The New Climate Realism Initiative Seeks to Redirect US Efforts in Combating Climate Change

Climate Realism is a new initiative of the Council on Foreign Relations and is funded by the ClimateWorks team, a global philanthropic organization dedicated to developing and implementing high-impact climate solutions for the planet. Climate Realism launched on April 7 in an effort to redirect and improve the current climate policy of the United States. 

According to Varun Sivaram, senior fellow for energy and climate at the Council on Foreign Relations and director of the Climate Realism Initiative, climate change poses a direct threat to U.S. national security — yet the approach to this challenge has so far been misguided. The opening line of the initiative’s website sums it up: “The United States’ historical approach to climate change is failing.”

What’s Wrong With the Traditional Approach of the US Toward Climate Change?

The US was a signatory to the landmark Paris Agreement in 2015, a legally binding international treaty seeking to gain commitments from world leaders to combat climate change. 

However, over the past decade, the back-and-forth shifts in  US leadership have turned climate policy into a political roller coaster.. In 2016, President Barack Obama pledged $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund. Just a year later, newly elected President Donald Trump announced the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. A similar story ensued with the Biden administration, followed once again by Trump. The changing of administrations every year has stunted real progress toward climate control. 

Therefore, even though the US has spent trillions of dollars on climate change, Sivaram states that this approach isn’t working. Yes, climate change is a major threat to national security, but throwing money around blindly is not the answer. 

Climate Realism’s Proposed Solution to Climate Change

In a recently published essay, Sivaram debunks what he thinks are several myths surrounding global warming:

• Myth 1: Paris temperature targets are attainable — Saviram says they are not. 
• Myth 2: Cutting US emissions will make a meaningful difference — Saviram says that emissions from China and developing economies like India, Indonesia, Brazil, and more will have a larger impact than the US on global cumulative emissions between 2025 and 2100.
• Myth 3: Climate change poses manageable risks to U.S. prosperity and security — He calls this “wishful thinking.”
• Myth 4: Clean energy will have a 100% positive impact on US interests and climate control. In fact, the transition comes with risks to US global and economic leadership. The US is currently the largest oil and gas producer, while China leads in clean energy tech. The transition to green technologies may cost the US political leverage and power. 

While Saviram’s myth debunking tackles several pillars of traditional climate control thought, he doesn’t advocate abandoning all efforts. 

Rather, he argues that US policymakers should accept the fact that they will see global warming of 3°C this century — and that they should prepare immigration and security policies accordingly. He also proposes several other realistic approaches for dealing with global warming, including focusing on industries in which the US can get ahead economically, like next-gen geothermal, advanced nuclear, and solid-state batteries, developing and testing geoengineering, and prioritizing climate change as the top national security concern. 

Saviram hopes that this initiative will garner bipartisan support and thus withstand the changing of US administrations every four or eight years. This is a long-term approach that simultaneously seeks to achieve green milestones while helping the US maintain its position as a global and economic superpower.