On a planet where people are just growing used to wild change — endless droughts, massive storms, smoke-orange skies, random flash floods, heat domes and so on — the biggest shifting baseline seems to be our expectations of climate diplomacy.
The future planet we appear to be ready to agree to live on — if we get what is being framed as a *successful* COP — was understood to be an appallingly bad outcome just 30 years ago... a tragedy for future generations, to be avoided at all costs.
I am all about getting the wins we can, and revving up for the Snap Forward. Winning is a spectrum, here, and there are multiple paths to victory.
Our climate debate, however, wanders amidst the absurd and slightly surreal these days.
If true, $500 billion for climate (over 10 years) looks to be the limit of the possible in this administration—and while huge, it falls short of what we actually need by at least one order of magnitude.
We need a reality check on the orderly transition.
"Scientists have known for decades that burning fossil fuels are heating up the planet, and that more intense heat waves are one of the clearest manifestations of life on a superheated planet. And..."
On COVID, Afghanistan or domestic terror, sure, but on climate chaos, ecological destabilization, supply chain breaks, mass-migration, failed disaster states, sudden economic realignments and all the other mechanisms of discontinuity in the planetary crisis, too.
OODA sheer is happening not only around responses to fast-moving crises, but also in regards to the rapidly-evolving strategic environment for solutions/action.
What used to be expert thinking about sustainability, decarbonization, etc is now outdated.