guest column

Houston expert: Why climate action needs better PR and how to love the climate apocalypse

Houston climate tech founder weighs in on his observations on what's true, what's exaggerated, and what all humans can agree on about the climate crisis. Photo via Getty Imagees

The last thing anyone wants in 2024 is a reminder of the impending climate apocalypse, but here it is: There is a scientific consensus that the world climate is trending towards uninhabitable for many species, including humans, due in large part to results of human activity.

Psychologists today observe a growing trend of patients with eco-anxiety or climate doom, reflecting some people’s inability to cope with their climate fears. The Edelman Trust Barometer, in its most recent survey respondents in 14 countries, reports that 93 percent “believe that climate change poses a serious and imminent threat to the planet.”

Until recently reviewing this report, I was unaware that 93 percent of any of us could agree on anything. It got me thinking, how much of our problem today is based on misunderstanding both the nature of the problem and the solution?

We’ve been worried for good reason before 

It’s worth keeping in mind that climate change is not the first time smart people thought humans were doomed by our own successes or failures. Robert Malthus theorized at the end of the 18th century that projected human fertility would certainly outpace agricultural production. Just a century and a half later, about half of all Americans expected a nuclear war, and the number jumped to as high as 80 percent expecting the next war to be nuclear. Yes, global hunger and nuclear threats still exist, but our results have outperformed the worst of those dire projections.

We are worried for good reason today 

Today changing climate conditions have grabbed the headlines. The world’s climate is changing at a rate faster than we can model effectively, though our best modeling suggests significant, coordinated, global efforts are necessary to reverse current trends. While there’s still lots to learn, the consensus is that we are approaching a global temperature barrier across which we may not be able to quickly return. These conclusions are worrisome.

How did we get here?

Our reliance on hydrocarbons is at the heart of our climate challenge. If combusting them is so damaging, why do we keep doing it? We know enough about our human cognitive biases to say that humans tend to “live in the moment” when it comes to decision making. Nobel Prize-winning economic research suggests we choose behaviors that reward us today rather than those with longer term payoffs. Also, changing behaviors around hydrocarbons is hard. Crude oil, natural gas and coal have played a central role in the reduction of human suffering over time, helping to lift entire populations out of poverty, providing the power for our modern lives and even supplying instrumental materials for clothes and packaging. It’s hard to stop relying on a resource so plentiful, versatile and reliable.

How do we get out of here?

Technological advances in the future may help us address climate in new and unexpected ways. If we do nothing and hope for the best, what’s the alternative? We can take confidence that we’ve addressed difficult problems before. We can also take confidence that advancements like nuclear, solar, geothermal and wind power are already supplementing our primary reliance on hydrocarbons.

The path forward will be extending the utility of these existing alternatives and identifying new technologies. We need to reduce emissions and to withdraw greenhouse gasses (GHGs) that have already been emitted. The nascent energy transition will continue to be funded by venture capitalists, government spending/incentives and private philanthropy. Larger funding sources will come from private equity and public markets, as successful technologies compete for more traditional sources of capital.

Climate Tech will be a large piece of the climate puzzle

My biases are likely clear: the same global capitalism that brought about our complicated modern world, with its apparent abundance and related climate consequences, has the best chance to save us. Early stage climate tech funding is increasing, even if it’s still too small. It has been observed that climate tech startups receiving funding today fail to track solutions for industries in proportion to their related production of GHGs. For instance, the agriculture and food sector creates about 18 percent of global GHGs, while climate tech companies seeking to address that sector receive about 9 percent of climate tech funding. These misalignments aside, the trendlines are in the right direction.

What can you do?

From a psychological perspective, healthy coping means making small decisions that address your fears, even if you can’t eliminate the root causes. Where does that leave you?

Be a voice for reasonable change. Make changes in your behavior where and when you can. Also, take comfort when you see existing industries adopting meaningful sustainable practices at faster rates. Support the companies you believe are part of the solution.

We are already seeing a burgeoning climate tech industry across the globe and here at home. With concerted efforts like the Ion and Greentown Labs, the Houston climate tech sector is helping to lead the charge. In what was even recently an unthinkable reality, the United States has taken a leadership role. Tellingly, we are not leading necessarily by setting targets, but instead by funding young startups and new infrastructure like the hydrogen hubs. We don’t know when or where the next Thomas Edison will emerge to shine a new light in a dark world. However, I do suspect that that woman or man is alive today, and it’s our job to keep building a world worth that person saving.

---

Chris Wood is the co-founder of Houston-based Moonshot Compost.

Trending News

A View From HETI

Shell is offloading another renewables business. Photo via sprngenergy.com

Reflecting its ongoing de-emphasis of renewable energy, oil and gas giant Shell has agreed to sell its solar and wind power business in India for $1.8 billion.

Aditya Birla Renewables Ltd. (ABRen) is the pending buyer of Solenergi Power Private Ltd., including the Sprng Energy group of companies. Sprng Energy develops, owns and operates utility-scale solar and wind power facilities in India.

Shell, whose U.S. headquarters is in Houston, acquired Solenergi in 2022 for $1.55 billion.

ABRen is Aditya Birla Group’s renewable energy platform. Global Infrastructure Partners, part of asset manager BlackRock, is a strategic investor in ABRen. ABRen develops and operates solar, wind, hybrid and battery storage projects in India.

“This agreement reflects Shell’s continued focus on adjusting the portfolio in our power business,” Machteld de Haan, Shell’s president of downstream, renewables and energy solutions, said in a news release. “We are high-grading our power portfolio and recycling capital in service of our asset-backed trading strategy … This is another step in building a more focused, competitive, and resilient business while improving returns year on year towards 2030.”

Under Wael Sawan, who was named CEO of Shell in 2023, the company has moved away from large-scale, low-yield green energy projects to concentrate on high-margin sectors. Those sectors include natural gas, LNG, deep-water drilling and global energy trading.

The Solenergi deal, expected to close by the end of this year, signals yet another move in Shell’s reassessment of its renewables business. The company has said it will no longer invest in offshore wind projects, but it remains committed to becoming a net-zero emissions business by 2050.

Shell said India remains an important market. In India, Shell offers LNG supply and regasification for downstream users, and also operates Shell Mobility and Shell Lubricants.

The proposed sale of the Indian renewables business continues Shell’s decreasing focus on renewables. In October, Shell exited Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind, a 50-50 joint venture created to offshore wind projects off the coast of New Jersey and New York.

Shell has declared it will not make new investments in offshore wind generation, favoring existing ventures and the expansion of EV charging infrastructure.

The company also announced plans to shut down its Volta C electric vehicle charging business in August 2025.

Trending News