If governments choose to deny or abandon mitigation of climate change, things will almost certainly get worse—and quicker too. The planet isn’t waiting around while politicians argue. It responds to the laws of physics, not opinion polls or election cycles.
Let’s cut to it. If mitigation, meaning cutting greenhouse gas emissions, is abandoned, then emissions will just keep rising. That means more CO₂ and methane piling into the atmosphere, like a slow but relentless pressure cooker. The result? More heat gets trapped near the Earth’s surface. That’s already happening, of course, but without any meaningful action to curb it, the process would go into overdrive.
The climate system has built-in feedback loops, and some of them act like accelerators rather than brakes. For instance, when Arctic ice melts due to warming, it exposes dark ocean underneath. That dark water absorbs more sunlight than ice ever did, so the region warms faster. That’s already causing chaos for northern ecosystems and local weather patterns.
But that’s just one example.
Thawing permafrost is another, releasing methane that’s many times more potent than CO₂ in terms of warming. If mitigation is binned off entirely, these feedbacks may intensify and become harder to stop, even if we do change our minds later.
Extreme weather would also ramp up in both frequency and strength.
We’d see more intense heatwaves, heavier rainfall, longer droughts, stronger storms. Insurance companies are already jittery, pulling out of areas they see as too risky. If climate change speeds up, the knock-on effects on food prices, property, and water availability will follow. It’s not just about nature and polar bears anymore, though they’re suffering enough, it’s about the day-to-day lives of ordinary people.
Now, governments aren’t the only players here. Individuals, businesses, local councils, even online weather geeks like you and me, we can all help, but let’s be honest: the biggest levers are in the hands of national and international decision-makers. If they pack it in and go back to business-as-usual, emissions from major industries: aviation, fossil fuels, intensive agriculture, will stay high or even increase.
That could push global average temperatures 3 to 4 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. That’s not a world most of us would want to live in. Or could, comfortably.
Another issue is the time lag. Even if all emissions stopped today, the Earth would still keep warming for a while due to the heat already locked in. That’s called “committed warming”. But if governments give up now, we don’t just stay on the current path, we hit the accelerator. It’s like knowing your car’s brakes are dodgy and deciding to drive faster, hoping the road sorts itself out.
And it’s not just about more heat. Abandoning mitigation also means giving up on trying to reduce sea level rise, which threatens coastal towns and cities all over the world. Imagine the damage in places like Bangladesh, Florida, the Netherlands, or even parts of the UK coast if sea defences are overwhelmed. These aren’t far-off threats. Some are already happening in slow motion.
Now, will it get faster?
Almost certainly, yes. Climate change isn’t a linear thing. It’s not just “a little bit warmer every year.” It speeds up when we cross certain tipping points. Like a frozen lake cracking suddenly when the last layer weakens. When those thresholds are crossed, parts of the Earth system change so dramatically that it becomes very difficult, if not impossible to go back.
One grim possibility is the disruption of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), which includes the Gulf Stream. If that slows or collapses, as some scientists now think it could this century, we’d see massive shifts in weather across Europe, including the UK. It could mean colder winters here, ironically, even as the global average warms. Elsewhere, it could mean devastating droughts or floods depending on location.
So if governments choose to walk away from climate mitigation (drill baby,drill), it’s not just about temperature graphs creeping upward. It’s about tipping the balance into more chaotic territory. It’s about locking in more suffering, more expense, and fewer choices in the future.
What’s the alternative? Serious, consistent mitigation now. Not slogans, not vague targets for 2050. Real cuts. And yes, it might cost in the short term, but the cost of doing nothing will be far higher in lives, livelihoods, and even national security.
Do you think enough people understand just how fast things could unravel if we keep dragging our feet?
Durham County Council have just labelled Net Zero as “Virtue Signalling Tripe”
That’s a proper head-scratcher, isn’t it?
When a local authority like Durham County Council (specifically Darren Grimes) brushes off Net Zero as “virtue signalling tripe,” it’s hard not to raise an eyebrow, or both. Especially when we’re in a region already seeing some of the effects of a shifting climate. Just ask anyone who’s dealt with flash flooding, heat stress in vulnerable folks, or freakishly wet summers that ruin harvests and batter the local economy. It’s not abstract anymore. It’s here. And yet somehow, climate action is still being waved away like it’s just a trendy badge of honour for city types.
Now, I get that some folk are tired of being told how to live, what to drive, and whether or not they can have a wood burner. There’s definitely been a bit of heavy-handedness from the top at times, and yes, some big corporates do slap Net Zero slogans on their websites while flying execs around the world and doing little else. But that doesn’t mean the whole idea’s a load of nonsense. And it doesn’t excuse a local council, paid by the public no less, for calling it “virtue signalling tripe.”
There’s a difference between being sceptical and being dismissive.
Healthy scepticism means asking, “How do we do this in a way that’s fair, sensible and effective for local people?” That’s fine. Needed, even. But writing it off as virtue signalling? That’s just lazy. Worse than that, it’s insulting to those in the region actually trying to make a difference. There are local farmers shifting to more sustainable practices. Volunteers planting trees. People insulating older homes and supporting renewable schemes. Are they all just posturing too?
I suspect there’s more politics than policy behind the comment. A bit of culture war stuff dressed up as economic realism. It’s easier to mock a big idea than to actually wrestle with it. But it’s a risky game. Climate change doesn’t care who made a snarky comment at a council meeting. The data rolls on regardless.
And let’s be honest: if a council can’t even pretend to take Net Zero seriously, what hope is there for long-term planning? Flood defence, energy efficiency in public buildings, green jobs, better public transport, none of that gets sorted with this attitude. Meanwhile, younger generations are looking on thinking, “Right, so they’ve just given up then?”
Here’s the other thing. Real virtue signalling is often what happens when people bang on about “protecting the taxpayer” while ignoring the costs of inaction. The bill for floods, collapsed infrastructure, crop failures, heatwave-related deaths? That’s going to make a few insulation grants look like pocket change. You can’t budget your way out of climate damage once it’s here. You can only try to soften the blow before it hits.
Also, Durham is not some outlier bubble immune to the wider pressures. Our weather’s changing. Ask anyone who’s lived here for 40 or 50 years, they’ll tell you the winters are warmer, snow is rarer, and sudden downpours more fierce. It’s not just the headlines from the other side of the world. It’s home now.
And from my own perspective as a weather geek running durhamukweather.com, I’m seeing the trend lines shift first-hand. The raw data doesn’t care what the council thinks. It just ticks upward.
Anyway, whether we call it “Net Zero” or not, the truth is this: slashing emissions and preparing for a changed climate is just common sense. Good planning. Responsible leadership. And if that’s too much to ask, well… maybe we need more grown-ups in the room.
What would you say to someone on the council who genuinely believes Net Zero is just “virtue signalling tripe”?
Please Support Durham Weather