Heat, wealth and denial

 

The Earth is on fire – literally and politically. From southern Europe to the American West, from South Asia to the UK, we are witnessing heatwaves, floods and systemic breakdowns not as outliers but as the new normal.

And still, somehow, we go on pretending.

The Guardian's recent opinion headline – “Why do we pretend heatwaves are fun and ignore the brutal, burning reality?” – poses exactly the right question. Why are inflatable paddling pools, rooftop cocktails and weather presenters chirping about “glorious sunshine” still our cultural defaults, even as climate systems tip dangerously toward the edge?

This dissonance is a form of climate denial. Not the outright rejection of science, but a quieter, more pervasive refusal to let the facts fully alter how we live, lead, or legislate.

Adaptation limits

This week, the UK’s Climate Change Committee released its latest review, warning that Britain remains dangerously unprepared for what lies ahead. “We are not resilient to the changes that are already happening,” the report states. And worse, the pace of adaptation is slowing just when it needs to accelerate.

While the report argues that the UK can still reach net zero by 2050, it warns that this alone will not protect the country from flooding, heatwaves and food system instability. "Adaptation is as important as mitigation," the committee notes, "and right now we’re failing on both fronts."

This echoes what climate scientist Tim Lenton told The Guardian in a powerful new interview: “This is a fight for life.”

Lenton, an expert on climate tipping points, warns that cascading climate failures are not decades away – they are unfolding now.

What may once have been theoretical risks are becoming visible ruptures in our weather systems, water cycles and social infrastructure.

“We are in a planetary emergency,” he declares bluntly. “But there’s still agency. We have a meaningful chance to turn this around – if we act.”

Tipping points and privilege

Among the most chilling parts of Lenton’s interview is his critique of how the wealthy attempt to insulate themselves from climate impacts – by migrating, insuring, air conditioning, or building physical barriers.

“People with financial resources are trying to buy resilience,” he says. “But in the long run this is not a crisis that respects wealth.”

We saw that vividly in 2023’s flash floods in Germany, and again in recent Canadian wildfires and southern US droughts. Critical infrastructure collapses. Water fails. Food prices spike. Insurance markets break down. And while the vulnerable suffer first, no one is untouched

In short, climate chaos is not a distant threat to people in far away lands. It is here, now, and it is coming for the systems we all rely on.

Fiction as foresight

As someone who has turned to fiction rooted in climate science as a means of conveying urgency, I see this new way of storytelling as a way to make the different facets of climate change more real. 

 My forthcoming novel, Flood Waters Down, imagines a near-future Britain fractured by flooding, authoritarian drift and collective disorientation.

The geography is drawn from Climate Central’s real-world sea level projection tools. The characters – though fictional – face choices rooted in policy inertia, displacement and social fragmentation.

They live in a country that pretended, for too long, that it could “cope” its way through climate change.

If that sounds familiar, it's because it is.

Just this past week, CNN detailed the now-undeniable link between human-caused global warming and record-breaking heatwaves across the globe. “We are seeing extremes that scientists didn’t expect until the 2030s or 2040s,” one researcher noted. “We’ve accelerated the timeline of risk.”

Heat isn’t neutral

Extreme heat is not just uncomfortable. It kills. It erodes productivity, threatens food security and degrades mental health. It disproportionately affects the elderly, the poor, outdoor workers and those living in poorly insulated or densely built environments.

And yet, in much of the UK’s mainstream media and politics, heat is still treated as a lifestyle issue, not a public health or systemic risk.

Another recent editorial in The Guardian put it plainly: “We must stop thinking of climate breakdown as a future issue. We need to build national readiness now, or we’ll let everyday life keep breaking down.”

That means investing in climate-resilient infrastructure, yes. But it also means telling new stories – stories that prepare people not just with facts, but with frameworks for feeling, thinking and acting differently.

Inflection point

The convergence of science, policy warnings, media coverage and lived experience is no coincidence. We are in an inflection moment – when the consequences of inaction are visible, and the possibilities of change remain open.

Whether we respond with courage or complacency will define more than just the future of emissions. It will define the kind of society we become and the kind of world we leave.

In Flood Waters Down, the waters rise – and so does something else. It’s characters and the challenges they face aren’t far from us. They’re just a few degrees – and decisions – ahead.

 #        #        #

 Flood Waters Down – for further details contact Clive Simpson

Fuelling the fire

Deep clouds and long shadows viewed from the International Space Station.                  NASA

Climate change denial thrives on manipulated language and disinformation. While sceptics exploit misunderstandings, California’s recent wildfires have proved the deadly reality of climate change. A new study confirms these fires were significantly more likely due to global warming, yet denial persists through cherry-picked data and misinformation.

WORDS wield power and nowhere more so than in the animated discourse on environmental crises. Yet, as California's recent infernos have tragically illustrated, the consequences of misinterpreting or dismissing climate terminology are anything but abstract. 

Disinformation is rampant in today’s world of social media and so-called authoritative media commentary, which is often anything but expert. 

It’s time the mainstream media dissected the language that fuels denial and confronts the clear evidence linking our planet’s escalating disasters to human-induced climate change.

The words "weather", "meteorology" and "climate change" are not synonyms, and understanding the latter as a comprehensive term highlights the complex and multifaceted nature of the challenges we face. 

It's not just about temperatures rising; it's about the cascading effects on weather systems, ecosystems and human societies.

Terms like "climate crisis" or "climate emergency" have emerged to underscore the urgency of the situation, emphasising that these changes are not distant or abstract but immediate threats requiring prompt action. 

And this evolution of climate-related terminology reflects our growing understanding of these phenomena. 

Rhetoric of dismissal
Dismissing such expressions as mere rhetoric ignores the scientific consensus and the lived experiences of communities in all parts of the world already impacted by climate-related disasters.

Whereas “global warming" and "climate change" are often used interchangeably infact they convey different aspects of our planet's environmental shifts.

"Global warming" refers specifically to the increase in Earth's average surface temperature due to rising levels of greenhouse gases. 

In contrast, "climate change" encompasses this warming but also includes the broader range of changes affecting our planet's climate systems, such as alterations in precipitation patterns, increased frequency of extreme weather events and rising sea levels.

Focusing solely on "global warming" can lead to oversimplification, allowing sceptics to argue against the reality of climate change by pointing, for example, to localised cold weather events such as snowstorms or cold snaps. 

This distinction is crucial and is one so often lost on the conspiracy theory and denier community who ply their views freely and without reference or accountability on social media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter).

Definition of denial
By definition, a climate change denier is a person or entity that rejects, downplays or misrepresents the current overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is occurring and is primarily caused by human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.

Climate change deniers typically fall into one or more of the following categories:

•    Outright deniers – those who claim that climate change is a hoax, a conspiracy, or not happening at all, often ignoring or distorting scientific evidence.

•    Minimisers – individuals who acknowledge that the climate is changing but argue that it is part of a natural cycle, downplaying the role of human activities.

•    Delay tacticians – people who accept that climate change is real and human-caused but argue against immediate action, claiming that solutions are too expensive, ineffective or unnecessary.

•    Cherry-pickers – those who selectively use data or specific weather events (such as a cold winter) to argue against long-term climate trends.

•    Misinformation spreaders – individuals, corporations or organisations (often linked to fossil fuel industries or politically motivated groups) that deliberately spread misleading or false information to sow doubt and delay climate action.

Many climate change deniers rely on disinformation, pseudoscience and economic or political motivations rather than peer-reviewed research to support their views and their influence, particularly through online media and political lobbying, has significantly delayed meaningful action on climate change, worsening its consequences.

Tangible impacts
The devastating wildfires that swept through Los Angeles in January 2025 serve as a stark illustration of the tangible impacts of climate change. 

A new study by World Weather Attribution analysed the conditions leading to these fires and found compelling evidence of human-induced climate influences.

It revealed that the hot, dry conditions preceding the fires were approximately 35 percent more likely due to the effects of climate change.

Additionally, the region experienced significantly reduced rainfall in the months leading up to the fires, a trend also linked to global warming. 

These factors combined to create an environment primed for wildfires, which were then exacerbated by the Santa Ana winds – strong, dry gusts that blow from inland towards the coast.

Historically, the arrival of winter rains in California would dampen vegetation and reduce fire risk during the Santa Ana wind season.

The study also noted a troubling shift: the wildfire season is extending, and the anticipated rains are diminishing. This prolongation of dry conditions into periods traditionally considered safer underscores the evolving nature of climate-related threats.

The consequences were catastrophic. The fires resulted in at least 28 fatalities and destroyed over 16,000 structures, marking them among the most destructive in Southern California's history. The rapid spread and intensity of the fires overwhelmed firefighting efforts, highlighting the challenges of responding to such unprecedented events.

Critically, the study emphasised that while natural factors like the Santa Ana winds have always played a role in Southern California's fire regime, the increasing frequency and severity of such fires cannot be explained without accounting for human-induced climate change.

This aligns with broader scientific consensus that links rising global temperatures to more extreme and unpredictable weather patterns.

Deliberate distortions
The language we use to discuss environmental issues shapes our understanding and, consequently, our actions – and so is important.

Misinterpretations or deliberate distortions of terms like "global warming" and "climate change" help foster complacency or denial, despite empirical evidence – such as the recent California wildfires – demonstrating the impacts of climate change are real, immediate and devastating.

It's imperative to move beyond semantic debates and acknowledge the urgency of the crisis we face. The time for action, guided by clear understanding and informed by undeniable evidence, is not tomorrow but now. In many ways humanity’s future depends on it.

Looming catastrophe of climate change

Fossil-fuel companies have become the “godfathers of climate chaos” and should be banned from advertising in every country, the secretary general of the United Nations stated while delivering dire new scientific warnings of global heating.

Speaking in New York this week, António Guterres called on all media to stop enabling “planetary destruction” by taking fossil-fuel advertising money as he warned the world faces “climate crunch time” in its faltering attempts to stem the crisis.

“Many governments restrict or prohibit advertising for products that harm human health,” he said. “I urge every country to ban advertising from fossil-fuel companies. And I urge news media and tech companies to stop taking fossil-fuel advertising.”

In his speech, Guterres announced new data from the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) showing there is an 80 percent chance Earth will breach 1.5C in warming above pre-industrial times in the next five calendar years. 

The WMO says there is a already a 50-50 chance that the global average in the period between 2024 to 2028 will be above 1.5C in warming.

“We are playing Russian roulette with our planet,” he said. “We need an exit ramp off the highway to climate hell.”

According to the European Union’s Copernicus monitoring system, the past 12 months (from June 2023 to May of this year) have already breached this target following a string of months with record-breaking heat, with the average global temperature being 1.63C higher than the pre-industrial average.

Guterres likened the looming catastrophe to the meteor that wiped out the dinosaurs. “We’re having an outsized impact and, in the case of climate, we are not the dinosaurs - we are the meteor. We are not only in danger - we are the danger.”

He admitted that the 1.5C target was “still just about possible” but said there needed to be far greater effort from countries to slash carbon emissions, to boost climate finance to poorer countries, and for the fossil-fuel industry to be made pariahs by governments, the media and other businesses.

“The godfathers of climate chaos - the fossil-fuel industry - rake in record profits and feast off trillions in taxpayer-funded subsidies,” he said. “It is a disgrace that the most vulnerable are being left stranded, struggling desperately to deal with a climate crisis they did nothing to create.

“We cannot accept a future where the rich are protected in air-conditioned bubbles, while the rest of humanity is lashed by lethal weather in unlivable lands.”

Guterres attacked fossil-fuel firms for their meagre investments in cleaner forms of energy and for “distorting the truth, deceiving the public and sowing doubt” about climate science.

He called for global bans on fossil-fuel advertising and for public relations and media companies to cut ties with oil, gas and coal interests.

“These companies should stop acting as enablers to planetary destruction. Stop taking on new fossil-fuel clients and set out plans to drop your existing ones. Fossil fuels are not only poisoning our planet - they’re toxic for your brand.”

The speech was timed to act as a rallying call by the UN which is increasingly concerned that the climate crisis has slipped down the list of priorities for a world racked by war in Ukraine and Gaza, and other economic worries.

A meeting of the powerful G7 group of countries will take place in Italy next week, followed by November’s Cop29 climate summit, to be held in Azerbaijan, along with a G20 gathering in Brazil.

Amid this wrangling the impacts of the climate crisis continue to hit home, with countries including India and the US recently gripped by severe heatwaves. 

A study released this week found that extensive flooding that has devastated parts of southern Brazil, leading to 169 deaths, was made at least twice as likely due to human-caused climate change.

But Guterres urged people not to lose courage or hope. “No country can solve the climate crisis in isolation and we do still have a choice,” he said.

“This is an all-in moment. We can create tipping points for climate progress, or we can career to tipping points for climate disaster.”

He warned that it was now the people of Earth versus the polluters and the profiteers – and it is time for leaders to decide whose side they’re on.

“Tomorrow it will be too late,” Guterres concluded. “Now is the time to mobilise, now is the time to act, now is the time to deliver. This is our moment of truth.”

Professor emeritus of geophysical and climate hazards at University College London, Bill McGuire, agrees and says that as a scientist he is faced with “indifference and a failure to understand the reality of the climate crisis every day.

“We must wake people up. Extreme weather, especially heatwaves and floods, is set to be all-pervasive and will have a colossal impact on our lives and livelihoods,” he warns.

“A recent report by the European Environment Agency warned that climate breakdown will bring ‘catastrophic’ consequences for an unprepared Europe, most notably through heat stress, river flooding and flash floods.

“And this applies equally to the UK. Disruption to transport and utilities, interference with industrial and business operations, serious pressures on food production and supply, and increased burdens on the health service and hospitals, will conspire to make day-to-day living harder and far more unpredictable.”

#          #          #

A Moment of Truth – UN speech by António Guterres (5 June 2024)
Hothouse Earth – by Bill McGuire (2022)