Environment featured

As America turns 250, its attention to continued survival fades and fractures

July 3, 2026

United States politicians, even Democratic ones, no longer mention climate change, according to a recent report by Grist. Evidently, after their 2024 election losses, Democrats concluded that global warming isn’t a winning issue. Their calculus is somewhat confirmed by a recent Pew poll that ranks climate change only ninth among Americans’ top concerns. 

Meanwhile, hard-won US national climate data, scenarios, and analyses are quietly disappearing from official government websites. A prime example is the Fifth National Climate Assessment, a county-by-county description of likely risks from 1.5 degrees and 2 degrees of warming over pre-industrial levels. This preeminent report on climate impacts and responses is a congressionally mandated, interagency effort to provide “the scientific foundation to support informed decision-making across the nation.” A clone of the government website is being hosted by Climate.us; the Trump administration has taken down the official site, which was here

Source: imjustbait | Instagram

Those seeking to downplay climate change did a victory dance in May, when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) announced it was retiring its RCP8.5 scenario—the worst-case trajectory in which humanity continues increasing its greenhouse gas emissions through the end of the century. We at Post Carbon Institute have been saying for a decade or more that this scenario was unrealistic and should be dropped, since it assumes the burning of more fossil fuels than the Earth can reasonably supply. However, axing RCP8.5 at this politically fraught moment has simply fed a predictable gloat-fest on the part of climate deniers. For example, the New York Post editorial board proclaimed that the revision showed climate warnings had done “untold damage” to the public, the economy, and “the average man’s pocketbook.” Fox News host Sean Hannity asserted that a “top U.N.-backed climate change panel is now waving the white flag of surrender” and “quietly admitting that the Earth will not in fact be destroyed by climate change.” Donald Trump claimed on Truth Social that the United Nations had just admitted that its own climate projections were “WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!” and called global warming research a “Green New Scam.”

Meanwhile, back in the real world, it’s becoming clearer that Earth is breaching the 1.5 degrees Celsius limit to which world leaders pledged, in 2015, to limit global warming in their effort to avert a catastrophic future. Earth first exceeded the 1.5-degree threshold in 2024; however, in 2025, the global average surface temperature cooled to 1.44 degrees above baseline (2025 was still the third-warmest year on record). The 1.5°C limit is defined in the Paris Agreement as a multi-year average temperature; by that standard, many climate scientists expect the limit to be breached before 2030. Overall, Earth’s march toward 2 degrees of warming is accelerating. The question climate experts are now asking: will it still be possible to keep warming below 3 degrees by the end of the century? The difference in impacts between 1.5, 2, and 3 degrees would be monumental: at 3 degrees, 3.25 billion people would be exposed to deadly heat-humidity conditions at least annually.

As I write this, Europe is emerging from an unprecedented heat wave in which over 1,300 people died from causes linked to high temperatures. Europe is the fastest-warming continent, heating at twice the global average—but its people are unaccustomed to, and unprepared for, sustained searing heat. According to research associate Theo Keeping at Imperial College, London, “this heat wave would have been virtually impossible even 50 years ago without human-caused climate change.” On the other side of the pond, as the US is celebrating its 250th Independence Day, a heat dome has settled over the eastern half of the country, with more than 160 million Americans under extreme heat warnings.

Also, an unusually strong El Niño is developing in the eastern Pacific. Expected impacts of this “super” El Niño include increased flood risks in the southern US, drier and hotter weather in South America, and prolonged drought and reduced agricultural output in southern Asia. Climate change is a contributor to the unusual strength of this El Niño: due to continued global heating, ocean temperatures are now at the highest level ever recorded. While El Niño is a naturally occurring climate cycle, hotter ocean waters are driving that cycle to extremes.

One more result of climate change: the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), a global deep-ocean current that, among other things, helps keep Europe warm, is slowing. Cold meltwater from Greenland and Arctic sea ice is diluting the dense, salty ocean water that drives the current. The complete halting of the current before the end of this century, once considered a remote possibility, is now being given higher odds by climate scientists and oceanographers. See the recent Crazy Town podcast episode featuring Emily Schoerning for a fascinating discussion of this globe-changing development. 

Collectively, we seem to have wandered into a peculiar new psychological-political terrain: as we approach the collapse of Earth systems and therefore of civilizational support pillars, rational worries are being replaced with delusions. The reasons are no doubt complex and include the rise of social media, the consolidation of media companies, the politicizing of climate discourse by fossil fuel companies, and the emergence of right-wing centi-billionaires intent on shaping the attitudes of entire nations.

But I’ll add one more possible explanation in half-jest. In his science blog, Ugo Bardi suggests that rising CO₂ levels in Earth’s atmosphere, in addition to warming the planet, will also gradually degrade human intelligence. As evidence, he cites a 2024 paper by neuroscientist Richard Buxton of the University of California San Diego showing that “the oxygen-to-CO₂ balance in brain tissue is crucial. As CO₂ rises, the energy available to sustain neural activity falls.” The US has always been a conflicted, if not crazy, country (after all, it tolerated slavery for decades and elected Donald Trump as president twice). Maybe now, with the nation at age 250, the extra CO₂ that it’s breathing is starting to erode whatever remains of its collective rationality.

If you want to buck that trend, don’t lose sight of the big picture (Earth is a system of systems, nature must be at the center of human concerns, and energy is the true currency). Adjust your views as needed to incorporate new data and events. Don’t succumb to political doom scrolling. And surround yourself with green plants producing lots of oxygen.

Thank you for your Attention to this Matter.

Richard Heinberg

Richard passed away unexpectedly in July 2026. Read this rememberance by Asher Miller.

Richard Heinberg was regarded as one of the world’s foremost advocates for a shift away from our current reliance on fossil fuels. He was the author of fourteen books, including some of the seminal works on society’s current energy and environmental sustainability crisis. Richard was Senior Fellow of Post Carbon Institute for nearly twenty years.

Richard authored hundreds of essays and articles that have appeared in such journals as Nature and The Wall Street Journal; delivered hundreds of lectures on energy and climate issues to audiences on six continents; and was quoted and interviewed countless times for print, television, and radio. His monthly MuseLetter was published for 400 consecutive months starting in 1992, and was included in Utne Magazine’s annual list of Best Alternative Newsletters.

Full bio at postcarbon.org.


Tags: climate change, climate policy, Donald Trump, natural disasters

Comments

Welcome to the new Resillience commenting system!

We have moved from the former Disqus commenting system to a new system as of September 10, 2026.

  • Your past comments have not disappeared.
  • You can log in with your old Disqus credentials, as well as Gmail credentials or a Resilience account (formerly Resilience+). Login with Facebook and other credentials is coming soon.

We made this change because of privacy concerns regarding Disqus. It's also part of a set of changes to bring more services to the Resilience community under a single login: commenting, (coming September 2026), and online courses (coming 2027). Unfortunately, your old Disqus comments may not reliably link to your account in this new system. Please contact us if you have any questions or concerns.

Subscribe
Notify of
3 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
PattiMichelle Sheaffer
PattiMichelle Sheaffer
1 month ago

Thank you for this, Richard. I would think the concern about El Nino, rationally, should be decreasing because similar Oceanic Heat Waves driving chaotic patterns are springing up in every part of the earth's oceans. Dr. Francis is the only one I know talking about this. I think naming them (e.g., The Blob) might be useful.
____________
https://youtu.be/VSw_kV6dq9g
______________
In a sense, the term "El Nino" has become a political term for denialists. I think the word "Doom" is a buzzword for the Liberal Class to avoid considering these subjects.

______________

The Kid
The Kid
2 months ago

Civilizations disintegrate after losing the ability to successfully overcome challenges. Heinberg hints at when the leading society of the West began to no longer meet and overcome a challenge when the US had to fight a Civil War to end slavery. Dialogue, ethics, and recognizing universal human rights could not end slavery in the nation which assumed the leadership of the West despite its peers ability to end slavery administratively. The same inability to overcome the challenge of global warming is now glaringly evident. This state of affairs is not peculiar. Disintegrating civilizations resort to archaism and futurism to deal with challenges they no can longer resolve with rationality and unity. These trends of decline are salient today and there does not appear any way to overcome the enervation which now symbolizes the West at this critical time when the biosphere is facing destruction. Heinberg's advice reflects Voltaire's at the end of Candide; tend your garden. That will not save Western Christendom. Nothing can. To save ourselves and the biosphere accelerating the decline of the West and becoming subjects of a new civilization communally administrated to properly distribute the products of both nature and man appears to be the only solution. Toynbee theorized once civilizations begin to disintegrate they take 400 years to end. I doubt the West has 240 years to transform into such a society.

Jon Freise
Jon Freise
2 months ago

Resilience

As I look back on the past 20 years of discussing peak oil and climate change, where we have reached is not unexpected. Richard's Depletion Protocol outlined several different pathways forward. David Holmgren wrote his little book Future Scenarios.

It was often conjectured on The Oil Drum that the peaking of fossil fuels would lead to political systems fracturing and new wars.

I am actually kind of amazed at how much progress has been made toward renewable energy. Back in 2005 it was hard to imagine high horsepower electric motors and battery packs. Utility scale batteries. Solar panels with a positive EROI.

Of course the oil companies are not "going silently into that good night". That the oil companies made political allies in white christian nationalists and gulf state monarchies and are resorting to dictatorship is also not surprising. Oil companies are famous for knocking off governments and installing corrupt and compliant dictatorships. Why shouldn't they do it in the west?

I feel we are at the start of WW3 over the fossil to renewable energy transition. The US won WW2 by being a petrostate. That it would lead the petrostate alliance against the renewable transition is not surprising. How does it play out?

Because of nuclear weapons, WW3 is going to be very different from WW2. More likely cold war style proxy fighting. China has done a good job of splitting the petrostates into competing factions. The US tried to conquer them all and force them into an alliance, but that dream shattered on Iran's resistance. When we look at the facilities being blown up in the current wars it is oil refining. Are we at peak refining capacity?

Within the US it is pretty much only the Confederate South that is still a petrostate. And white christian nationalism is widely unpopular. So even within the US we are likely looking at a fracturing.

Nate is doing a great job discussing scenarios over on The Great Simplification. But it is worth looking at a few historical examples as possible guides:

The French Revolution(s) as the landed aristocracy (photosynthesis) gave way to renewably powered merchant shipping and coal powered industrialization. It was 100 years of government turmoil between dictatorship and republic before the fossil fuel powers finally won out. Europe was plunged into multiple region wide wars as they tried to meddle and ended up poking a bear.

The Dutch British war as Dutch peat energy gave way to British coal. The Dutch Guilder was replaced as the worlds reserve currency by the British Pound. Low tech magazine has a very good piece on this. And Ray Dalio The Changing World Order is a good text on the monetary system changes.

Most people survived. It was not always pleasant. Les Misérables documents the misery.

Frank Herbert — 'The willow submits to the wind and prospers until one day it is many willows – a wall against the wind.'

Resilience.