The new way to successful mitigation of global warming

December 20, 2025

With all the greatest respect and acknowledgment to millions of courageous, forward-looking, foresighted, considerate and conscious leaders and decision makers within countless wonderful organisations like the “United Nations” (UN), “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” (IPCC), “World Meteorological Organization” (WMO), the “International Energy Agency” (IEA) and many, many more taking on the responsibility on mitigating “greenhouse gas” (GHG) emissions, global warming, and the loss of biodiversity for a bright, flourishing, and prosperous future of humanity – the verdict after 30 years of “United Nations Climate Change Conferences” (CC COPs) and 10 years after the “Paris Agreement” is clear: Politics failed to keep global warming within “human control”.

There are already enough GHG emissions in the atmosphere of our mother plant Earth for at least ca. 2°C global average temperature rise and the two main drivers (fossil fuels & meat “production”) for GHG emissions are projected to further increase, GHG sinks (oceans, soil, and plants) – so far buffering the temperature rise – tend to be full now and the potential of our planet Earth to capture GHG emissions is decreasing, since deforestation is still going on and will accelerate with the increase of wild fires. One of several self-reinforcing cycles taking over after reaching the “1.5°C climate tipping point” in 2029, resulting in an exponential temperature rise after that.

The political decision to actually fix this – a global binding market for GHG emissions – is far away from becoming a reality.

Millions of progressive corporations are doing a fantastic job in reducing GHG emissions, billions of people are investing their private wealth to transform their day to day lifestyle into a sustainable one and take on several sacrifices for that.

I did my first speech in school about the so called “Greenhouse Effect” in 1988. Since then I am basically aware of what is going on.

80 years after the “2^nd World War” we are heading towards global collapse

In the year 2025, 80 years after the ending of the “2^nd World War“, we do have very high certainty – humanity failed in transferring away from burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas) and the “production” of meat – responsible for ca. 90% of the global GHG emissions – to stay within a stable climate system (underneath 1.5°C average global warming in comparison to the average global temperature between 1850 till 1900).

My very clear verdict evolved over many years, collecting uncountable data and impressions, developed in a certain “heuristic certainty” (paradox). Latest most crucial events are the 2025 “Group of 20 Summit” (G20)¹, 9th edition of the “Future Investment Initiative” (FII9), the 2025 “Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change” (COP30), participating at e.g. “Preventing 2°C by 2040“, “Stockholm Series #8: Repainting the Climate Justice Canvas: How the World’s Highest Courts are Leading the Way“, reading several reports from “UN”², “WMO”³, “IEA”⁴, “WHO”⁵, “OECD”⁶, “World Bank”⁷, “Stockholm Environment Institute”⁸, “Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research” (PIK)⁹, “International IDEA”¹⁰, “BP p.l.c.”¹¹ et al.

With all that data processed, there is for me a very clear understanding: We as humanity are enormously powerful in one way and enormously weak in the other way.

It was clear from the beginning of “international corporations” and “globalised economy” – there will be a significant increase and concentration of wealth (economies of scope, economies of scale, network effect, etc.). Large parts of this is based on the exploitation of a new technology, the World Wide Web (WWW), and fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas), which leads to “externalities” like global warming, climate change, the loss of biodiversity, plastic pollution, micro- & nano-plastics within our food and bodies, et al.

The concentration of wealth is accelerating, global GHG emissions are still raising, the need for energy increasing, the “golden age” for fossil fuels up to come (cf. following graph about the outlook of the “Global Primary Energy Consumption by Energy Source”¹²).

*(c) Future Investment Initiative Institute (FII-Institute)*: “Can we solve the energy trilemma? Impact Report“, p. 10, based on data from “pb Energy Outlook 2024 edition“

Hope speech and nationalism politics show the helplessness

Politicians talking about hope are admitting, they have become powerless. I have never heard a “Chief Executive Officer” (CEO) talking about hope, unless she/he would be fired the next day.

Politics traced back to nationalism suppresses the reality of a globally interconnected society and economy, which is basically fantastic. The concept of a “holy island” based on reactionary conceptualisations and rooted in a mostly linear reduced understanding of “love” and “religion”, promotes collapse. I am very sure, not unconsciously but due to clearly and openly opportunistic thinking and acting based on main-stream linear management theory (cf. e.g. the work from Michael E. Porter) or linear imperialistic power fantasies, rooted in some kind of “inferiority issue”.

Science almost completely decoupled from political decision making and pushed to quantified, thus dangerously reductive research (“positivism”), trash culture (e.g. powered by commercialised “social media” and open pornography) taking over and reducing our most plural societies into a “flat world”, demolishing the 4^th column of prudent democratic decision processes powered by high quality, independent critical & investigative journalism, profound education (“Bildung”), and exceptional art & culture performances.

The global population still fast increasing and billions of the global population wanting to improve their lifestyle significantly towards “western standards”, pushing demand for energy and further resources to new record highs. New technologies (e.g. “Artificial Intelligence”) further significantly increases the demand for energy.

Politics heavily dependent on short term thinking and acting due to commercialised media with business models based on sensation rather than nuanced reporting (would be too expensive and inefficient). The unhealthy concept of “homo oeconomicus” and “commercialisation” – humans reduced to short term profit and wealth generation – transferred to a concept, “good” to run global society and politics.

Competition destroying the ability for collaboration and solidarity. “Mimetic forces” (greed, vanity, envy, jealousy, group-think) socialised to something “positive”, supporting consumption and thus profit & wealth maximisation.

Industrial production processes, mobility and daily livelihoods heavily dependent on fossil fuels for billions and meat consumption developed towards a most renowned “status symbol”.

Mitigating technologies like “Carbon Capture” (CCS) or “Solar Radiation Management/Modification” (SRM) are basically there, but they are not ready to do the job in the needed scale.

There will be no “overshoot”, there will be collapse

Many years scientist told us, the “1.5°C” matter. Now, one of the most renowned and from my side most respected scientist, Johan Rockström, speaks e.g. at the “UN Climate Summit 2025 in New York“¹³, while the 2025 “UN General Assembly” (UNGA80) gathering, about what happens next. He explains, there will be an “overshoot” now and with greater and faster efforts to reduce GHG emission (not specifically explained), we can be back to 1.5°C (and a stable climate system, as we have it now) till the end of the century. Being aware of his own concept of so called “climate tipping points”, this is most absurd.

Another leading scientist, Katharine Hayhoe, speaks also e.g. at the same event about “soft politics” and the need for collaborative action and hope as a solution concept. She outlines some dogmatic speech, without any clear data (e.g. of potential deaths), ending talking about love and that something matters. Why and what exactly matters, it stays rather vague. Most absurd, since the corresponding leaders and decision makers, politicians, who have the power to act and decide, are all in the same room. No collaborative action, no hope, etc. needed. Strong leadership and decisive action from the 195 leaders in the room needed, that’s it.

With all the greatest respect and acknowledgment, that is just not good enough.¹⁴ We know from “Change Management”, from good leadership theory or from good pedagogy: If you want people to act, then you first of all have to most clearly explain why (cf. e.g. Hansen, H.: “Narrative Change”, Columbia Business School Publishing, 2020). Some “threshold” is not good enough for that, a “physical limit” or “tipping point” nether, numbers about global average temperature increase way too abstract.

And you better stay “radical” honest. I fully understand, scientist do have loads of pressure these days to deliver – mostly quantified – research results. There is high uncertainty within scientific carriers and most competition for any science grant.

It is fully understandable, within such a hostile environment, developed from sick liberal economic theories based on willingly reduced resources to amplify competition, all kind of alternative perspectives, critic, plurality is demolished – all the known “externalities” from systems based on the concept of “perfect competition“.

Not even the best scientists, e.g. like Johan Rockström, who at least admitted, we failed to stay within the “1.5°C”, seems to be able to go one step further: This would mean to acknowledge, that after reaching 2°C average temperature increase, not even the best computer models, powered by the greatest super computers and supported by the best “Artificial Intelligence” (AI) can predict, what happens next. We very simply just don’t know. That’s the “radical” honest answer to the current situation concerning global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity and that is the worst case that can happen.

Every CEO would be fired the next day, if there are some “risks” within its corporation, she/he is not aware, has not most specifically addressed, precisely quantified, and a convincing mitigation action plan ready to go.

And furthermore, science is not about gathering the most quantity of most precise data, it is about asking the relevant questions and gathering the relevant data most precisely. These relevant questions start with “Why” (not with “What”).

There are two important points, I want scientists to work out in detail now:

There is no (physical) chance to stay within a stable global climate system any more, because the global temperature rise is ca. 30 years delayed to the GHG emissions.
We can not predict the further temperature acceleration and the specific impact on the climate & biodiversity system of our mother planet Earth – worst case out of a “Strategic Management” perspective – we are blind and lost control.

It is 100% political failure

There is a lot of room for improvement especially towards much better trans- & interdisciplinary research within science. Nevertheless, science basically delivered. It delivered within a highly complex system a very precise estimation of the level of global average temperature rise, which keeps the climate system of our mother planet Earth within a stable and “controlled” situation for potentially millions of years – the “1.5°C (physical) limit”¹⁵.

Politics is aware of that at least for 20 years, since 2005, with the “Kyoto Protocol” entering into force.

We understand from system dynamics research and cognitive sciences, human cognition performance poorly with the management of complex and dynamic systems – one of the most dynamic and complex systems we humans partly understand is the “climate system” of our mother planet Earth.

Commercialised systems based on competition furthermore perform very poorly within inert systems, since they are designed for short term optimisation rather than long term foresighted management. We see a current peak with such kind of poor cognitive performance within e.g. the United States of America (USA) presidential administration, democratically legitimised by the majority of USA voters.

The current situation with mitigating GHG emissions, global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity being out of human control simply shows the by far greatest political failure in human history.

The actual effects will only become noticeable in ca. 30 years. What we experience currently in terms of water shortage, droughts, wildfires, flooding, storms, cold- & heat waves, land slides, etc. is basically caused by the GHG emissions from ca. 30 years ago, 1995. This explains, why such a disasters for humanity like the “Trump administration”, the “United Arab Emirates (UAE) administration” and the “Putin administration” are possible, and why even highly reflected and progressive “European Union” (EU) politics stumbles with decisive climate actions.

In 30 years, non of the current politicians will be in charge any more. Based on the overwhelming scientific evidence we have, the “Trump administration, the “UAE administration” and every other politicians currently in charge of the future of our mother planet Earth and denying the “Greenhouse Effect” caused mostly by burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas) and meat “production”, will find its way into the history books, responsible for the greatest death toll of humans, greater than the one caused by Adolf Hitler or Josef Wissarionowitsch Stalin.

And for me it is very important to be super precise and specific: The collapse is 100% within the responsibility of politics!

The (global) economy is supposed to work on the rules given by politics. Corporations are there to optimise there profits. Fossil fuel corporations and the meat “producing” industry will exploit their assets, as long as this is profitable for them. That is their most fundamental task and duty.

It is 100% within the responsibility of politics to make sure, this kind of business based on profit maximisation leads to a healthy and thus sustainable society.

What comes next?

Collapse, much faster than most can imagine. The term “collapse” refers to a fast and sudden event.

Now, there are basically two options to approach this collapse:

(1) Going (back) to nationalism and hoping suppression & repression solves the “problem” (e.g. “Trump & UAE administration”)

(2) Acknowledge the failure, reflect on the reasons, learn out of that and take on the corresponding lessons learned. Key lesson: We developed a highly successful global economy with highly successful international corporations without developing a corresponding global governance.

Now, ahead of the collapse, we can proactively start with the development of such a global governance, a new way towards a healthy and thus sustainable global society. And my clear recommendation is: We do this as much as possible based on global (direct) democracy and we start with asking the sovereign, how to continue with mitigating GHG emissions, global warming, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity. And “the sovereign” are all the people living on our mother planet Earth.