-
Forever Chemicals, Forever Waiting? UK’s PFAS Plan Under Fire
Does the UK’s plan to tackle PFAS ‘forever chemicals’ go far enough to protect people and the environment?

The UK Government has published its first-ever plan to tackle PFAS pollution in the last few days, with a lukewarm response from experts and environmental charities describing the plans as being nothing more than ‘shutting the door after the PFAS horse has bolted’ and not going far enough to identify and isolate the sources of pollution.
The Government’s promise, published on the 3rd February, set out the mission to mitigate against the risks from PFAS.
‘The government’s new PFAS Plan sets out, for the first time, a collaborative approach to understanding, managing and reducing these risks – while allowing continued use where no safe alternatives exist, such as in medical devices and clean energy technology.’
The policy paper acknowledged the importance and prevalence of forever chemicals stating, ‘Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often called ‘forever chemicals’, represent one of the most pressing chemical challenges of our time. They are used throughout our everyday lives as their unique properties have brought significant benefits to society… Yet their persistence and widespread presence in our environment pose risks we cannot ignore.
This is an important issue for the government to address.’
‘Forever chemicals shouldn’t be a forever problem.’
The Department for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs claimed that their new plan would better protect people and the environment stating ‘Forever chemicals shouldn’t be a forever problem.’
The plan aimed to better understand PFAS sources, to tackle the spread of PFAS chemicals and then to reduce exposure with comprehensive monitoring of PFAS in rivers, lakes and seas. Consulting on a statutory limit for the amount of PFAS in UK drinking water in order to increase regulatory enforcement powers was also one of the measures revealed from Defra.
‘Our vision is to reduce and minimise the harmful effects of PFAS while transitioning to safer alternative substances. There is growing evidence that their widespread use and past management have generated risks of harm to people and to the environment, including wildlife. Their persistence means that some PFAS will remain in our environment for hundreds of years.’
The UK Plan acknowledged the levels of exposure from PFAS pollution in England, Scotland and Wales, stating, ‘PFAS have been found in approximately 80% of surface water samples, approximately 50% of groundwater samples, and all fish samples.’

Falling short on meaningful action
The environmental charity FIDRA responded to the UK plan, arguing that the plan fell short on significant action points.
Despite some vivid acknowledgements of the ‘irreversible harm’ PFAS can present, the plan falls short on meaningful action to prevent further PFAS pollution at source.
Fidra argued that PFAS chemicals ‘present one of the most challenging pollution crises of our generation, which is why urgent and decisive action is paramount.’ They stated that the Government’s PFAS plan did not go far enough on restriction opportunities and that prevention of PFAS pollution did not appear to be a priority. They described the plan as being little more than, ‘Shutting the stable door after the PFAS horse has bolted.’
Chloe Alexander, chemicals policy lead at Wildlife and Countryside Link,echoed this criticism of the Government plan, when she was quoted in The Guardian as describing the Government as a “crushingly disappointing framework that ducks the hard decisions”.
Lukewarm response from experts
Emma Hardy MP, Minister for Water and Flooding, appeared before the Environmental Audit Committee (4th February) and was asked whether she was surprised by the negative response and whether she understood why PFAS experts expected more.
Hardy commented that she ‘was proud of the plan’, claiming that ‘this has never been done before’ and that these plans were ‘a foundation to build and develop on’ and that she ‘wanted to get something out which demonstrated this Government’s commitment and seriousness to this issue.’ However, the Chair’s response was critical, suggesting that the initial reading of the Government plan fell ‘A long way short of the coordinated action that the EU is taking collectively’, citing that other countries have acted faster on PFAS pollution. He also argued that this policy appeared to be nothing more than, ‘A plan to consult on whether to have a plan’.
Government timeline for action
The UK Government’s PFAS plan does indeed appear to focus more on a long-term vision rather than the short term action urged by experts.
It called for action to: ‘Commission research to better understand the consequences of environmental contamination by PFAS on ecosystem health and wildlife.’ In addition, it called for more monitoring of possible PFAS sources, when it stated its indicative commitment to: ‘Deliver a comprehensive, multi-year assessment of PFAS contamination in estuarine and coastal environments in England…’
Even in terms of tackling PFAS pathways, the UK plan seemed weak, in its indication to go no further than simply considering restrictions on PFAS: ‘Complete work to consider a UK REACH restriction on PFAS in fire-fighting foams.’
‘Acting now is essential’
This position to continue to monitor the situation, or the ‘Sit tight and assess’ option favoured in the satirical ‘Don’t Look Up’ film, seems to directly contradict the urgency from Emma Hardy MP in the foreword to the UK’s PFAS Plan when she makes it abundantly clear that action is needed now to avoid irreversible harm.
‘PFAS contamination threatens public health, wildlife and the quality of our natural environment. Acting now is essential to prevent irreversible harm and to ensure that our regulatory frameworks keep pace with scientific evidence.’
How long it takes for Government action to match Government rhetoric remains to be seen.
-
Planning Payments, Pollution Fears and a Paused Decision at Former RAF TollertonRushcliffe Borough Council defends £200,000 payment from housing developer

Campaigners against the controversial proposals of Vistry Homes to build 4,000 homes in and around the site of Nottingham City Airport were jubilant recently, as the local council voted to pause its decision, while more information was sought to support moving forward.
However, campaigners appeared very uneasy about the knowledge that Vistry Homes- the developer- would be making several financial payments to the local council over the first half of this year if planning momentum carried forward.
The Planning Performance Agreement (PPA) document uploaded to the planning portal in December 2025 revealed that Vistry Homes, the applicant, would pay Rushcliffe Borough Council totalling £202,006 as various planning stages moved ahead over a period of seven months. Payments of £28,858 for each stage to the council shocked campaigners as transparency and undue pressure became their new financial concerns, in addition to their environmental concerns.
Challenges over financial payments
Cllr Roger Upton, RBC Cabinet Member for Planning and Housing, responded to campaigners’ claims that financial payments from the developer to Rushcliffe Borough Council were untoward, stating that PPAs are a commonplace method in planning matters.
“Residents and stakeholders can also be assured developers contributions to the planning process or PPA amounts are placing no pressure on the Council than any other current application. This in the same way PPAs for other previous larger proposed sites have been managed appropriately and effectively in the past.
“PPA amounts vary from document to document that are submitted to Councils across the country. These can vary, such as in this case, where the amount is guided by the size and complexity of the proposed site and the extensive work the Council will have to undertake to fulfil its role.”
When asked to give detailed examples of other contributions to local projects, Cllr Upton asked the Communications and Customer Services Manager of Rushcliffe Borough Council to answer on his behalf. This response gave the information that, ‘In recent years PPAs have been agreed for the current significant Newton development near Bingham, Nottingham Forest Football Club’s proposed developments of the City Ground and proposed solar farms at Thoroton, Ruddington and Stragglethorpe.’
The level of payments from the developers to the local council for these other projects was questioned further to better understand the context of receiving a payment of over £200,000 in seven months and whether the perception of this timeframe and cost could be viewed unfavourably. Rushcliffe Borough Council told me that the PPA for the Newton development was £70,000, for each solar farm the PPA was £18,500 and for the development of Nottingham Forest Football Club City Ground was £150,000.
A large housing development of 4,000 homes may then have a larger financial payment to the council than a solar farm, especially when remediation work of the radium contaminated land at Tollerton Park would have to be included.

RAF Tollerton history
Nottingham City Airport is also known as RAF Tollerton and has a long and illustrious military past, being used regularly in World War 2 and then later as an area for aviation repair and disposal, potentially being the source for the radium discovered in the soil. In more modern times, the site has seen various uses and businesses operate, from flight training, an emergency landing site for the air ambulance and an established local cafe.
Vistry Homes have earmarked the site for a large housing development, though these plans have been dealt a blow by Rushcliffe Borough Council which voted for a pause in the planning process, while more evidence about the impact to the local area is confirmed, especially with concerns coming from the Highway Authority.
In a press release this week, the Council stated,
‘Rushcliffe Borough Council’s (RBC) Cabinet has voted to pause a decision on the next stage of planning at Tollerton Airfield whilst more detailed information is requested from the developers on highways.
It met on Tuesday January 13 and chose to not proceed with a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) or masterplan for the site at this stage, requesting developers submit more information on highways modelling data that can inform traffic projections.
It follows consultation on the SPD last year, aware of the points local residents and key stakeholders have raised as part of the planning process for the proposed Gamston/Tollerton Development.’
Cllr Roger Upton, RBC Cabinet Member for Planning and Housing, bemoaned the lack of information requested from the developer, saying,
“We currently have applications sitting with the Council to build on the Gamston and Tollerton site, and we have been clear that we want a Masterplan for the entire development, to offer clear guidance on where the infrastructure should be sited as part of the planning process.
“We have been awaiting detailed traffic modelling data from developers, and comments from Nottinghamshire County Council and National Highways on the data and plans for the transport highway solutions in and around the site, and it is yet to arrive.
We have therefore decided to delay a decision on the SPD whilst we request this information. We do need to make a decision by June 30, 2026 and will be calling upon the developers and highways agencies to provide this information, which they have had months and years to complete.
We are aware of concerns around possible contamination on areas around Nottingham Airport, and these must be addressed as part of any planning applications.”
From Rushcliffe Borough Council
More transparency over planning issues needed
Rushcliffe Borough Councillor Debbie Soloman called for more transparency over the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and had asked for a request to delay its adoption days before the council meeting took place.
On the 11th January, she posted on social media, ‘I am very concerned the RBC is rushing through the decision on the Tollerton/Gamston Fields development. Therefore I have written to all Rushcliffe Borough Council cabinet members asking them not to adopt the East of Gamston / North of Tollerton (SUE) Development Framework SPD. If the Gamston Fields/Tollerton development does go ahead it needs to be done the right way -with full transparency.’
Her letter continued to highlight some of the specific concerns raised before by campaigners.
‘Dear Cabinet Members,
East of Gamston / North of Tollerton Development Framework – Request to Delay Adoption
I am writing to express my serious concern ahead of your scheduled vote on Tuesday 13 January 2026 regarding adoption of the East of Gamston / North of Tollerton (SUE) Development Framework SPD.
The issues emerging from consultation responses, particularly from National Highways, Nottinghamshire County Council and Tollerton Parish Council indicate that key technical and environmental matters remain unresolved. Chief among these is the question of land contamination across the former airfield site.
It is clear that this site carries a complex legacy of contamination, including historic industrial waste, PFA (“forever chemicals”), and deposits associated with former aviation operations. Yet the SPD moves forward without a comprehensive contamination study, a remediation framework, or the involvement of accredited specialists independent from developer control.’

She appeared to be also concerned about the public perception and the ‘optics’ of rushing through the process, which might damage the reputation of Rushcliffe Borough Council, when she stated, ‘the optics of rushing adoption are extremely poor. What confidence can the public have if we appear to be hurrying to avoid scrutiny? A short delay would protect the Council’s reputation far more than pressing ahead under the shadow of unanswered questions.’
Campaigners pleased with calls for more investigation
Responding to the council’s decision, Sarah Deacon, one of the leading campaigners from the Save Nottingham Airfield Group, said,
‘SNAG are really pleased that RBC have taken this important step. Pausing the adoption of the SPD will allow for the collection of critical data to inform the proposed highways and transport strategy for the site both locally and regionally. This will then allow for proper costings to take place which will mean that realistic viability assessments can be produced.’

She continued her statement, saying, ‘We know from preliminary calculations that the site is not viable in terms of delivering full policy obligations – and we want the people of Rushcliffe to be fully informed about what would not be delivered. If the site is not fully viable with the delivery of 30% affordable homes, for example, because of the costs of Highways or remediation of contamination, the people of Rushcliffe deserve to know this.’
It now appears that these housing development plans will undergo closer examination and scrutiny, with the success of pressure from campaigners for transparency and dialogue.
-
Welsh Council to spend over £2.5 million to protect residents from climate change
Homes at severe flood risk to be demolished by council

Councillors for Rhondda Cynon Taf council have approved the acquisition of 16 homes in Ynysybwl, which have been described as at ‘severe flood risk’. The homes in Clydach Terrace will be bought for £2,570,000 and are at high risk of flooding from the local river, Nant Clydach, with residents having suffered considerably with flooding owing to recent storms.
A council report described their experiences, ‘During these recent storm events much of the pavement / highway was under water and the homes were rapidly inundated with flood water with internal flooding up to 1.96m in depth. There was extensive damage to many of the properties.’
The decision from the county council will include relocation costs for the residents concerned, as well as legal fees, and will remove an ongoing flooding risk for the community.
The report noted, ‘Approval of the recommendations would enable the Council to exercise its statutory and discretionary powers to intervene in respect of the ongoing risk to health, safety and property due to flooding.’
Several flood risk management strategies had been explored, including the construction of a raised flood defence wall. Councillors however supported the conclusion that ‘this was not ‘an economically viable option under the UK and Welsh Government funding rules for flood risk management purposes.’
Increased climate change risks
Serious consideration was taken of the increased risks posed by climate change, which meant that the homes could not remain, as the report pointed out, ‘Indeed, given the implications and expectations of further flooding due to climate change, flooding may become a more frequent occurrence.’
Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council stated in their decision that their conclusions were conducted in line with their statutory aim to protect the community against the threat of climate change, a role they were taking seriously.
‘The Council can use such [statutory] powers for the benefit of the authority, its area or persons resident or present in its area. Use of this power would include protecting communities against the threat of climate change and from a high risk of flooding, through the purchasing of property for the reasons set out in this report.’
The Council also stated that funding for the purchase of the homes would come from available resources within the Council’s overall flood management programmes.
Climate change displacement
Around Wales and England, many homeowners have faced the challenge of having an ‘insurance nightmare’, where obtaining insurance has been difficult owing to climate related risks and when it is offered, the premiums have been high. Unable to protect, insure or sell their homes, these Ynysybwl residents have felt trapped in their own homes.
Although this instance has been described as a ‘unique set of circumstances’, Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council has rightfully placed the safety of residents at a high level, and has acted decisively to prioritise the housing needs and the well-being needs of the community.
This may not be the first displacement of people and communities within the UK owing to climate change- what is certain though, is that it won’t be the last. -
Review of ‘The Problem With Plastic: How We Can Save Ourselves and Our Planet Before It’s Too Late’ by Judith Enck and Adam Mahoney

Plastic pollution and contamination sadly seems to be so ingrained into our environment that yet another book on the issue appears to be superfluous. That being said, Enck and Mahoney peel back the veneer of company ‘plastic-washing’ and false promises to challenge the dominant and overwhelming narrative from the plastics industry (read fossil-fuel industry) that if individuals were just better at recycling, then the problem would be solved.
They make the early point that despite plastics being a relatively new invention, they have colonised the world, making us overly-dependent and addicted to their use. ‘What began as a marvel of modern science has been woven so tightly into the fabric of our lives that imagining a world without it seems impossible.’
Humans once lived in a world without plastic and this seems hard to fathom now. ‘In just seventy- five years, plastic has cradled our planet in a synthetic embrace.’ Enck and Mahoney address the systemic issues at the core of the plastic crisis and explore the links to environmental injustices, using repeated examples of neighbourhoods and communities blighted by plastic pollution, with attendant increased health risks. They call out big business as being a knowing actor in the ‘plastic racism’ and argue that short-term profits are more of a priority to these companies than real solutions to reduce the production of plastic. ‘Despite the mounting evidence against the plastics industry, those in charge continue to double down on false solutions, successfully misleading the public and hindering real progress.’
No place untouched by plastic
Enck and Mahoney remind the reader that, ‘Today, there isn’t a place on Earth untouched by plastic.’ From plastic bags deep in the Mariana Trench to plastic pollution on the slopes of Mount Everest, to inside the human body with microplastics and nanoplastics, the contamination is everywhere, with the tap of production not even close to being shut off. For an industry that is not older than the oldest person alive today, this shocking impact on our world is the worst of achievements. ‘Half of all the plastic ever created has been around only since 2007’
The authors make the point that massive production of plastic will thwart and dwarf the best efforts of recycling, or even ‘chemical recycling’, which continues to stand at less than 10% globally. The same fossil-fuel playbook of hoping for a technological ‘magic bullet’ solution, which will allow production to continue and profits to prosper, has been successfully used by the plastic industry and it is this that the authors want us to be alerted about. This should be no surprise as the vast majority of plastics are made from fossil fuels and it is the same industry pushing both products.‘Plastics are made from fossil fuels and chemicals. The world’s biggest oil and gas companies are also the biggest plastic producers.’ … ‘In less than a century, plastic has changed the world. In 1950, the world produced just 2 million tons of plastic. It now produces over 450 million tons per year.’
‘With microplastics seemingly everywhere—in the air, water, and food we consume—it’s easy to feel overwhelmed.’
Against this industrial plastic behemoth, it can feel that our efforts and voices are insignificant and that it is easier to not challenge their narrative, however Enck and Mahoney argue that this is far from the case, and that the plastic edifice is beginning to crumble. They highlight communities where local protests have successfully repelled fracking industries, incinerators and landfill operators. ‘Most people experience plastic in passing as a brief relationship with a throwaway item. The bulk of the consequences, though, are saddled upon the local communities where plastic is fracked, cracked, dumped, and burned: from the Indigenous, to the free towns, to the poor working class. In short, plastic kills. Yet organized resistance to plastic is spreading across the globe.’ It appears that it is the communities which are threatened the most which are standing up the most against the polluters, but they need the help of powerful, unafraid governments, which are not content with solutions that ‘skim the surface’, but which apply rigorous regulation to industry. ‘As with traditional landfills, incinerators and toxic ash landfills are overwhelmingly located in low-income and minority communities where residents bear the brunt of the health and environmental impacts from plastic pollution.’
The authors call for meaningful and significant change to phase out this plastic pollution.
‘Meaningful changes that significantly reduce plastic production and waste must occur on a vast scale, one that matches the current volume of plastic produced and consumed…Achieving such large-scale change requires the introduction of new laws that compel industries to take actions they have otherwise failed to initiate on their own.’
The authors make the repeated point in ‘The Problem with Plastic’ that,
‘If the science is clear and the damage so severe, why hasn’t the crisis been meaningfully addressed?’
A cleaner, healthier future is in our hands
In order to achieve this cleaner and healthier future, Enck and Mahoney powerfully argue for a two-pronged attack- one which is government led and one which is consumer led. They urge that meaningful choices for customers away from plastics cannot happen magically on its own and need the helping hand of a necessary Big Government. The current unrealistic self-policing practices of the plastics (fossil-fuel) industry must come to an end.
‘Governments must implement strict regulations to curb plastic production, enforce transparency in corporate sustainability claims, and eliminate subsidies for plastic production under the guise of recycling innovation. And we, as consumers, must be empowered with better choices, clearer labeling, and access to plastic-free alternatives that are genuinely sustainable. The petrochemical industry will continue pushing misleading solutions unless there is strong pushback from communities, policymakers, and environmental advocates.’
The authors close by reminding us that profound transformation is possible and that inventions, although they can’t be ‘un-invented’, can be refined (!), improved upon and in many cases, left behind, as more sustainable, efficient and safe options become widely accessible.
‘Yet this is no natural catastrophe; it is human-made, and that means it can be unmade. Plastic pollution, climate change, and environmental injustices are not inevitable; they are the results of choices made by businesses, governments, and, to a lesser extent, you and me.’
The path forward to save ourselves and our planet from this plastic juggernaut will likely not be an easy one. It is reliant on individuals moving away from convenience to choice, from being fettered to plastics to freedom, and from apathy to action. When held against the healthy vision of the world, just over the horizon, this surely is a price worth paying.
‘The way forward is daunting but not impossible. It requires courage, persistence, and a shared vision of what the world can be.’
-
Review of ‘The Nature of Pandemics: Why Protecting Biodiversity is Key to Human Survival’ by Jake M. Robinson

Robinson’s latest book, The Nature of Pandemics could not have come at a more timely moment, as hospital admissions of flu patients in the UK rose by 55% in one week owing to a winter ‘super flu’.
Robinson explores what lessons have been learned from the Covid-19 global pandemic and warns that a proactive approach to the next Disease X is far more sensible than a reaction which might come too late.
This book repeatedly urges for action and awareness when it comes to emerging diseases and strongly warns about the dangers of the deadly duo of apathy and ignorance. As Robinson notes, ‘Complacency is the breeding ground for disease. Where vigilance falters, contagions thrive.’
The Nature of Pandemics begins by looking to the past for clues and lessons, noting the incredible bravery of the villagers of Eyam, Derbyshire in 1665, who, through their actions, taught the future about containment. ‘Exploring the annals of past pandemics can help illuminate the path ahead, casting light on future outbreaks.’ Robinson begins the book by ensuring that his readers are clear on the various terms of pandemics, outbreaks and epidemics, especially in the modern world, where they are often used interchangeably by the general public.
Throughout the text, he convincingly argues for a ‘One Heath’ approach and mindset- an approach which ‘acknowledges that the health of humans, non-human animals and our environment are inseparably linked.’ He cautions that finger-pointing and blame do not by themselves offer solutions and can oftentimes hide the solutions, if the closeness between humans, non-humans and the environment is not well understood. ‘Yet pointing the finger at wildlife for pandemics is off track. It’s a misguided heuristic that overlooks the complexity of diseases, ecosystems and human antics. It’s also a way to keep solutions buried in a grave of misconception.’
When we push nature to its limits, nature pushes back.
Dilution, diversity and amplification effects are all explored in the text, with human behaviour placed under the microscope. Robinson argues that global movement of people can create a convenient mode of transport for pathogens. ‘Millions of people cross oceans and borders each year. As we do, we provide a comfy vehicle for pathogens.’ The change in land-use, from practices such as deforestation, and also a lack of awareness on the importance of soil, can allow for the evolution, emergence and mutation of diseases.
‘Over 30% of new diseases reported since 1960 can be attributed to deforestation and land-use changes. Closeness is an issue. By changing the land, we increase human-wildlife contact.’ Throughout the book then, Robinson argues that spillover events can not be described as ‘accidents’, but are a predictable outcome from the closeness between species and the pressure of conditions that this can bring. ‘Spillovers don’t just happen. They’re a consequence of fractured ecosystems and close interactions between humans and other organisms. ‘When we push nature to its limits, nature pushes back.’
Disease X- It’s Coming
‘The Nature of Pandemics’ should not be read as an ‘alarmist’ or ‘doomist’ text- instead it rationally outlines the likelihood of global pandemics and the emergence of ‘new’ or ‘old’ diseases that are flourishing in our world, sometimes through political inaction, or through the dangers of antimicrobial resistance. ‘Disease X symbolises the perpetual race against new and evolving pathogens. It’s an ongoing struggle to keep pace with microbial evolution- a relentless drive for survival.’ Disease X itself is simply a term used to represent the next unknown pathogen that could cause a severe pathogen that could cause a severe pandemic, so to some extent, we are both preparing for a ‘known unknown’ as well as an ‘unknown unknown.’ At present, the statistics warn that another event like COVID-19 is coming.
‘The current likelihood of experiencing another COVID-19-like event in one’s lifetime is 38%, a figure that may double in the coming decades due to increasing rates of disease emergence.’
What was particularly refreshing about Robinson’s arguments was that he did not shy away from highlighting that pandemics, such as bird flu, within non-human species are already happening at an alarming rate. Treating the ‘non-human animal kingdom’, in a medical sense as well through vaccinations, to ensure positive health could help bring stability to linked species and food webs.
A critical crossroads
In order to ‘stay ahead of the curve’ then, Robinson suggests that re-building the connection to the natural world could be seen as a public health intervention. He argues that, ‘It’s clear that our relationship with the natural world is at a critical crossroads.’ He highlights examples of nature regeneration, green prescriptions, community level work that together sow the necessary seeds of change that can help address the looming and current threats. ‘In a world facing a double burden of disease, from contagious outbreaks to chronic illnesses, reconnecting with the natural world may offer a powerful form of relief.’
As per his other books, Robinson challenges us to shift our mindsets and arrogance about our place in the ‘animal kingdom’ and begins to suggest that our relationship with nature should be heading towards a symbiotic relationship where all parties mutually benefit. He writes, ‘We must recognise that the health of our planet and its inhabitants is inextricably linked to our actions.’
Pandemics happen. They exist. They have existed and they will exist. They are a part of our world. We need to learn how to stop them from being our world. The Nature of Pandemics by Robinson, charts this course for us.
-
Review of ‘Life on a Little- Known Planet’ by Elizabeth Kolbert

Kolbert, the Pulitzer Prize winning author, has gathered for her readers 17 celebratory articles from the last 20 years of her writing career, to highlight and inspire others working for a better climate today and tomorrow.
With devastating climate events happening daily around the world, articles on issues from ten years or over, may seem out-dated to some readers. The lesson here, however, is to acknowledge the journey towards climate action, that sometimes has happened slowly and other times has been revolutionary in nature. Many of the essays draw our focus towards solutions and how the impact of an individual’s work on conserving, communicating, rewilding and protecting our precious world and ecosystems, can motivate and inspire local communities to work together.
Kolbert reminds her readers that, ‘We live in an extraordinary time’ and that the alarming pace of climate decline we witness in the modern world, is a rare occurrence in the planet’s history and one which we are in danger of pushing past a point of no return. ‘But over the last four billion years, only very rarely has change rushed along at the pace it is moving today.’ Rising global carbon emissions and the resulting need for decarbonisation can become political footballs, which can delay helpful technologies which may play a part such as carbon dioxide removal initiatives. Kolbert is quick to note the challenges that need to be surmounted before any of these programmes could be feasible at large scale and suggests instead that these efforts may simply be a distraction from the need to turn the curve of global emissions back down to the steady and stable levels of the past.
Kolbert notes, ‘The amount of CO₂ in the air now is probably greater than it’s been at any time since the mid- Pliocene, three and a half million years ago, when there was a lot less ice at the poles and sea levels were sixty feet higher.’
‘Life on a Little- Known Planet’ is not by any means, a ‘doomist’ text. Instead, it profiles dedicatedindividuals, including more famous names like James Hansen and Christiana Figueres, one of the architects of the Paris Agreement, along with their experiences and expert views.
It also focuses on the efforts of individuals around the world, who have a strong sense of place and connection with their environments. The moral and legal question of whether the natural world should have rights, is evaluated by Kolbert and is found to exist throughout human history. ‘From a certain point of view, granting nature a say isn’t radical or new at all. For most of history, people saw themselves as dependent on their surroundings, and “rivers, trees and land” enjoyed the last word.’
Witnessing how both our local and global environments are changing, transforming and collapsing, reminds us of what we are in danger of losing. Writers like Kolbert have been sounding the climate alarm for over 20 years now and this is brought into sharp relief when we read her prescient articles dating back to 2005.
When languages die out; when ecosystems die out; when insect colonies die out; we are not just in danger of losing connections, species and interconnected worlds- which we are still touching the surface of- no, instead, we are in danger of losing ourselves and our relationship with our world. How we respond to the climate crisis as the defining challenge of our times, means that we have to move beyond words, treaties and pledges. We need a response which is rooted in gratitude.
The Earth is not a capitalist commodity.
It is our home.
-
Review of ‘Clearing the Air’ by Hannah Ritchie

‘Climate change- and the energy, materials and food systems that drive it- is a massive but solvable problem.’
It is not often that we find a climate book that is openly honest, factual and optimistic about where we are in ‘one of the biggest challenges that humanity faces’. Ritchie structures this book into a question- answer format which makes the writing accessible, while at the same time, objective and factual. Her 50 questions are divided into 10 sections covering issues ranging from food, carbon removal, heating, electric cars, renewable energy and more. Every section has clear action points which are necessary to bring about the change that is needed. Her objective, data based clarity approach makes her writing compelling and her arguments convincing. She argues that ‘We are not only capable of solving climate change but also poised to create a better future for ourselves in the process. To do that, we first need to understand that it’s possible.’
Ritchie repeats that aiming for ‘perfect solutionism’ is a pathway doomed to failure. She argues, like many others, that we should not ‘let perfect be the enemy of good. ‘Another problem is that we seem to be stuck in something I call ‘perfect solutionism’. People seem to expect solutions to climate change that have no downsides…Unfortunately, perfect climate solutions don’t exist.’ She challenges what this search for a ‘perfect solution’ actually means: ‘We also need to recognise where a search for perfection will leave us: in a much hotter world, still hooked on fossil fuels, with millions still dying from air pollution.’
‘It won’t be straightforward, but it will be worth it.’
Ritchie begins by tackling some of the oft-repeated questions that seek to delay climate action. Some of these will now be summarised here, owing to the quantity of times we have seen these arguments. ‘Isn’t it too late? Aren’t we headed for a 5 or 6℃ warmer world?’
Ritchie tackles this question head on and deals with it by highlighting how much progress we have made from the early scenarios that suggested these higher global temperatures. She urges honesty in these discussions, in order that the public do not lose trust in the messages from climate scientists. Her succinct answer is that, ‘Every tenth of a degree matters. There’s no point at which it’s too late to limit warming and reduce damage from climate change.’
Attention is then turned to the issues of polarisation, or apparent political divides and support for climate action. Ritchie argues that the data indicates that ‘more people care about climate change than you think’ and that views on this are skewed by the preferred media that is consumed. She points to survey findings which indicate that the public welcome climate policy action. ‘A survey of 59,000 people across 63 countries found that 86% thought that humans were causing climate change and that it was a serious threat to humanity.’ Ritchie urges that talking to real people about climate issues and actions, such as installing solar panels or choosing to drive an electric car, can really make a local difference. When communities work together and people talk to each other, solutions can be found which then drive further innovation. ‘Systemic change is driven by culture and public sentiment, and how we all think and talk about climate solutions shapes that culture.’
Why should my country act when others are not acting?
Ritchie also explores the ‘1%’ argument when she poses the question, ‘My country only emits 1% of the world’s emissions; surely it’s too small to make a difference?’ She highlights two factors here when this is used as an excuse not to act; one, that ‘the world’s ‘small emitters’ make up more than one-third of the world’s emissions, enough to significantly turn the dial’ and secondly the moral argument of understanding the importance of historical emissions and not just emissions now. ‘There is also a strong moral argument for why countries like the UK should care, even if their emissions today are not a big piece of the pie. The UK emits just 0.9% of emissions, but if we add up all its historical emissions, it accounts for 4.5%.’ Countries like the USA historically have emitted around 24%, but the spotlight is rarely focused on them, but rather the climate scapegoat of China.
Ritchie does focus on China and answers the question, ‘Aren’t our efforts pointless if China’s emissions keep growing?’
She acknowledges China’s position now, but also highlights its climate leadership position, when she argues that the data demonstrates that, ‘China is the world’s largest emitter but it’s rolling out renewables and electric vehicles at breakneck speed.
China is rolling out solar and wind at a staggering rate. In a single year, it builds enough solar and wind to power the entire UK. In 2023, it installed more solar power than the US had in its entire history.’
She makes the point that, ‘[r]elying on others is a geopolitical liability’, one which was demonstrated only too well in the UK, when the impact of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was felt in electricity prices. Her point is that solar and wind energy are free in every country, although some countries may make decisions on their energy needs depending on their geography and local conditions.
The future is there, waiting for us to take it. Or, rather, build it.
‘Clearing the Air’ continues in this analytical approach, outlining the facts around electric cars, the energy needs from the food industry, heating and cooling and nuclear power- the ‘big topics’ of climate discussions and policy. Throughout, Ritchie stresses what the data indicates, which heightens the optimistic possibility of what can be achieved.
‘Getting our emissions to zero- while providing a good life for billions of people- is one of the biggest challenges that humanity faces. It’s possible to do it, and there are very few technical constraints in our way, but that doesn’t mean it’ll be easy.’
Ritchie finally urges us to understand and appreciate that a mindset shift will help enormously. We accept that society has changed in the past- oftentimes very quickly, but oddly, we find it difficult to project this understanding into future events.
‘We accept that changes have happened in the past but are sceptical that tomorrow, next year or the next decade will be much different.’
It can be difficult, when living in a transitional moment, to recognise that change is happening and that attitudes are shifting. But looking back to how much progress we have made to reduce emissions and to negate high emission pathways, demonstrates that significant progress has been made.
The journey has already started.
Where it ends, is up to us.
-
Review of ‘Here Comes The Sun’ by Bill McKibben

Bill McKibben’s ‘Here Comes The Sun: A Last Chance for the Climate and a Fresh Chance for Civilization’ is a book which throughout highlights the transformative revolution of solar power and which revels in the ability for countries around the world to see past the short-term interests of the fossil fuel industry- desperately clinging on to its profits- to see and build a new world. ‘ And yet, right now, really for the first time, I can see a path forward. A path lit by the sun.’
McKibben admits that the task between now and 2030- a scant 5 years away- is difficult, but also reminds us that there are no longer technical or financial obstacles in the way. ‘…[W]e must cut greenhouse gas emissions in half before the decade is out. That target is on the bleeding edge of the technically possible, and this book is an effort to shove us toward that deadline.’
This is a book which hopes to re-ignite our connection with our sun. McKibben reminds us that, ‘We were all sun worshippers once.’, with the hope that metaphorically, we can be again. He argues passionately that we have an opportunity, a chance in this moment, which is not to be missed- which cannot be missed. ‘Our species, at what feels like a very dark moment, can take a giant leap into the light. Of the sun.’
The revolutionary idea of this book is that it is past time when we should break the habit of burning things. In more poetic terms, the Fires of Isengard have already spread…’and all that was once green and good this world will be gone.’ McKibben notes that changing and converting the economy is as important as changing our power supply. He also highlights that Big Oil will be a difficult hydra to slay. ‘Big Oil will do almost anything to stay in the burning business, because their reserves of oil and gas are currency worth tens of trillions of dollars.’ He hammers this point home effectively arguing that ‘… fossil fuel is going all out to make sure it doesn’t happen. In fact, the entire point of the industry by this point in its history is to make sure we keep burning something. It’s desperate, as we shall see, to slow down this switch by any means necessary.’
As a result of their rapacious extractive measures, McKibben describes the state of humans on the planet through the medical metaphor of being in the ER. ‘We’re very much in the ER- that’s what all those statistics about the jet stream and the bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef mean.’ He highlights the ecological systems around the world which are becoming critically threatened- ‘There are only so many really huge and vital systems on the planet, and now all of them seem to be in some sort of violent flux.’ Global records continue to be shattered by the world that has been forged and created by Big Oil, but McKibben outlines that even though they have tried hard to steer us off course- and despite their best efforts- solar power has undergone one of the most revolutionary successful transformations ever seen.
McKibben effectively reminds us of the many many solar technologies and projects taking off around the world- from Spain and Germany, to Ecuador, to China and to Australia and Pakistan. He points out that many of these revolutions tend not to gain the global attention which they deserve, because they are simply not in the West, calling us out accurately on our ideologies. ‘One reason we’ve missed some of that revolution is because so much of it is taking place in China, and we’re used to thinking that anything important must happen in the West.’
As a result of these extraordinary breakthroughs, McKibben is energised (terrible accidental word- pun) and encouraged to power through our dependency on the fossil fuel industry. ‘Before our decade is out, we have to break the back of the fossil fuel system. We have to land the sun on the earth.’ He ends Section 1 of the book with the alarming comment, ‘It would be unthinkable not to figure this out.’
As the book progresses, McKibben frankly ridicules the arguments trotted out by stooges for the fossil fuel industry- arguments solely designed to slow down the transition away from their product. He first ridicules the ‘Can we afford it?’ argument. ‘Of course we can afford it- the sheer fact that we’re merrily building out terrawatt after terrawatt of solar and wind power is more or less proof that it’s becoming affordable.’
He urges us to consider what the cost implications and ramifications would be if we continued on the fossil fuel path- citing that the insurance industry is already acting to protect its interests by not offering climate cover. ‘First, though, let’s reflect for a moment on what it would cost us to do nothing- that is, to continue lurching slowly through a haphazard transition off fossil fuels that happens too slowly to really arrest climate change.’ McKibben notes that the supply and demand pathway is one which works against capitalism- ‘because energy from the sun and wind is so plentiful and cheap, it can’t make as much profit for investors as oil and gas, which are scarce and dear.’
Throughout, he advises that ‘Emergencies demand urgency’ and that ‘[W]e need to do this now; we can’t afford another miss.’ He asks the very simple questions of what are the obstacles to this solar and wind transformation; who are the players acting against this revolution; and why are they behaving like this. It’s not a land coverage issue, it’s not a battery storage issue, it’s not a recycling of parts issue, it’s an enslavement to the fossil fuel industry issue and we have the power to break those bonds. Dependency on fossil fuel is dead. There’s no reason not to embrace the solar revolution.
McKibben asks us all to turn our faces to the sun once more in wonder and build a world ‘where we no longer set things on fire, but rely instead on the great fire out there in space. A world where we can turn to our star.’
He ends the book exhilarated about the possibilities lying ahead of us and exhorts us all to seize fire from the Gods once more.
‘We’ve been given one last chance…a chance to restart that civilization on saner ground, once we’ve extinguished the fires that now both power and threaten it.’
-
Review of ‘Human Nature: Nine Ways to Feel About Our Changing Planet’ by Kate Marvel

Dr Marvel’s ‘Human Nature: Nine Ways to Feel About Our Changing Planet’ is a wonderfully balanced book. It offers clear and detailed scientific information, which logically ties all the climate clues together, while at the same being unashamedly and unapologetically a personal account of the range of feelings that the climate crisis brings.
Marvel’s writing is peppered with a sharp dry wit and crackles with a passion for climate action. She draws on the wonderful power of storytelling and compares the hubris of modern humans in their fossil fuel lives, with the classical figures of mythology to suggest that the lessons still haven’t been learned. The chapters of the book are entitled with major emotions, such as ‘Wonder’/ ‘Anger’/ ‘Fear’/ ‘Pride’ which read like mythological characters progressing on a quest. Marvel makes the powerful point that the humanity of climate scientists does not cloud their judgment, but rather enhances it with a love of what can be saved. “I’m sad, desperately so, when I think about all the things we’ll lose. I’m afraid of the disasters I know are coming. I’m proud and surprised and hopeful and utterly in love with our beautiful world, I feel so much.”
As a scientist well versed in using climate models to better understand the impact of climate scenarios, Marvel focuses our attention on our living model- one that is our home. “Scientists have used climate models for decades to see possible futures. Now these long-predicted changes are coming to pass…It’s not a toy planet burning; it’s our beloved Earth.” She compares climate scientists to modern day Cassandra- like figures: “We see the tragedy that awaits; we try to warn of it.”
“Yes, it’s real. Yes, it’s us. Yes, it’s bad. Yes, we’re sure.”
Repeatedly in the book, Marvel hammers home the point that the scientific information of climate change has been known for many decades and that we appear to be more interested in ‘watching Rome burn’, than in taking the action which will make us the heroes of our own story. “The evidence is overwhelming, the science unequivocal: The world is warming because of greenhouse gases.” She rails at the ignorance- oftentimes deliberate ignorance- of those who fail to understand scientific uncertainty and attempt to use it to delay further climate action. “I am angry at the cynicism, the lies, and the greed. I feel burning rage when I hear the same tired talking points, the falsehoods repeated credulously by people who should (and do) know better. And I’m absolutely furious when I see the uncertainty inherent in the scientific method twisted into something evil.”
Marvel’s writing style lifts the words off the page. Her command of the cadence and rhythm of language leads to arguments being well balanced and emphasised.
“We are more sure that greenhouse gases are warming the planet than we are that smoking causes cancer…To stop the planet warming, we simply have to stop emitting them.”
Marvel argues powerfully that we are the agents of change and the future that we hand to our children must contain the acknowledgement and apology that humans have been poor guardians of the planet so far. “When we accept our own responsibility, we gain a powerful truth: How bad it gets is up to us. The future is still in human hands.”
The future matters for Marvel and she argues that we have an immense and unprecedented challenge ahead of us, as the planet changes. “The future remains uncertain. But I’m sending my children there, and they are never coming back.” The political choices that humans make now to act cooperatively, will create this future world- whether it is a world of conflict, limited resources and fear, or whether it will be a peaceful world remains in our control. “We can’t predict what future climate disruption will do to geopolitics, conflict, or the risk of war. But it would be unwise to think it will make the world a more peaceful place.” Marvel continues this argument, that our future world depends on our choices now by saying, “It’s true we don’t know what future climate change will look like. And this is mostly because we don’t know what choices humans will make.” Unprecedented human action to fight against this all too real climate monster is a choice that we need to make so that compound climate events do not continue to imperil us.
The world is not supposed to warm this quickly
Marvel negates the arguments from climate deniers and delayers that ‘climate change has always happened’ by adroitly pointing out that, “The planet’s temperature goes up and down irregularly, like many unsynchronised hearts beating together. What it does not do is rise consistently for more than a century.” This pace that we have caused and then witnessed rightfully causes concern. “The pace of recent climate change is stunningly, bewilderingly fast…The world is not supposed to warm this quickly, to change this suddenly. It never has, or at least not since humans (or anything like humans) have existed. It feels wrong. It is wrong.”
Marvel urges that in this climate emergency, we should be ‘throwing everything at the problem’, but cautions against the ‘silver bullets’ of geoengineering, which continue to hold unknown dangers. She acknowledges that, “Miracles are possible. But it’s a terrible strategy to bet the planet on one.”
We are urged not to be the ‘mad scientists’ of shock horror B movies, creating the golems of climate technological saviours, as we have no idea what climate chimeras we might unleash.
Marvel asks instead that we act out of love and compassion- compassion for our world and for ourselves, so that future generations may look on us with pride and gratitude for a job well done. She quotes the great Carl Sagan, “For small creatures such as we, the vastness is bearable only through love.” We are the writers of this new climate story- one which will be passed down generations, as the myths of the classical past have been gifted to us. Marvel describes this simple and powerful act- a journey that no one has gone on before, but a path which we all must chart.
“At bedtime we read stories about heroes and monsters, quests fulfilled against impossible odds. I tell him that to stop climate change, we will have to do something that no one has done before. But that, he knows, is what happens in any story worth telling.”
Leibniz’s words, popularised by Voltaire, bring Marvel’s ‘Human Nature’ to a close. ‘All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.’ We are reminded again by Marvel that the planet that we have damaged, and continue to damage, is our only home- our once and future home.
“We can only live here, together. Here in the world that we have changed so much. Here, shining out into cold space where there is no darkness, only light we cannot see.”
-
Review of ‘Positive Tipping Points: How to Fix the Climate Crisis’ by Tim Lenton

Tim Lenton’s ‘Positive Tipping Points’ does well to remind us all that we have agency to create meaningful change- that as cogs in the societal machine, we have the power to enhance and act transformatively, or to disrupt the current system. As he notes, “To get out of the incumbent, unsustainable state we need a fundamentally social tipping point, because it is people and their actions that either maintain the status quo or oppose it.”
Lenton makes the early point that, “We are in a climate and ecological crisis of our own making.” His focus is on finding the lever which will accelerate positive societal change. “We need to find and trigger positive tipping points that accelerate change in our societies and technology towards sustainability and social justice.”
‘Positive Tipping Points’ highlights well known examples of small actions which had large and significant consequences. He uses the example of the ‘Ever Given’ ship which blocked the Suez Canal to emphasise how the actions and decisions of just a few people ‘can sometimes escalate into global consequences.’ He makes the point that the world is far from the ordered, stable, place that we imagine it to be and that small changes can create large- scale self-propelling social change which could create the positive tipping points of actions and behaviours that are required. “We have been brought up to think that the world is an orderly, predictable place, where if we act in a proportionate manner we’ll get things back under control. But today’s world is not behaving like that.”
Lenton correctly clarifies what he means by a ‘tipping point’, arguing that overuse in the media has led to a confusion in the term. Additionally, he highlights the inherent danger in overstating the inevitability of such tipping states.
“There is also quite a bit of popular confusion over what is and is not a tipping point. This matters because if we overstate the existence of bad tipping points, knowing that they are self-propelling and hard to stop or reverse, we may feel disempowered and fatalistic.”
He gives clear and thorough examples of past ‘tipping points’ which moved societies through stable states to unstable alternatives. He explores nomadic lifestyles and how these were replaced with sedentary cultures; how foraging food made way for farming; how the Industrial Revolution in the UK changed the world; how cars replaced horses; and how previous complex societies collapsed owing to a range of external and internal factors impacting them simultaneously. Creating a ‘new world’ through innovative techniques can never be viewed as truly successful before the change has occurred. Lenton outlines that, “There are two faces to tipping points- they are sometimes creators and sometimes destroyers of worlds.” His argument is that once collapse gets underway, reinforcing and amplifying feedbacks can propel it at a much faster pace.
We are on thin ice
The immediacy of the positive tipping point for climate action is well documented in the text. “Now we are at around 1.5℃ of global warming and our list of potential climate tipping points has grown to sixteen.” Lenton explores how these tipping points might increase the abrupt risk of further points being broken irreversibly, owing to the complex interconnected Earth systems. “Our journey around the tipping elements has begun to reveal how tipping one thing affects the likelihood of tipping another. Hopefully this is intuitive. The Earth is a complex interconnected system where if something breaks it has repercussions elsewhere.”
Changing course
However, this is not a ‘doomist’ text- listing tipping point after tipping point. Instead, Lenton argues that disaster can be averted. He argues that by learning from moments of drastic change in the past, we should have learned to spot the warning signs. “To believe we can change fundamentally, and fast, we need to appreciate that we have done so in the past.” As climate tipping points are a “universal negative to avoid”, Lenton points to successful social movements of the past which brought the necessary change. The abolition of slavery and the Suffragette movement are both explored as movements which reached a ‘critical mass’ where change became inevitable and self-propelling. “Social movements, like the suffragettes or the climate protestors, are a particularly important way of tipping change. Many, if not all, the great social changes in the past had social movements behind them.” Attitudes towards change are driven by core groups, labelled by Lenton as “Innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, laggards”. Changing the social norm can be done in short timescales when intention and a better vision are part of the messaging. Society has changed its attitude towards smoking in a relatively short timeframe. Solar power, EV cars, vegetarianism and other changes in diet, have also broken through quickly as group dynamics ‘nudge’ others into taking action. The rise in technology in the past 20 years, and the acceptance and reliance on this technological innovation, also indicates how significantly society can change its attitude.
Government policy can play an impactful role when rapid change is required. This was ably demonstrated when the ozone layer was threatened with CFCs. Government and industry worked quickly together to reduce the harm and risk. “We urgently need such a tipping point of international coordination to tackle climate change”
Lenton pulls no punches in addressing this need for government policy, nor the bad actors at play, delaying climate action or promoting untested geoengineering proposals. “Policy is particularly important, because the transformation we need now is a rapid and intentional one.”
‘Revolution is impossible until it is inevitable.’
Lenton closes by quoting Trotsky’s famous line that ‘Revolution is impossible until it is impossible’. He urges that waiting until we have reached the point of an impending climate tipping point before acting would be risky and foolhardy. “Common sense says it would be a very risky strategy to wait until we are near certain about impending catastrophe before we act together.”
The stress on resources of climate migration could be well founded as humans move beyond their ‘climate- niche’ of stable survival. Hundreds of millions of people could be displaced in the coming decades and could become climate migrants, leading to an impact on welcoming countries and unwelcoming countries alike.
“The take home message from all this is that if we carry on knowingly towards 3℃ of global warming many people will have an existential risk to deal with, and in the worst case, we could be heading for a tipping point of societal collapse.”
Acting proactively rather than reactively may make all the difference to creating the necessary, critical mass social change. We can see the very real danger ahead- the alarm is sounding- our course needs to be altered.
“For all these reasons we need to act fast, well in advance of the point of impact, if we are to avoid it.”
Margaret Mead’s words may become prophetic once again,as we each consider what part we want to play in the positive tipping points to come.
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”