboring at work had triggered the onset of panic disorder, a nervous system affliction that had led me into a near-chronic state of fight or flight mode, causing a swath of physical symptoms not typically associated with “anxiety.”

For me, this was a wake-up call. I turned to a slew of Western and naturopathic remedies to alleviate my symptoms, but ultimately, removing the stressors of farm management was the thing that allowed me to, mostly, reach a nervous system balance. Even still, six years later, I’m constantly navigating the ‘new normal’ of this diagnosis.

A pilot study conducted by agriculture researcher Josie Rudolphi and her colleagues in 2020 found that of 170 participants, approximately 71% met the criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder. By comparison, in the US, an estimated 18% of adults experience an anxiety disorder. Rudolphi’s work indicates that these disorders maybe three times more prevalent in young farmer and rancher populations.

This rang true as I went from farm to farm trying to figure out what so often goes wrong in a new farm operation. Again and again mental health was a through-line. Collette Walsh, owner of a cut-flower operation in Braddock, PA, put it to me bluntly: "I usually get to a point in late August or early September, where there’s a week where I just cry.”

How can we build a farming economy that helps young farmers not only stay, but also thrive on the land? The Farm Bill , a federal package of legislation that provides funding for agricultural programs, is one route. As the reboot of the Farm Bill approaches, it’s a critical time to ask these questions and advocate for policies that support young farmers and the barriers they’re facing in maintaining a long-lasting career in agriculture.

Take for instance, Jac Wypler, Farmer Mental Health Director at the National Young Farmer Coalition (Young Farmers), who oversees the Northeast region’s Farmer and Rancher Stress Assistance Network (FRSAN). The organization was established by the Farm Bill in 2018 to develop a service provider network for farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural workers that was dedicated to mental well-being. Through the network of service providers she directs, called “Cultivemos,” Wypler and her colleagues utilize a multi-tiered approach to address mental health in farming spaces. Cultivemos partners provide direct support in moments of stress and crisis as well as peer-to-peer support spaces.

An expanded (and subsidized) program that scales efforts like Cultivemos to a size commensurate with the young work force is clearly needed. But it’s only part of the picture.

“While we believe that it is important to make sure that farms, farmers, and farmworkers are getting direct support around their mental health,” Wypler explained. “We need to alleviate what is causing them stress.” 

Cultivemos works to address the structural root causes of stress which can include climate change, land prices, and systemic racism, to name a few. They focus on communities that are disproportionately harmed by these structural root causes, specifically Black, Indigenous, and other farmers of color. Finally, they seek to make this impact by regranting funding directly into the hands of these farmers.

“The way I think of regranting is that the USDA and these large institutions are the Mississippi River of funding.” Wypler says. “We’re trying to get the funding into these smaller rivers and tributaries to disperse these funds and shift that power dynamic and leadership dynamic.”

The next Farm Bill cycle will be critical in ensuring this work is continued. In November of 2023, lawmakers signed a stopgap funding bill that allows for a one-year extension on the 2018 Farm Bill. Lawmakers are currently in deliberations over the bill until September when it will be up for a vote. Young Farmers underscores the importance of the appropriations process, which is when program areas that are authorized in the farm bill are allocated funding.

Back-to-the-landism has waxed and waned throughout the last hundred years, booming in the pre-Depression years of the 1930s, dying in the war years and then storming back in the 60s and 70s. When my generation’s own farming revolution came along in the early 2000s, I was similarly swept up. I imagined when I chose to farm that the path would be lifelong. What I hadn’t accounted for, as a determined, starry-eyed changemaker, was the toll that a decade of farming through wildfires, evacuations, floods, power outages, and a global pandemic would take on my mental health.

Don’t get me wrong:  I was happy working hard with my two feet planted firmly on the land. In a better world I and people like Scott Chang-Fleeman would have kept getting our hands dirty, making an honest, if modest, living providing good and wholesome food in synch with the rhythms of the planet.

But to borrow a word from the world of ecology, being a young farmer in today’s economy is “unsustainable.” The numbers don’t work economically and, eventually, any mind trying to square this un-squarable circle is going to break. The economic, physical and mental challenges are all interconnected.

It’s hard to find an American, Republican or Democrat, red or blue state resident that doesn’t want more young hands on the land. We all rightly see agriculture as a pathway to personal fulfillment and a way to make our food supply healthier and more secure. But words and intentions can only do so much. We must answer these very real problems with very real subsidy.

If we don’t, my generation might be the last to think of going “back-to-the-land” as something actually worth doing.

More Must-Reads From TIME

• The 100 Most Influential People of 2024
• The Revolution of Yulia Navalnaya
• 6 Compliments That Land Every Time
• Stop Looking for Your Forever Home
• If You're Dating Right Now , You're Brave: Column
• The AI That Could Heal a Divided Internet
• Fallout Is a Brilliant Model for the Future of Video Game Adaptations
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

Share this page

Climate change.

Climate change refers to changes in the Earth’s climates, at local, regional, or global scales, and is most commonly used to describe anthropogenic, or human-caused, climate change.

Contributors

Shakti Ramkumar

Senior Director Of Global Programs

Student Energy

What is Climate Change?

Climate change is a broad term used to refer to changes in the Earth’s climates, at local, regional, or global scales, and can also refer to the effects of these changes. In recent decades, the term ‘climate change’ is most often used to describe changes in the Earth’s climate driven primarily by human activity since the pre-Industrial period (c. 1850 onwards), particularly the burning of fossil fuels and removal of forests, resulting in a relatively rapid increase in carbon dioxide concentration in the Earth’s atmosphere. 1 2

Global warming is a term often used interchangeably with climate change, as it is one of the most important measures of global changes. Global warming refers to the rise in average global temperatures, which is linked to significant impacts on humans, wildlife, and ecosystems around the world. Because there are more factors and impacts than only rising surface temperatures, the term climate change is used to include these additional impacts. There is strong consensus among scientists, representing 97% of actively publishing climate scientists, that human influence has been the dominant cause of observed warming trends since the 20th century. 3

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen from hovering around 280 parts per million (ppm) in pre-Industrial time, to 413 ppm as of early 2020. 4 5 This concentration of carbon dioxide is unprecedented in recorded history. Scientists have reported that we need to return to a ‘safe’ concentration of 350 ppm by 2100 in order to stabilize global warming. 6

The largest anthropogenic  (human caused) source of carbon dioxide emissions is the global energy system, which means transforming the global energy system is one of the most significant ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change.

As of 2019, approximately 81% of the world’s primary energy supply still comes from fossil fuels, (specifically, coal, oil, and natural gas), which result in carbon emissions both upstream (in the extraction and production of the energy) and downstream (during the final consumer use of the energy). 7 Continued reliance on fossil fuel-based energy sources is a barrier to emissions reductions, particularly as energy demand continues to increase around the world.

Why does a global temperature increase of 1.5 ° C matter?

Global warming of 1 °C or 1.5°C represents an average across the planet – many places will warm faster, and see far greater temperature increases. For example, the Arctic is warming 2-3 times faster than any other place on Earth. The effects of global heating are far-reaching, including rising sea levels, glacier retreat, changes in the timing of seasonal events (plants flowering, migration patterns), and a rise in the frequency and severity of extreme weather events. These categories of impacts have direct and indirect consequences on people and wildlife. Direct consequences include displacement of people and communities due to sea level rise and extreme weather events, whereas indirect consequences may include disruptions to economic development, food production, escalation in water crises, and increased public health risks.

  The impacts of climate change will not be evenly felt around the world – people living in the poorest countries and in geographically vulnerable regions (such as small-island states) will be first and most significantly impacted. This is because communities living in poverty are more likely to be exposed to environmental hazards, are often more dependent on natural resource-based livelihoods such as agriculture, and have fewer resources to cope with climate impacts.

Each fractional degree of warming also results in outsized impacts on biodiversity and species extinction, and disturbances in natural ecosystems. 8 Even if carbon emissions in the atmosphere can be absorbed and stabilized over a long period of time, many of the impacts on wildlife, land, water, and people will be irreversible once they occur, which makes halting the release of greenhouse gas emissions, and limiting global warming as much as possible, the first priority.

Dive deeper

Recent blog posts about climate change, globeforum 24 at a glance: student energy attends “the future is regenerative”, march 4, 2024, unlocking the untapped potential of youth in clean cooking: a look back at the 2022 clean cooking forum, april 12, 2023, announcing the global youth energy outlook, august 31, 2020, student energy’s commitment to addressing racial injustice in the sustainable energy transition, june 1, 2020, policy, access, and decentralization: diving into the energy system with rachel kyte, february 13, 2020, student energy at cop25, january 13, 2020, student energy at the un climate action summit, september 20, 2019, external resources.

• Pachauri, R. K., Allen, M. R., Barros, V. R., Broome, J., Cramer, W., Christ, R., … & Dubash, N. K. (2014). Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (p. 151). IPCC. ↩
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2013) AR5 WG1 Summary for policy makers, pp. 17. ↩
• Skeptical Science (2017). The 97% consensus on global warming. https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm ↩
• Yale Environment 360 (2017). How the world passed a carbon threshold and why it matters. https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-the-world-passed-a-carbon-threshold-400ppm-and-why-it-matters ↩
• Energy Systems Research Laboratories (n.d.). Trends in atmospheric carbon dioxide.  https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/ ↩
• Hansen, J., Kharecha, P., Sato, M., Masson-Delmotte, V., Ackerman, F., Beerling, D. J., … & Rockstrom, J. (2013). Assessing “dangerous climate change”: Required reduction of carbon emissions to protect young people, future generations and nature. PloS one , 8 (12), e81648. ↩
• International Energy Agency (n.d.). Data and statistics. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics?country=WORLD&fuel=Energy%20supply&indicator=Total%20primary%20energy%20supply%20(TPES)%20by%20source ↩
• Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (n.d.). Nature’s dangerous decline “unprecedented” species extinction rates “accelerating”.  https://ipbes.net/news/Media-Release-Global-Assessment ↩

• Share full article

Advertisement

Subscriber-only Newsletter

To Fight Climate Change, We Need New ‘Political Technologies’

By Peter Coy

Opinion Writer

Science alone won’t stop the planet from overheating. But science coupled with political science just might.

That’s the theme of a new book, “Long Problems: Climate Change and the Challenge of Governing Across Time.” It’s by Thomas Hale, an American political scientist who teaches at the University of Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government.

Hale argues that people are too quick to throw up their hands because the political will to stop climate change is lacking. For political scientists, he writes, “this is not the end but rather the start of the intellectual challenge.”

Hale has specific ideas for how to change institutions and procedures so that today’s inhabitants of Earth give more consideration to tomorrow’s inhabitants. He calls them, at one point, “political technologies,” a phrase I like.

Long problems such as climate change are ones in which there is a long lag between causes and effects. They are hard to solve, especially with today’s institutions. We don’t act early because we’re uncertain about how big the problem is, and it isn’t as salient as the daily emergencies all around us. Our hesitation gives an opening to obstructionist forces. Today’s decision makers vow to protect the planet for future generations, but the unborn multitudes are mere “shadows” to them, as Hale puts it.

On top of all that, Hale writes, “Institutions created to address the early phase of a long problem struggle to remain useful as the problem’s structure develops over time.” Case in point: The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which was created in 1992. The original concept was for countries to make binding commitments to fight climate change. As the organization has evolved, though, “nothing is agreed until every country agrees on every point,” Hale writes.

That’s not useful. A better approach is the Paris Agreement of 2015, which went into effect the next year. It allows countries to set their own targets for greenhouse gas reductions while triggering a “norm cascade” that induces them to do more and more. Hale likes the Paris Agreement on the whole, though he says it’s not perfect.

Society has already invented institutions and systems that bring future considerations to the fore, Hale writes. The Congressional Budget Office and similar offices in other countries analyze how new legislation will affect economic growth and government finances in the long run. The bond market assesses whether bond issuers, such as governments, will be able to pay back what they owe. Insurance companies — which Hale doesn’t mention — won’t issue policies unless customers take steps to reduce their risks.

On climate, too, there have been efforts to create institutions and processes that help solve Hale’s long problems. Some governments are requiring business to incorporate the “social cost” of carbon into their decisions. And the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change brings together the world’s top experts and issues closely followed reports.

There are many more opportunities for political engineering, Hale writes. He approvingly mentions the Finnish Parliament’s cross-party Committee for the Future and the Finnish Government Report on the Future, which interact. He recommends more experimentation in policymaking — as Chinese leaders put it, crossing the river by feeling for stones.

To get the public and lawmakers thinking more about the future, he endorses Britain’s Climate Change Committee, which he writes “has become a significant political force for the long-term interest,” and similar organizations (some of them not as effective) in Hungary, Israel, Malta, Sweden, Tunisia and the United Arab Emirates.

To insulate long problems from partisan politicking, he recommends the appointment of a trustee to oversee climate decisions, analogous to the way a politically insulated central bank is delegated the authority to conduct monetary policy. The California Air Resources Board is “perhaps the strongest, though still imperfect” example of such an institution in the realm of the environment, he writes. (Hale told me he’s not aware of anything quite like the California agency elsewhere in the world.)

“Long Problems” is a kind of nonfiction counterpart to Kim Stanley Robinson’s science fiction book from 2020, “The Ministry for the Future,” which took seriously the idea that future generations need to be given as much consideration as our own.

Hale is a co-leader of the Net Zero Tracker , which tracks the decarbonization progress of countries and companies, and the Net Zero Regulation and Policy Hub . He told me that he has been involved in helping people at the United Nations prepare for a Summit for the Future, which will be held Sept. 22-23. On the U.N. website is an early draft of a declaration to be issued at the summit, which says among other things that “our conduct today will impact future generations exponentially.”

Anne-Marie Slaughter, the chief executive of the think tank New America who was Hale’s adviser on his doctorate at Princeton, shared a byline with Hale and two of his Oxford colleagues on a policy brief , “Toward a Declaration on Future Generations,” that recommends the U.N. appoint “a special envoy or high commissioner” to be a voice for the future.

I kind of prefer “envoy” because it sounds like the person has literally come from the future.

No one solution will instantly end the political obstacles to fighting climate change. Some of the ideas in Hale’s book may not pan out at all. But I give him credit for focusing on how to solve problems in which the cause and the effect are separated by decades. Getting the “political technology” right is every bit as important as inventing better solar cells, wind turbines and batteries.

Outlook: Oliver Allen

Retail sales rose more than expected in March, but the “booming” pace of growth isn’t likely to last, Oliver Allen, a senior U.S. economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, wrote in a client note on Monday. “It is hard to see how the strength in consumption can continue for much longer, now that real after-tax income growth has slowed markedly, the bulk of excess savings from earlier in the pandemic has been spent, and a raft of leading indicators point to a marked softening in the labor market,” Allen wrote.

Quote of the Day

“Why do we need to make the rich richer to make them work harder but make the poor poorer for the same purpose?”

— Ha-Joon Chang, “Economics: The User’s Guide” (2014)

Peter Coy is a writer for the Opinion section of The Times, covering economics and business. Email him at [email protected] . @ petercoy