Tag: climate

  • Guest post: France’s June heatwave caused more than 2,700 heat-related deaths

    Spread the love

    Article by Dr. Christopher Callahan and Prof. Andrew Dessler republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license

    First responders tending to person with heatstroke in Paris on 21 June, 2026. Credit: Icon Sport / Alamy Stock Photo.

    In June 2026, a record-breaking heatwave swept across Europe, with France among the first and hardest hit countries. 

    In a new analysis, we estimate that the extreme conditions caused more than 2,700 heat-related deaths in France.

    We also show how France’s extreme temperatures in June exceeded projections from climate models.

    Our findings illustrate the human toll of extreme weather as the world warms.

    We also highlight the challenges in projecting the magnitude of future heatwaves and their impacts on people.

    Outpacing projections

    For most of this century, Europe has seen summer heat extremes that outpace projections from climate models

    Several different factors likely explain this trend, including reductions in planet-cooling aerosols as nations have cleaned up their air pollution, as well as changes in atmospheric circulation patterns, which models struggle to represent.   

    In June 2026, daily high temperatures averaged across France reached 36.9C, shattering the previous June record set in 2022 by 2.4C.

    [For more on the impacts and coverage of Europe’s June heatwave, see Carbon Brief’s explainer.]

    The rise in observed temperatures in France has outpaced projections made by climate models, with June maximum temperatures more in line with what was expected for the 2070s.

    This is illustrated in the figure below, which shows how France’s average maximum daily high temperature for June recorded in 2026 (black line) compares to climate model projections (blue and orange lines).

    Comparison of observed (ERA5, black) and modelled (blue and orange) temperatures across France from 2000 to 2080. Plot shows the maximum daily high temperature recorded in June for each year, after averaging temperatures across France. The model ensembles are bias-corrected CMIP6 model ensembles from the NEX-GDDP (blue) and CIL-GDPCIR (orange) projects. The dashed blue and orange lines are the ensemble averages. Credit: Prof Andrew Dessler.
    Comparison of observed (ERA5, black) and modelled (blue and orange) temperatures across France from 2000 to 2080. Plot shows the maximum daily high temperature recorded in June for each year, after averaging temperatures across France. The model ensembles are bias-corrected CMIP6 model ensembles from the NEX-GDDP (blue) and CIL-GDPCIR (orange) projects. The dashed blue and orange lines are the ensemble averages. Credit: Prof Andrew Dessler.

    Counting the death toll of climate change

    The downstream impacts of these extreme temperatures are lethal. 

    Scientists are able to estimate the death toll of high temperatures in many locations, depending on the availability of mortality and climate data. 

    There are several ways to do this. 

    One option is to examine death certificates to see which deaths have been directly recorded by physicians as related to heat. However, there is strong evidence that this method significantly undercounts heat-related deaths, as most death certificates do not consider environmental factors such as heat when diagnosing the cause of death.

    Alternatively, it is possible to calculate the rate of total (“all-cause”) mortality in a given time period relative to previous time periods – for example, by comparing the total number of deaths in June 2026 compared to the average of previous Junes. This “excess deaths” figure can be used as an estimate of the deaths from a heat wave. 

    Using this approach, Public Health France attributed around 2,000 deaths in France to the extreme heat in the week of 22-28 June.

    Finally, scientists can use long-term data on overall mortality and correlate changes in mortality with changes in temperature to understand the statistical relationship between the two. 

    Research published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2025 that used this third approach found that mortality rates in France increase rapidly in cold or hot conditions as daily maximum temperatures depart further from approximately 20C.

    This pattern of a U-shaped response of mortality to temperature – shown in the figure below – is very consistent across time periods and regions around the world. 

    Chart showing the relationship between extreme heat and mortality in France
    Relationship between daily high temperature and all-cause mortality rates in France, estimated using data over 2004-19. Credit: Dr Christopher Callahan, based on data and methods in Callahan et al. (2025)

    To calculate the death toll of the June 2026 heatwave in France, we compared observed temperatures over 12-29 June to their baseline average over 1980-2025. 

    The difference between these two temperatures helps us understand how many more people died than they would have in the absence of such extreme conditions.

    Over 12-29 June, we found that France has experienced around 2,700 heat-related deaths above the average baseline. Day-to-day heat-related mortality rates rose from less than 100 to almost 300 on the hottest days of 24 and 25 June.

    This is shown in the graph below, which illustrates the cumulative total heat-related deaths seen in France over the two-and-a-half week period. The inset shows how heat-related deaths fluctuated on a day-to-day basis during this time.

    Chart showing the number of deaths from heat in France during the June 2026 heatwave
    Estimated heat-related mortality over 12-29 June, based on a U-shaped response of mortality to temperature. The main plot shows cumulative total deaths and the inset shows daily deaths. Credit: Dr Christopher Callahan, based on data and methods in Callahan et al. (2025)

    Recent analysis by World Weather Attribution has already shown that human-caused climate change increased the frequency and intensity of the June heat wave across Europe.

    Meanwhile, previous research has shown there is substantial evidence that heat-related mortality in Europe has already been elevated by greenhouse gas emissions. 

    As a result, we can be confident that at least some of the more than 2,700 deaths already seen in France are directly due to the burning of fossil fuels.

    Calculating climate risk

    In April, the UN-led body responsible for coordinating the work of climate modelling centres – the Coupled Modelling Intercomparison Project (CMIP) – unveiled a set of seven new emissions scenarios.

    These are designed to replace the previous scenarios that have been used by scientists to understand how the climate might change in the future. They will feed into the upcoming seventh assessment report (AR7) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    The range of future emissions in the new CMIP scenarios is smaller, with scenarios of very high or very low emissions no longer on the table.

    The retirement of the very-high emissions scenario – known as “RCP8.5” – led to certain commentators in the media and in politics, including US president Donald Trump, arguing that the risks of climate change had been “overstated”.

    [For more on false and misleading claims around the new emissions scenarios, see Carbon Brief’s factcheck.]

    Our analysis of June’s heat-related deaths in France suggests that, even if the most severe emissions pathways are no longer needed, climate impacts are taking a heavy toll on society. 

    Moreover, the temperatures seen in France show that climate models continue to underpredict the magnitude of heatwaves for a particular level of global warming.

    This is because greenhouse gas emissions are only a first step in estimating the impacts of climate change.

    The second step is converting emissions to changes in the climate at both the global and local levels – or hazards. This includes heatwaves, flash floods and droughts.  

    The third step is to determine how changes in the hazards will affect local populations. This can be determined by calculating people’s exposure and vulnerability to hazards.

    Substantial uncertainty persists at every stage of this sequence. 

    For example, scientists do not know exactly how the global climate will react to ever-rising greenhouse gas emissions – nor the extent to which global temperature increases will drive local climate hazards. We also do not know how climate change at a local level impacts human health outcomes.

    Managing the future of heat risk

    Almost all heat-related deaths are preventable

    Adaptation options, such as air conditioning, heat action plans and social support for isolated people, will be crucial as the climate moves away from the typical conditions that people are used to.

    Our previous research showed that France made a lot of progress reducing heat-related mortality after the deadly 2003 summer heatwave by taking many of these actions. 

    Adaptation can reduce deaths, but it cannot eliminate the risk created by continued warming. 

    Without a move away from fossil fuels, future heatwaves will keep testing the limits of public health systems and more people will die.

    Article by Dr. Christopher Callahan and Prof. Andrew Dessler republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license

    Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
    Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
    Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him. He says that Reform UK has received millions and millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.
    Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him. He says that Reform UK has received millions and millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.
    Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.
    Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.

  • The Elite Death Project: Why Capitalism Is Choosing Collapse

    Spread the love

    Parts of an article by Roger Hallam at https://rogerhallam.com/the-elite-death-project/. It stands despite references to Psychoanalysis (shit theories by and derived from Sigmund Freud). See the original is best …

    Francisco Goya — Saturn Devouring His Son (1819–1823). Copyright has expired.
    Francisco Goya — Saturn Devouring His Son (1819–1823)

    Every day the political class announces another initiative, pledge, roadmap or “ambitious target.” And every day, the material reality moves closer to total collapse. At some point, we must confront a simple truth: the elites are not failing accidentally — they are participating in a death project. They are driving a system that destroys itself, destroys life, and destroys the conditions for civilisation, even when warned by their own institutions and scientists.

    This is not just incompetence. It is not even simple greed. What we are witnessing is something deeper and more pathological — a mixture of elite degeneration, the death wish, and a civilisation unable to confront its own end. This piece gathers my recent reflections on why elites refuse to act, why capitalism is running toward its own destruction, and why the outcome is now structurally revolutionary.


    Do we want a place in this miracle?

    We live in a universe – do we want a place in this infinite miracle?
    Do we want to stand for life?
    Do we want to live rather than die?

    Because at this point — to repeat a million times — we have become revolutionaries. Not in the neoliberal performative identity-bollocks way.
    But actually, literally revolutionary.

    Even Colombian President, Petro Gustavo, put it plainly:

    “I know that decarbonisation requires a transformation on a global scale, a revolution. But it must be undertaken if humanity is to live on for millennia, or even millions of years, in the universe.”

    Reality is no longer ideological.
    It is existential.

    Gustavo’s Full Statement after COP [dizzy: Recommended]


    The death wish: why elites act against their own survival

    The biggest misunderstanding in the world is that people act out of material self-interest.

    No.

    Many people want to die — and want the world to die with them — because they hate themselves and they hate life so much. This is the death wish. It is supported by a century of psychoanalysis, social psychology, and history: under existential threat, societies often choose self-destruction over transformation.

    This insight is reinforced by decades of experimental work in Terror Management Theory (Greenberg, Pyszczynski, Solomon), which shows that under conditions of heightened mortality awareness people become more authoritarian, more aggressive and more willing to support destructive systems, even against their own material interests.

    The repeated historical pattern of elites knowingly destroying the very systems they depend on — from late Rome to pre-revolutionary Europe to today’s fossil economy — fits this psychological picture far better than any rational-actor model. What we are seeing is not rational self-interest, but the death wish operating at a civilisational scale.

    Why else do capitalists knowingly act in a way that will destroy capitalism?

    Gunther Thallinger of Allianz SE, one of the world’s largest insurance companies, spells it out: “The financial system as we know it ceases to exist and capitalism ceases to be viable at 3°C.” A few years ago, I sat down with a director of E3G — a leading climate think tank. Privately, he admitted that the “death project” will destroy the British state. Publicly, he would never say it.

    Yet elites continue to accelerate the trajectory toward 3°C.
    This is not rational self-interest.
    It is civilisation-wide self-destruction.

    Climate crisis on track to destroy capitalism, warns top insurer

    Action urgently needed to save the conditions under which markets – and civilisation itself – can operate, says senior Allianz figure …


    Here’s an example of such elite madness: Heathrow’s third runway. The news last week is that it will finally be built by 2035.

    Just as the world hits 2°C.
    Just as the global economy collapses.
    Just as flying becomes impossible.

    But don’t worry — there will be a “full public consultation by July next year.”

    This is the death wish as public policy.

    Heathrow airport’s £33bn third runway plan chosen by government

    Scheme includes plan to move the M25 and could mean up to 760 more planes in the skies around London every day ..

    See the original article at https://rogerhallam.com/the-elite-death-project/

  • Spread the love
    Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
    Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
    Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him and his Deputy Richard Tice. He says that Reform UK has received £Millions and £Millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.
    Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him and his Deputy Richard Tice. He says that Reform UK has received £Millions and £Millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.
    Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
    Orcas comment on killer apes destroying the planet by continuing to burn fossil fuels.
  • Streeting backs ‘progressive capitalism,’ drilling and the bond market

    Spread the love

    https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/streeting-backs-progressive-capitalism-drilling-and-bond-market

     Wes Streeting speaking about so-called ‘progressive capitalism’ at No1 Tower Place West, in central London, June 16, 2026

    LABOUR leadership pretender Wes Streeting came out fighting today for carbon fuel, the bond market and “progressive capitalism.”

    The former health secretary reaffirmed that he will contest any leadership election triggered by Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham’s expected victory in the Makerfield by-election this week.

    Mr Streeting, the Blairite candidate in any election, backed plans to drill for oil and gas in the Rosebank and Jackdaw fields in the North Sea.

    He said he aimed to “protect the workers in oil and gas, who’ve seen words like ‘just transition’ translate into jobs for someone else, somewhere else. We should be working with the unions on this – not least on making sure that we’re building our clean power future here in Britain, not simply importing it from China.”

    He denied that this would forfeit Britain’s “moral leadership” on climate change.

    “The best example we can set is to show the world that net zero is compatible with a pro-growth agenda. The worst example would be losing support for the net zero agenda, handing the country to Nigel Farage, and allowing Reform to destroy the renewables industry,” Mr Streeting said.

    Green Party deputy leader Rachel Millward said his “call to open up new drilling in the North Sea is environmentally reckless and economically illiterate.

    “Rosebank alone contains enough fossil fuel to produce over 200 million tonnes of CO2 if burned – more than the combined annual emissions of 28 low-income countries.”

    Uplift director Tess Khan said: “Politicians need to learn the lesson of the last five years – the UK’s dependence on fossil fuels is making a handful of oil and gas companies obscenely rich and the rest of us poorer, while driving inflation, harming the economy and altering our climate.

    “Streeting would do better to listen to the millions who are sick of the energy giants loading costs onto the rest of us, and pay less attention to this profiteering industry and its proxies, like Tony Blair and Donald Trump.”

    https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/streeting-backs-progressive-capitalism-drilling-and-bond-market

    Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London.
    Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London. (Photo: Handout/Chris J. Ratcliffe for Greenpeace via Getty Images)
    Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.
    Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.
    Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him and his Deputy Richard Tice. He says that Reform UK has received £Millions and £Millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.
    Nigel Farage urges you to ignore facts and reality and be a climate science denier like him and his Deputy Richard Tice. He says that Reform UK has received £Millions and £Millions from the fossil fuel industry to promote climate denial and destroy the planet.

  • We are all going to die, you f*cking idiots

    Spread the love

    https://rogerhallam.com/our-grandchildren-will-starve

    Good News: Our Grandchildren Will Starve, Not Our Children

    The most extreme climate scenarios are off, according to scientists in the conservative IPCC. However, the Godfather of Climate Science says otherwise.

    Good news from The Times: our grandchildren will starve to death rather than our children. The new worst case is just 3.5C. Phew.

    Adam Vaughan, Most Apocalyptic Climate Scenario Thrown Out by Experts, The Times, 11 May 2026.

    Firstly, let’s remember what a 3.5C world actually means.

    1. Mass food system collapse, particularly in the Global South.
    2. Vast areas of Africa, South and West Asia will become uninhabitable within the lifetimes of people already born. Translation: billions will die from impending poverty and disaster.

    That is what this headline is supposedly reassuring us of.

    Secondly, this report is not telling the truth about the science because it is based on outdated models. Even Trump jumped on it to advance his end-times fascist agenda.

    To understand why both Trump and the Times are deeply wrong about where we are heading, let’s turn to the godfather of climate science, James Hansen, and look at one of his latest papers on climate sensitivity.

    In May 2025, Hansen published a paper on Earth’s albedo (the reflectivity of solar radiation bounced back into space). Over the past 25 years of precise satellite data, Earth’s albedo has declined by 0.5%, leading to an increase of 1.7 watts per square metre of absorbed solar energy. Hansen describes this as a BFD (Big Fucking Deal), and he is right. That single number, in forcing terms, is equivalent to an additional 138 parts per million of CO2.

    Clouds reflect sunlight back into space. Fewer clouds, or thinner clouds, means more solar energy reaches the surface and stays there. As the planet warms, evidence now shows that cloud cover is decreasing and, crucially, that this decrease is itself a response to warming. In other words, warming reduces clouds, which in turn cause more warming, which further reduces clouds. This is what climate scientists mean by a feedback loop, and this one is a fucking big one.

    And a big cloud feedback means the planet is far more sensitive to CO2 than the IPCC’s standard figures suggest. The IPCC’s best estimate for climate sensitivity — the amount of warming you get from a doubling of atmospheric CO2 — is 3°C. Hansen’s three independent lines of evidence (of which the albedo data is one), all point to 4.5°C. The difference between 3°C and 4.5°C is the difference between devastation and extinction.

    The corporate media has barely engaged with this work, and when it has, it has often cast doubt on its truth. At the end of the climate sensitivity paper, Hansen notes:

    “Criticisms of the Acceleration paper in the media did not address the physics in our three assessments of climate sensitivity. Instead, criticisms were largely ad hoc opinions, even ad hominem attacks. How can science reporting have descended to this level? Climate science is now so complex, with many sub-disciplines, that the media must rely on opinions of climate experts. Although there are thousands of capable scientists in these disciplines, the media have come to depend on a handful of scientists, a clique of climate scientists who are willing, or even eager, to be the voice of the climate science community. But are they representative of the total community, of capable scientists who focus on climate science?”


    The Problem of Fragmented Science

    A key problem of scientific understanding is that it requires slicing reality into manageable chunks. Take “the doubling of CO2.” The slice aids understanding but paradoxically kills it too. Attending to the part deflects attention from the whole. Space. Time. The full arc of what’s coming.

    So when Hansen and colleagues write that climate sensitivity for doubled CO2 is 4.5°C, and that sensitivity as low as 3°C is excluded with greater than 99 percent confidence — they stop there. Slice completed. No return to the whole. No wonder the media shrugs. So what.

    Here’s the whole.

    1. Doubling CO2 means going from 280ppm to 560ppm. We’re at 420ppm now. At current trajectory — roughly 40ppm additional per decade — we hit 560ppm around 2055. That’s 4.5°C by roughly 2060. Not 2100. 2060. Hansen also shows Earth’s albedo has already darkened by 0.5%, an extra 1.7 W/m² of absorbed solar energy. The system is already running hotter than the models admit.
    2. Time doesn’t stop at 2060. At those temperatures, natural feedbacks (clouds, ice, permafrost) accelerate. There is no equilibrium, only continuation.
    3. Above 5°C, effective human extinction is locked in. We are on that path.
    4. Facts alone don’t move humans. Emotion does. We are human, after all. So the headline that would actually communicate the whole truth? “We are all going to die, you fucking idiots.”

    In my recent paper with the 4 Billion Dead team, we examine what an All Systems Approach could look like to counter this fragmented thinking.

    See the full original article at https://rogerhallam.com/our-grandchildren-will-starve