Humanity’s burning of fossil fuels is known to be the cause of the earth’s above-normal temperature over the last century (Fig 1) [4] [6]. A normal human body temperature range is 97-99F, while an upward excursion of 1.5C (= 2.7F) means you’re now 100-103F with a fever. Much higher than that and you might need medical intervention to survive.
We gave the earth a fever, and now must ride out the side effects. If the fever continues to get worse, so too will the side effects. Precisely how the fever will likely alter life for our future selves can be hard to figure out, in part because no one knows the future. Increasingly worse and more frequent droughts, hurricanes, and severe weather systems are all in the forecast however. Rising sea levels, ocean temperatures and acidification are also expected. And these are comparatively easier to quantify than the exact toll on living species that populate the earth. Regardless, there is no upside to these side effects.
[See Figure 1]
Climate change’s velocity is currently greater than the human effort being concentrated to slow it. So the side effects of today will persist and worsen before it gets better. In the spirit of optimism, let’s consider an older global problem that is much farther along in being addressed: cancer.
Cancer is not a fun word. It’s not called the emperor of all maladies by mistake [2]. And if you’ve heard it before in a personal health setting, as I have, the word itself causes a systemic shock. It feels personal because it is personal. Today, it’s hard to find someone who is not already familiar with how personally dark cancer is and can be. It would be harder still to find someone who thinks cancer is not much of a problem at all.
Meanwhile, many people don’t think of climate change as a global crisis. Maybe the phrase “climate change” is too weak? Perhaps it connotes a small deviation from what you expect, like getting the wrong order at the drive through. With cancer, by contrast, the marketing job is already done. Everyone knows someone who has it, and it remains the 2nd leading cause of death in the US [1].
Following widespread acceptance came action. We have never been better at diagnosis and treatment than we are right now. A well-oiled engine of progress, especially regarding innovations in treatment and screening, has made a massive difference. Fatality rates have recently decelerated for the first time in history, and what used to be fatal diagnoses have become treatable and even curable [1]. After adjusting for population growth and age-standardization, in fact, the death rate from cancer has fallen by 15% since 1990 (Fig 2). This progress was buoyed on many fronts by innovation breakthroughs, capable investors, and government funding.
[See Figure 2]
It may surprise you to know that the discovery of cancer is substantially older (4500 years ago) than the widespread recognition of its severity [2]. This was primarily due to technological gaps in quantifying how broadly cancer exists. But, even beyond that, there was also a sustained period of resistance to acknowledging the full gravity of the situation, especially when special interests were making barrels of money on cancer-causing products (e.g., cigarette brands).
Eventually, the groundswell of outrage against cigarette companies outweighed their influence, and lung cancers cases attenuated following a drop in consumption (Fig 2). To me, this playbook sounds eerily familiar when you think of how oil and gas companies would not want you to view their global-warming practices negatively, or to accept white washing practices (like a carbon captured for some number of carbons released) as being good enough.
The urgency of the situation, in part caused by more extreme weather patterns since 2021, is moving the needle toward widespread recognition for the need for change. However, public perception is still in flux between “it’s not a big deal” and “eff global warming!”
Make no mistake: the climate crisis is a health crisis [12]. If it hasn’t become personal for you yet, don’t take my word for it – read everything you can get your hands on, listen to every podcast and have an open mind. The livelihood and very existence of the next generations depends on us to do this correctly.
The earth’s elevated temperature is an enormous, global-scale problem to society that has several substantial technology gaps. What is the scale of change required to address climate change? According to a recent Energy Trade Commission report [8], meeting the COP21 Paris Agreement target of 2050 net-zero [7] requires reducing demand and supply by 80-85% in coal use, 55-70% in gas, and 75-95% in oil by 2050.
Moreover, these reductions need to start now, with a 15-30% cut in coal use, 15-20% in gas, and 5-15% in oil by 2030. This requires extensive disruptions to how most of the energy, transportation, buildings, food, and industrial sectors currently operate. Forty-six percent of all emissions will be reduced by technology that’s still in the works [11]. While we can be optimistic, most of the work is still ahead of us.
Solving technology-gap problems requires substantial time and resources (space, materials, money, people), but also know-how. And it’s rational that the optimal brand of know-how has at least two critical ingredients:
If innovation is the beating heart of an entrepreneurial being, strategy is its nervous system, and resources make up the musculoskeletal system.
Governments, corporations and investors cannot solve big problems without the innovators who conceived of novel solutions and helped bring it to life. If you consider yourself an actual or aspiring innovator, inventor or entrepreneur, please consider committing yourself to this great cause: the climate change crisis is and will be the greatest societal problem of your lifetime.
The good news is that people are making a difference [0]. The bad news is that we are not doing enough, as fast as it needs to be done, to stave off serious repercussions. What we do, and don’t do, today will directly impact how many people will perish.
##
[Figure 1] Global surface temperature compared to a long-term average (1951 to 1980). Earth’s average surface temperature in 2023 was the warmest on record since record keeping began in 1880 (source: NASA/GISS), matching other analyses (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)). Overall, Earth was ~1.36 degrees Celsius warmer in 2023 than in the late 19th-century (1850-1900) pre industrial average, and the 10 most recent years are the warmest on record. Figure source: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
[Figure 2] Death rates from lung cancer in the US since 1950 with a rise, peak, and decline pattern observed (with a lag) in cigarette consumption statistics, with smoking now known to be the biggest risk factor for lung cancer. Figure source: https://ourworldindata.org/cancer, Data source: WHO Mortality Database (2022)
0 https://www.nottheendoftheworld.co.uk/
1 https://www.cancer.org/research/acs-research-news/facts-and-figures-2022.html
2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor_of_All_Maladies
3 https://youtu.be/NXDWpBlPCY8?si=e6uchItEL6_o3jRw
4 https://www.epa.gov/climatechange-science/causes-climate-change
5 Trends in Planetary Health Innovation: An Investor's Perspective, Avind Gupta, UCSC talk, Jan 23, 2024
6 https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
7 It is international scientific consensus that, in order to prevent the worst climate damages, global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) needs to fall by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching net zero around 2050. Global warming is proportional to cumulative CO2 emissions, which means that the planet will keep heating for as long as global emissions remain more than net zero. This implies that climate damages, caused by global heating, will continue escalating for as long as net emissions are positive. https://netzeroclimate.org/what-is-net-zero-2/
8 https://www.energy-transitions.org/publications/fossil-fuels-in-transition
9 https://www.targetedonc.com/view/fda-halts-clinical-studies-of-magrolimab-in-aml-mds
10https://www.vox.com/down-to-earth/2024/2/7/24057308/earth-global-greening-climate-change-carbon
11 https://www.wired.com/story/climate-finance-wrong-targets-investment-green-daria-saharova/
