350.org

The climate crisis doesn’t always arrive as a sudden headline-grabbing disaster. Sometimes, it creeps up quietly: in shrinking rivers, failing wells, and communities being forced to “use less” of what they barely have. But make no mistake: what looks like scarcity is actually theft. Theft of a stable climate. Theft of reliable rainfall. Theft of the water systems that have sustained life for millennia.

A new report from the UN University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH) “Global Water Bankruptcy: Living Beyond Our Hydrological Means in the Post-Crisis Era”  warns that the world has entered an era of “global water bankruptcy.” It means we are using and damaging freshwater systems faster than nature can replenish them and in many places, the damage is irreversible.

This is what the climate crisis looks like when it hits the systems that sustain life. And it’s being driven by the same forces destroying our climate: fossil fuel extraction, industrial agriculture, and an economic system that treats nature as an infinite resource to exploit for profit.

For decades, policymakers and researchers have described global water challenges as a “water crisis” or “water scarcity.” But scholars have long warned that this crisis framing fails to capture the reality of long-term, structural decline. The word “crisis” sounds temporary. Bankruptcy means something more permanent and more concerning. It describes a system that’s been used up so badly that it can no longer simply bounce back.

The UNU report documents a scale of loss that makes this distinction unavoidable:

• Roughly 70% of the world’s major aquifers (underground layers of rock and soil that store water) are in long-term decline. 
• Rivers that once flowed to the sea now run dry for months each year. 
• Over half of the world’s large lakes have lost water since the early 1990s. 
• The world has lost an estimated 410 million hectares of natural wetlands over the past five decades, nearly the size of the entire European Union. These were ecosystems that once stored water, buffered droughts, and regulated local climates.

Perhaps most alarming, the world has lost more than 30% of its glacier mass since 1970. These “frozen water towers” once released meltwater during dry seasons, sustaining billions of people. Their disappearance is the liquidation of nature’s water savings account — with no mechanism for repayment.

Almost all the world’s glaciers are shrinking and fast. Credit: Copyright 2011 Michael C Smith

Bankruptcy essentially means you can’t restore what’s been permanently lost. Compacted (squeezed out) aquifers can never store water again. Extinct species don’t return. Glaciers that took millennia to form won’t regrow in our lifetimes.

Water bankruptcy is being locked in by climate breakdown, which in turn is driven overwhelmingly by the burning of fossil fuels i.e. coal, oil, and gas. Here’s how climate change is destroying our water systems:

• Rising temperatures intensify the water bankruptcy spiral: Every fraction of a degree of global warming increases evaporation from soils, rivers, and reservoirs. Hotter air sucks moisture from the land, turning what would have been manageable dry spells into devastating droughts. The report documents how drought is increasingly “anthropogenic”, meaning it’s not just about lack of rainfall, but about human-caused warming, land degradation, and over-extraction combining to create permanent water deficits.

An Indian man takes bath under the tap of a water tanker on a hot day in Ahmadabad, India. Heat wave conditions prevailed as temperature rises in many parts of India. (AP Photo/Ajit Solanki)

• Extreme rainfall creates the cruel paradox – floods without recharge: At the same time, climate change is intensifying rainfall. Storms arrive in violent bursts that flood cities and wash water away before it can infiltrate soils. More than half of global agricultural land is now moderately or severely degraded, meaning it cannot absorb and store water. Communities experience the cruel paradox of flooding and water shortage in the same year or sometimes in the same month.

• Melting glaciers: short-term surge, long-term catastrophe: Glacier melt illustrates the danger of mistaking short-term increases for security. As glaciers melt faster, rivers may briefly swell. But once glaciers shrink past critical thresholds, dry-season flows collapse permanently. For the 1.5 to 2 billion people who depend on glacier-fed river systems such as the Indus, Ganges-Brahmaputra, and Andean rivers, this means water supplies that sustained entire civilizations are disappearing.

• Industrial agriculture and extractive industries devour and pollute water: Around 70% of global freshwater withdrawals go to agriculture, much of it for water-intensive monocultures in regions that cannot sustain them. Meanwhile, mining, fossil fuel operations, and industrial pollution render vast volumes of remaining water unusable. Water may still exist on paper, but functionally it is gone, too contaminated for drinking, farming, or healthy ecosystems.

The scale of water bankruptcy is quite extensive and ever- growing: 

• Nearly 4 billion people experience severe water scarcity at least one month per year
• 2.2 billion people still lack safely managed drinking water
• 3.5 billion lack safely managed sanitation
• Over 1.8 billion people were living under drought conditions in 2022-2023
• Drought-related damages cost over $307 billion per year worldwide — more than the annual GDP of three-quarters of UN member states.

But statistics only tell part of the story. Water bankruptcy shows up in daily realities no one should have to face. Farmers watch wells fail after generations of reliability and go into debt drilling deeper into aquifers that will soon collapse. Girls walk farther for water instead of attending school. Informal settlement residents pay more for less reliable water from tanker trucks while wealthy neighbourhoods maintain green lawns. Entire communities are forced to move as water sources disappear. Rising food prices as irrigation fails and harvests decline, pushing the poorest households into deeper poverty and hunger. 

Young women and girls carry water in Nigeria. Credit: Flickr

And here’s the brutal irony: the communities facing water bankruptcy today are often those who’ve contributed least to the climate crisis but are protecting the water systems everyone depends on like Indigenous water guardians stewarding watersheds, small-scale farmers practicing sustainable agriculture and communities resisting extractive industries and defending rivers from pollution.

Their knowledge and their resistance are being ignored while their water is being stolen by the same systems driving climate chaos.

Every year governments delay ending coal, oil, and gas, ordinary people pay the price, not in abstract climate targets, but in higher food prices, worsening health, lost livelihoods, and growing insecurity. Water bankruptcy is another consequence that makes those costs impossible to ignore.

The solution is not complicated. End fossil fuel expansion. Phase out coal, oil, and gas. Invest in clean energy and resilient, public, community-led water systems. Set binding limits on industrial water extraction. Align climate policy with the reality that there is no livable future without functioning water systems.

What happens next depends on whether leaders continue protecting polluters or finally choose people, justice, and a livable planet.

Sources

• Global Water Bankruptcy Report – UNU-INWEH (2026)
• Fossil Fuels Did This: How the Industry Drives Drought – 350.org
• The Planetary Boundaries Framework – Stockholm Resilience Centre
• Water Conflict Chronology – Pacific Institute
• UN 2023 Water Conference Outcomes

The post Water bankruptcy: how fossil fuels are destroying the world’s water supply appeared first on 350.

This is a guest article written by Jean McLean, Director of Engagement at the Green Economy Coalition (GEC), a global movement for green and fair economies.

Results from the Green Economy Coalition’s latest Global Green Attitudes Survey reveal a loud and consistent demand: People around the world, want more radical and transformative government action – not just on the environment, but on the economic systems driving the climate and nature breakdown.

And they don’t just want small “green tweaks” either, they want economies reshaped to serve the people and the planet, not pollution and profit.

Despite today’s shaky politics, the survey, which polled over 10,000 people across 10 countries, is clear: support for climate action is strong across countries and income levels. What’s missing now isn’t public backing, its political courage.

Compared to the same survey in 2024, the political and economic context has become even more challenging. Since our first wave of research, the cost-of-living crisis has continued to bite. Trump’s re-election has emboldened right-wing populists and their pro–fossil fuel agenda, while “green hushing” has crept into government, corporate, and even civil society spaces, with sustainability quietly reframed, deprioritised, or hidden.

Yet even in this climate of economic anxiety and political retrenchment, our survey found that the public has not turned away from environmental action. Instead, people increasingly recognise that today’s economic model is failing them as well as the planet — driving inequality, locking in pollution, and leaving households exposed to rising costs and environmental risk.

And crucially, the survey shows just how deep that support runs: 84% of people globally would choose stronger environmental protection even at the cost of slowed economic growth.

The polling reveals a powerful and consistent message: people want governments to lead a systemic economic transformation, not rely on voluntary action or individual sacrifice.

• 88% of people globally say governments should be doing more to combat climate change.
• 82% support prioritising public investment in clean energy, even when this requires significant government spending.

These are not abstract environmental preferences. They reflect a growing understanding that public investment, regulation, and economic planning are essential to building resilient, fair economies: ones that deliver decent jobs, affordable energy, and healthy environments.

And yet, only 42% of people believe their government is taking more action now than last year to protect the environment. The result is a widening credibility gap between what people know is needed and what governments are prepared to do.

Crucially, the survey shows that people do not see the green transition as something households can, or should, carry alone. The biggest barrier to more sustainable choices is not apathy or unwillingness, but lack of government support, cited by 52% of respondents globally.

This is especially pronounced in lower-income countries, where citizens are often most exposed to environmental harm while having the least influence over global economic rules. In countries such as Nigeria, Turkey, and South Africa, over 60% identify government inaction as the main obstacle.

When asked what would help, people pointed to:

• Better laws and stronger regulation
• Increased funding for environmental programmes
• Support for green jobs and environmentally responsible businesses

In other words, people are asking governments to reclaim their role in shaping the economy, rather than outsourcing responsibility to individuals and markets that reward pollution and short-term profit.

Trust in political leadership remains worryingly low. Just 39% of people globally trust political leaders to make the right decisions for a sustainable future. But this collapse in trust has not dampened ambition.

Instead, people are calling for bold reforms that challenge business-as-usual: stricter regulation of pollution, stronger accountability for corporations, and public investment to steer economies towards long-term wellbeing, even if this means economic trade-offs in the short term.

This reflects a growing public understanding that an economy designed around endless growth, extraction, and inequality is neither sustainable nor desirable. People are ready for a new direction — one that measures success by health, resilience, and shared prosperity, not just GDP.

Taken together, the findings leave no room for doubt. Governments already have a clear public mandate to act on climate, on nature, and on the economy itself.

Reclaiming our economies means: 

• • putting people and the planet back at the centre of decision-making.
  • using public policy to reward care, restoration, and long-term value  and to hold polluters to account. 
  • moving beyond rhetoric, towards real investment, regulation, and reform.

People are already doing their part. They are ready for change. The question is whether political leaders are willing to listen, and to finally use the tools they have to build economies that work for everyone.

What do we want? Economies that serve people and the planet. When do we want them? Now.

The post 84% of us want nature protected, even if it slows economic growth appeared first on 350.

The world can feel like it’s moving in two directions at once. One day, leaders talk about climate action and the next, we see fresh drilling pushes and new fossil deals, from the Arctic to Asia and South America. But the bigger truth is this: the ground is shifting beneath the polluter industry, because the world is leaving fossil fuels behind and already rapidly moving onto clean, renewable energy. 

That’s why January 26, the International Day of Clean Energy, is fitting a moment to celebrate progress, and to double down on a just energy transition that works for everyone. Here are eight reasons we should feel hopeful today:

Clean energy isn’t “emerging” anymore, it’s already outcompeting fossil fuels. The International Energy Agency projects around $2.2 trillion in clean energy investment in 2025, compared to roughly $1.1 trillion going into oil, gas, and coal. That’s the transition happening in real time. And it’s not slowing down: clean investment has outpaced fossil investment for years, and the gap keeps widening as technology improves and costs fall.

Despite weak consensus outcomes at the annual UN talks, COP30, in Brazil this past November, the diplomatic track is shifting. During the Summit, more than 80 countries from the Global South and Global North jointly called for a roadmap to phase out coal, oil, and gas. That matters because it shows unanimous agreement isn’t a necessary condition for political momentum for climate action. Countries are increasingly treating fossil fuel phaseout as a shared destination, and building the political alignment to get there. For instance, A growing “coalition of the willing” is building real phaseout architecture. Hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands’, the world’s first conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels this year in April aims to design “legal, economic, and social pathways” for a just transition beyond coal, oil, and gas. The goal isn’t a theoretical one-size-fits-all exit, it’s a practical, achievable roadmap tied to jobs, protection, and real opportunity.

Investor behavior too, is shifting in a clear direction. Not because “green” is fashionable, but because fossil-heavy assets look increasingly risky in a changing world. In a Morgan Stanley survey of 950+ major investors, most said they plan to increase sustainable investing over the next two years. The logic is straightforward: future-ready assets look safer and more profitable over time, while fossil dependence creates volatility, stranded assets, and reputational risk. 

Big investors are no longer willing to bankroll fossil companies that can’t prove they have a credible plan for the transition. That shift is already visible: in December 2025, Swedish pension fund AP7 cut off investments in companies it judged incompatible with climate goals. This is how the phaseout accelerates in practice, not just through speeches, but through capital discipline. “Business as usual” is becoming a financial liability, not a safe bet.

The legal “reasonableness standard” is moving upward, closer to what climate science actually requires. On July 23, 2025, the International Court of Justice issued a landmark advisory opinion strengthening what states owe on climate action, including on fossil fuel production and subsidies. It’s not binding, but it’s directional: the legal centre just shifted. That means more pressure, more scrutiny, and more risk for governments and corporations that keep expanding fossil fuels.

Clean energy is not only about cutting carbon. It’s about making daily life safer and more affordable: lower bills, cleaner air, and resilience in the face of energy and price shocks. When communities can generate and control power locally, through distributed solar, storage, and public renewables, they’re less exposed to global fuel price spikes and corporate profiteering. The transition becomes real when people can feel it: stability, dignity, and control over essential services like energy.

Campaigners and climate activists aren’t the only ones saying “stop drilling.” Even the International Energy Agency, one of the world’s most mainstream energy institutions, has made the case in its Net Zero pathway: a future where no new oil and gas fields should be approved for development beyond those already committed. That’s not radical politics. It’s basic risk management in a world that can’t afford more fossil lock-in. The safest investment now is building the clean energy system faster.

A fast energy transition is now the cheapest option on the table. A University of Oxford study found shifting to renewables by 2050 could save the global economy at least $12 trillion in energy system costs, even before counting avoided climate disasters. That’s because renewables are technologies, not commodities: costs fall as we scale. Over the last decade, solar fell ~90%, wind ~70%, and battery storage ~85% — while the sun and wind stay free. 

As we celebrate real progress toward a 100% renewable future, we can’t forget this: climate disaster is already here, and stopping fossil fuel expansion is the bare minimum for survival.

Clean energy is rising. But so are floods, fires, heatwaves, bill shocks, and fossil disasters. So the path forward has to do two things at once: end the harm, and build the alternative.

Governments and regulators must stop approving new oil, gas, and coal projects — and end fossil subsidies. When floods, fires, heatwaves, or bill shocks hit, alongside the media, we must connect the dots fast: this damage is driven by political choices that protect polluters. Courts must enforce climate and liability laws, hold governments and companies accountable for harm, and unlock compensation through litigation. Insurers must price climate risk honestly, withdraw cover from new fossil projects, and stop shielding polluters from the real costs of their damage.

Fossil fuel companies shouldn’t profit while communities pay the price. Governments must enforce real accountability through liability, levies, and an end to fossil impunity — so recovery and resilience are funded by those who caused the damage.

Governments, regulators, utilities, and cities must deliver affordable, resilient clean power people can feel. That means investing in distributed renewables, storage, and grids — plus tools like lifeline tariffs and free basic electricity where possible. 

Investors, banks, and insurers must stop financing expansion and shift capital toward clean energy solutions that are credible, community-backed, and built to last.

We make the shift away from fossil fuels real by organizing locally and forcing decision-makers to act. When a crisis hits, we show up, naming who’s responsible and demanding protection and justice. 

This is how we win: make fossil expansion harder, and make real alternatives easier.

The post 8 reasons to celebrate on this International Day of Clean Energy appeared first on 350.

A new report from Oxfam Resisting the Rule of the Rich: Protecting Freedom from Billionaire Power shows billionaire wealth reached $18.3 trillion in 2025, the highest level in human history. That’s more than the GDP of China, the world’s second largest economy. In fact, since 2020, billionaire wealth has increased by 81%.

All of this happens while one in four people don’t regularly have enough to eat, and nearly half the world lives in poverty. Families face rising costs for basics like food, rent, and electricity. Public services are stretched thin. Climate disasters hit harder and more often.

But what is worrying is that this small group holding extreme wealth, isn’t just buying luxury. They are buying control. Political outcomes. And of course, more fossil fuels. Billionaire power is building a dystopian, unliveable world with many government allies helping lock it in. Here is how: 

Oxfam’s report is clear: extreme wealth doesn’t sit quietly in bank accounts. It gets turned into political control. Alongside getting richer, billionaires are tightening their grip on the institutions meant to serve the public.

The research finds that billionaires are now 4,000 times more likely to hold political office than ordinary people. That imbalance shapes real decisions, deciding what gets funded, what gets blocked, and whose voices are ignored.

And when billionaire political interests dominate, the consequences are brutal and predictable:

• climate action slows, fossil fuel expansion is protected, regulation is weakened, and public money gets funnelled into corporate profit instead of community needs.
• People demanding justice face crackdowns, shrinking civic space, and rising repression.

Oxfam points to the US Trump administration as a warning sign: a pro-billionaire government agenda that slashes taxes for the super-rich, undermines global cooperation to tax corporations, rolls back action on monopoly power, and boosts billionaire portfolios. But this isn’t confined to one country. Oligarchy is going global, and it’s undermining societies everywhere.

And it doesn’t stop at economic policy. Oxfam warns that civil liberties and political rights are being rolled back globally. 2024 marked the nineteenth successive year of decline, with a quarter of countries curtailing freedom of expression. When people protest, governments increasingly respond with violence.

In 2025, billionaire wealth surged by $2.5 trillion which is what is held by the bottom half of humanity (4.1 billion people). Oxfam estimates this money would be enough to eradicate extreme poverty 26 times over.

At the same time, people are told there’s “no money” for clean energy, resilient infrastructure, or strong public services. Communities are pushed to accept austerity and “tough choices,” while extreme wealth concentrates at record speed.

Oxfam links these choices to real harm: governments slash aid budgets, directly hitting people living in poverty and potentially contributing to more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030.

The result is a world where life feels more unaffordable and more unstable, and where climate action gets treated like an optional extra, instead of a survival plan.

Billionaire lifestyles are high-emitting, and that matters. But the deeper problem runs through the economic model itself: billionaire wealth is built on extraction and climate plunder.

Many billionaires profit directly from industries tied to pollution and destruction: fossil fuels, mining, deforestation, and corporate land grabs. Their money shapes the political decisions that keep these industries protected, subsidized, and expanding.

And the fallout hits everyone else: higher bills, weaker public systems, polluted air and water, and escalating climate risks. Communities in the Global South and frontline regions pay first and worst while the people most responsible stay insulated from the damage.

Billionaire power doesn’t stop at politics. It reaches into the media and the information systems we rely on every day.

The Oxfam report shows how billionaire power doesn’t stop at politics — it spreads into the media and information systems we rely on every day. Billionaires now own more than half of the world’s largest media companies, and they also control all the main social media platforms, giving a tiny group of ultra-rich people enormous influence over what information gets amplified, what gets buried, and how public debate is shaped.

Oxfam points to examples like:

• Jeff Bezos’ purchase of The Washington Post, Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter/X, and Patrick Soon-Shiong’s ownership of the Los Angeles Times.
• In France, the report highlights how far-right billionaire Vincent Bolloré took control of CNews and reshaped it into a French version of Fox News.
• And in the UK, Oxfam notes that three-quarters of newspaper circulation is controlled by just four super-rich families.

This concentration of media power matters because it doesn’t just influence what people read, it shapes what people believe is possible, normal, or worth fighting for. Oxfam warns that when billionaires dominate media and social platforms, minority voices and dissenting perspectives get pushed out, while scapegoating and disinformation spread more easily. The report points to structural exclusion too: only 27% of top editors globally are women, and just 23% belong to racialized groups, reinforcing whose stories get centered, and whose get ignored.

This also fuels polarization, making it harder to build the public pressure needed for real climate action, and easier for fossil fuel interests to keep operating in plain sight. And while we’re distracted, the fossil fuel machine keeps running.

Oxfam also shows how governments enable this captured information ecosystem. Governments allow billionaire control of platforms to deepen, and in some cases even use these platforms to track, punish, and silence critics. Oxfam points to Kenya, where authorities use X to track, punish, and even abduct and torture government critics. And after Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter/X, one study found hate speech increased by around 50%, showing how billionaire control over platforms can rapidly reshape what’s normal, visible, and tolerated online.

When billionaires control the narrative, they don’t just defend their wealth, they protect the system that keeps them on top.

The climate crisis demands more than good targets and speeches. It demands a shift in who holds power. Governments need to stop pandering to the ultra-rich and start delivering for people and the planet. That means:

• taxing extreme wealth to reduce its political dominance
• investing in renewable energy, clean transport, social housing, and strong public services
• protecting civic space and the right to organize and protest
• building real firewalls between wealth and politics

People are already pushing for this shift. Across countries, communities are organizing, demanding accountability, and refusing to accept a world run by billionaires and fossil fuel corporations.

Billionaire power is real. But people power is bigger. And when we move together, the future changes.

The post Billionaire Wealth Just Hit $18.3 Trillion. Why that’s bad news for the rest of us. appeared first on 350.

This is a guest article written by Jean McLean, Director of Engagement at the Green Economy Coalition (GEC), a global movement for green and fair economies.

With the cost of living spiralling out of control, affordability is now the key factor determining whether climate action gains public support or faces opposition.

Zohran Mamdani’s recent successful mayoral campaign in New York was based on concrete affordability pledges to make life more affordable to New Yorkers: rent freezes, fare free buses, city owned grocery stores, raising the minimum wage, baby baskets for newborns and no-cost childcare. The UK and Australian governments have taken note of this success and have prioritised addressing the cost of living and affordability as key to electoral success. Climate leaders need to take note. 

This success can be replicated! We know that the money exists to prioritise affordability for the general public, what we need is political will. Leaders must urgently switch to cleaner energy alternatives as they are proven to be cheaper than fossil fuels, bringing down energy costs for everyone. Taxing big polluters, the ultra-rich and using those funds towards public investment is a popular and necessary action.

For years, climate misinformation has tried to convince people that a green transition is a luxury not an inevitability. Despite the millions spent on disinformation, public opinion tells a very different story. Across countries and political contexts, people increasingly understand that clean energy is not the cause of rising costs — it is one of the most powerful solutions to them.

Our latest Global Green Attitudes polling shows a remarkably strong global public consensus: 

• 82%  per cent of respondents believe investment in clean energy should be a top government priority, even if it requires significant public spending. 
• An even larger share — 88%— agree that stronger laws are needed to support renewable energy like solar and wind.

Notably, this support has held steady despite inflation and increasing economic anxiety.  

As cost-of-living pressures deepen, people are judging energy choices on a simple test — will this lower my bills? As routine household bills become the main source of financial stress, renewable energy offers both an economic solution and a political opportunity for governments prepared to act.

Crucially, public perceptions are already shifting in clean energy’s favour. Many people already see clean energy as cost‑competitive or cheaper than fossil fuels. In the United States, a majority now believe clean energy costs the same or less than oil and gas. Globally, renewable electricity is routinely 30–50 per cent cheaper than new fossil fuel generation. 

In this context, this year’s polling data reveals an interesting dynamic between public support for environmental action and the perception of government performance: 

• People want lower bills and place responsibility for this squarely on governments. 
• The public wants transformative government action, such as public investment, fair rules, and accountability for polluters while also holding low trust in political leaders to deliver this. 
• Many are feeling  deeply frustrated  at political inaction as inflation and economic anxiety increase.

What is missing from climate action is not public backing then, but policy creativity. Clean energy can deliver affordability, good jobs, and energy security — if leaders choose to act. 

From free or discounted solar power programs to large‑scale investment in grids, storage, and clean industries, the solutions exist. Renewables already save countries trillions in avoided fuel imports and shield households from price shocks.

The choice facing leaders is stark. Continue delaying in service of fossil fuels  or unlock a future where clean energy is understood for what it truly is: clean, common‑sense, and cheap. The public is ready. The question is whether governments are willing to listen.

The post Affordability is the defining climate issue of 2026 appeared first on 350.

A climate deadline has arrived absurdly early this year. New research from Oxfam shows that by 10 January 2026, the world’s richest 1% had already used up their entire annual carbon budget. The budget is the amount of pollution they could generate over the whole year so that global heating stays below 1.5°C, the limit to avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis. 

The richest 0.1% blew past their limit even earlier, on 3 January. Oxfam calls this moment Pollutocrat Day. It puts a timestamp on a reality that’s impossible to ignore: a small, wealthy minority is driving the climate crisis, while everyone else pays the price.

To stay within the 1.5°C. limit, each person’s annual carbon allowance works out to about 2.1 tonnes of CO₂.

For the richest 1%, that fair share is exhausted almost immediately. Oxfam finds they emit 75.1 tonnes per person per year, or 0.206 tonnes per day, meaning it takes just 10.2 days for someone in the richest 1% to burn through an entire year’s carbon budget. In fact, this 75 tonnes of CO₂ per person each year is over 35 times the level compatible with 1.5°C.

The inequality becomes even more glaring at the very top. More data from Oxfam shows that a person in the richest 0.1% produces more carbon pollution in a single day than the poorest 50% emit in an entire year. If everyone polluted at the rate of the richest 0.1%, the global carbon budget would be used up in less than three weeks.

The consequences of this unchecked pollution are deadly. Emissions from this group in a single year are expected to cause 1.3 million heat-related deaths by the end of the century. Over time, this excess pollution is projected to cause $44 trillion in economic damage in low- and lower-middle-income countries.

To stay within 1.5°C, the richest 1% would need to cut their emissions by 97% by 2030. Meanwhile, those who have contributed least to the crisis — including communities in climate-vulnerable countries, Indigenous Peoples, and women and girls — are already facing the harshest impacts, from deadly heat to food insecurity, floods, and displacement.

Beyond their own lifestyle emissions from private jets and super-yachts, the super-rich are also bankrolling climate breakdown through their investments. Oxfam finds that the average billionaire’s portfolio is tied to companies producing 1.9 million tonnes of CO₂ every year, locking the world into fossil fuel expansion.

That economic power is reinforced by political influence. The wealthiest individuals and corporations are able to shape rules in their favour, ensuring polluting industries remain protected. At the most recent UN climate talks, COP30, in Brazil, for example, fossil fuel lobbyists outnumbered every national delegation except the host country, with around 1,600 lobbyists in attendance. This level of access makes it far easier to delay action and weaken climate commitments.

Extreme wealth does not just mean higher emissions, it sustains a system built around fossil fuels and profit. This moment calls for more than outrage. It raises a deeper question: whose interests are governments choosing to protect? 

As the year unfolds and climate impacts like heatwaves and wildfires continue to intensify around the world, governments must be willing to challenge systems that reward pollution and individuals that hoard extreme wealth. 

Instead of doubling down on and expanding fossil fuels, and competing for control over oil, gas, and other critical resources, there is another, clearly better option. Oxfam points the way forward for our governments to:

• Make the richest polluters pay through higher taxes on extreme wealth and income
• Impose excess-profit taxes on fossil fuel corporations
• Ban or heavily tax carbon-intensive luxury items such as private jets and super-yachts
• Shift investment toward renewable energy and people-centred solutions

Pollutocrat Day is a warning. The climate crisis will not be solved by asking everyone to do the same while a small elite continues to pollute without limits. Real action means ending fossil fuel expansion, confronting extreme wealth, and putting people and the planet before profit.

The post Pollutocrat Day appeared first on 350.

This is a guest blog from Alex Kelly, Director of the Economic Media Centre and a filmmaker, based in Dja Dja Wurrung Country where she lives with her family in Castlemaine.

Last week my family as well as many neighbours and friends evacuated early in response to the catastrophic fire warning for Friday 9th January. I live in bushland in Djaara Country in Castlemaine, Central Victoria, Australia where we are impacted by the Ravenswood fire which, at the time of writing, has burned over 3,800 hectares of Djaara Country and is still burning.

Australia is a continent where fire is part of the ecology; many of our plants only germinate with the heat or smoke from fire and First Nations people have long tended to Country with fire. Settlers, especially those who grew up in regional areas like me, have memories of summer bushfire season – sometimes scary and destructive, yes, but not so many fires of such force all at once. I grew up on a farm and my dad was part of the local Country Fire Authority (CFA) so I am familiar with the emergency calls outs and smoky haze through summers. 

What we are seeing now is not normal. Accelerated by climate change, fires have increased in ferocity over my lifetime and are – terrifyinging – now capable of making their own weather systems, known as pyrocumulonimbus clouds.

On Friday over 200 fires were burning across the state of Victoria. More than 500 structures were destroyed and over 404,000 hectares have burned so far. The Ravenswood fire came close to my home before travelling east with a wind change. My neighbours in Harcourt were not so lucky, with over 47 homes and 85 businesses lost, countless animals and plants killed and immeasurable cultural heritage damaged. 

Without the volunteer response of the CFA it would be impossible to respond to the scale of disaster. First responders are increasingly locals and often volunteers, many of my friends and community were on the frontlines this weekend. 

CFA at Ravenswood Fire, picture by Cam Walker, Friends of the Earth Australia.

The CFA is a remarkable network of 1,137 brigades with around 51,610 volunteers. Local Castlemaine CFA volunteer and campaigns manager for Friends of the Earth Australia, Cam Walker explains that climate change has turbo charged fire in Australia and now these fires are becoming more “intense, unpredictable and un-fightable.”

Partly driven by the challenges of the increased ferocity and longer fire seasons Australia’s fire danger rating system, the national coordination warning system, was updated in 2022.  Catastrophic fire danger is the highest rating and the warning does not mince words, “For your survival, leave bushfire risk areas. If a fire starts and takes hold, lives are likely to be lost.” 

Prior to a fire starting households are encouraged to have a fire plan in place, with state governments providing online tools like this one to guide their preparation. The plan includes thinking through what you will take including documents and medication, charging electronic devices in the likely event of power outages, what your trigger to leave is, which route you will take to leave and how you will stay updated on information. 

Deciding on a plan, which may include leaving before there are any signs of a fire, can often feel like an overreaction and people seek reassurance from each other about how to make the right decision. The culture around staying to defend against fires has dramatically shifted in the wake of increasingly out of control fires. January is the peak summer holiday season in Australia and many people are on the road and away from their homes. Leaving early isn’t just about reducing risk for yourself, it’s also about limiting congestion and not having more people in the danger zone for emergency services to account for. For us it was also about reducing uncertainty for our kids and not making a decision in a panic in front of them if conditions worsened (as they did). 

West End Resilience meeting February 2020. Photo: Alex Kelly

After the last devastating fire season in 2019, which resulted in the Black Saturday bushfires where tragically 173 lives were lost, my partner, a friend and I decided to bring together our neighbours. Before another emergency occurred we wanted to have met and connected in person. Sixty five people turned up to the first meeting and West End Resilience (WER) was born. That was February 2020 and the network became a firm piece of community infrastructure during the height of the Covid19 pandemic with ever deepening relationships, quarterly meetings and a well organised and active whatsapp.  

Those of us who initiated WER have now stepped back as we moved to another part of town, and the network continues to grow, testament to the power of community. In the face of these fires alongside many community orgs, businesses and local radio stations, WER has sprung into action and is a key hub for people sharing (and correcting) information, advice and support, relaying emergency services updates and a providing a sense of purpose and connection amidst the enormous strain of such an emergency. 

We know we need to be ready to face increasingly frequent climate fuelled disasters. We need the fossil fuel companies to pay for the resources we need, to respond to the mess they have created, as I have written here in an article, the Harcourt fires show need for disaster levy For decades, fossil fuel companies have dug up coal and gas knowing full well that the carbon emissions that they profit from were heating up the planet. They long suppressed the science on climate change, and are still doing everything they can to prevent the move away from fossil fuels, which is what real action on climate change involves. These fires are not natural – their ferocity is man-made.

But it’s hard to prepare for these unprecedented times, for world that feels like a state of permanent crisis, as one upheaval rolls in to the next (pandemic, genocide, climate). The only way we can process and prepare is together – we have to stay connected, support each other and organise. 

Screenshot of fireplan from https://fireplanner.vic.gov.au/

The post Wildfires: Building Community Resilience  appeared first on 350.