The Coming Storm

The era of runaway climate change is upon us, which means things are going to get crazy, fast

We’re cooked. Done. It’s over. The world is now boiling. We’re frogs in a pot.

Ahem. Excuse me. I’m not sure what came over me.

Actually, yes I am. Climate hysteria is spreading, and it’s only going to get worse.

Last week it was announced that the average temperature rise across the globe in 2024 exceeded pre-industrial levels by more than 1.5 degrees celsius. That was the threshold set as part of the Paris Climate Accords, a threshold the world’s nations committed themselves to avoid crossing, by means of stringent emission-reduction goals, by 2030.

But now we’ve crossed it—six years early.

So what does this mean?

I’m not going to speculate about what the world’s climate is going to look like next week, next year or next decade. Even the most advanced models can’t predict—and haven’t predicted—changes to the world’s climate.

And whether humans actually have anything to do with climate change remains an open question, as far as I’m concerned. I think the climate is changing, but then again it always has done and always will do.

No, what I’m more interested in is the human response. What are we going to do now we know, or think we know, we’re heading for runaway climate change?

I’ll give you the short answer: nothing good. It’s early days—we’re just a week in to runaway climate change—but give it a few weeks or even months, certainly once Trump is back in office, and there’s going to be a whole new level of anxiety and calls for decisive action that will make everything that’s come before, all the insanity, seem tame by comparison.

Here are two things I think we need to watch out for. I’m highlighting these two things rather than, say, carbon taxes or further emission reductions, because I think we don’t pay enough attention to them—and we really should.

The first is geoengineering. Trials for geoengineering—that’s deliberate human interventions to alter the climate—are already taking place on a global scale, involving a whole range of public and private organisations, from governments and universities to starry-eyed tech startups.

In February last year, The Wall Street Journal published a detailed report on three ongoing geoengineering projects taking place in Australia, Israel and the US.

In Australia, researchers from Southern Cross University are releasing a brine mixture into the sky to create larger, brighter clouds that will reflect more sunlight and reduce local temperatures. The project is funded by the Australian government, universities, and conservation organizations.

In Israel, Stardust Solutions is testing a delivery system to disperse reflective particles at high altitudes, again to reduce solar radiation. The startup is currently testing the system indoors but is moving to outdoor tests.

And in the US, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute plans to add 6,000 gallons of sodium hydroxide to the ocean off Martha's Vineyard. They want to produce a “carbon sink” that sucks carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and into the sea, storing it there. The U.S. government and private sources fund the project.

This year we also had scientists telling us that geoengineering of glaciers in the Arctic and Antarctic must take place right now if we are to avoid a dangerous rise in sea levels as a result of global warming.

Even more worryingly, private companies and individuals are experimenting with geoengineering, without government or scientific support or approval. In January 2023, a California startup called Make Sunsets admitted to launching test ballons in Mexico containing sulfur dioxide, a chemical that is of great interest to geoengineers because of its ability to reflect solar radiation in the atmosphere. Sulfur dioxide is responsible for the cooling effect of massive volcanic eruptions, like the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in Indonesia, in the 1990s.

None of this technology has ever been used outside tightly controlled conditions. This is absolutely going to change now runaway climate change is official. The potential for disaster—for irreparable damage to be done to natural ecosystems, on an enormous scale—is now very real.

It was that obvious potential for disaster that held scientists back from proceeding with geoengineering projects, even though they’ve been mooted for decades as a response to climate change. But now governments and scientists—and private groups like Make Sunsets—are dealing with a different set of calculations, calculations in which no risk will appear as great as the threat posed by climate change.

So what the hell? What do we have to lose?

If the threat of man-made ecological catastrophe on a hitherto unseen scale isn’t enough to cheer you up on a Thursday, there’s also the threat of hundreds of millions or even billions of people migrating from the Third World to the West to escape climate change—with the help of Western governments and NGOs, of course.

This is so-called “climate migration,” and I think it’s probably the gravest threat to the continuing existence of the West as we know it.

If you’ve seen the film The Day After Tomorrow, you’ll know the basic premise: massive climate disaster, millions or billions have to leave their homes and settle elsewhere.

Unlike in the film, where it’s ungrateful, decadent, polluting Westerners who are forced to leave their homes in the Global North and thrown upon the mercy of the Global South—mercy they don’t deserve, obviously—in the actual climate migration scenario we’re facing, it will be the other way round entirely. The Third World, especially the equatorial belt, where the majority of the world’s population lies, is predicted to be worst hit by catastrophic climate change, whereas we, in the West, will be relatively shielded. That means the Third World is coming here. All of it.

What makes the climate migration scenario so dangerous is that we’re being told we must encourage the migration to take place as soon as possible. We must take an active role in it to minimise the suffering caused.

These people are going to be moving anyway, so why shouldn’t we help them do so in an orderly manner ahead of time? And remember: it’s our fault they’re going to have to move.

The scientific and moral argument for climate migration is laid out in a book called Nomad Century, which I reviewed back in 2022. It’s hard to read the book and not think that it’s all just totally bonkers.

Bonkers or not, that doesn’t mean it won’t happen.

Precedents for climate migration have already been established in international law. The status of “climate refugee” is now a real legal fiction. Left-wing governments around the world, including the leftist coalition in France, now want to recognise the rights of climate refugees to settle in their countries.

And even if billions don’t come, hundreds of millions or even tens of millions will be enough to change the West irretrievably. This will be migration like never before.

The advocates of climate migration, like the author of Nomad Century, the aptly named Gaia Vince, or Davos fixture Al Gore, welcome this. They say climate migration is the perfect opportunity for us to transform the way we live, work, eat, govern ourselves—everything. Climate migration is the perfect opportunity for… a Great Reset. They actually say that. Al Gore said it at Davos in 2024, and Gaia Vince says it in her book.

Donald Trump has already promised leadership in the fightback against the climate-change agenda. It’s expected that he’ll withdraw the US from the Paris Climate Accords for the second time, probably on day one of his administration. Good man. But he needs to go further than this. Now that we’ve officially entered the era of runaway climate change, he’ll need to protect not just America, but also the West, against the threats of large-scale geoengineering and mass migration of “climate refugees.” The first step is recognising these threats now exist. If their existence isn’t clear already, it will be soon enough—mark my words.