Venture capitalist Finn Murphy believes world leaders could soon resort to
deflecting sunlight into space if the Earth gets unbearably hot.
That’s why he’s invested more than $1 million in Stardust Solutions, a leading
solar geoengineering firm that’s developing a system to reduce warming by
enveloping the globe in reflective particles.
Murphy isn’t rooting for climate catastrophe. But with global temperatures
soaring and the political will to limit climate change waning, Stardust “can be
worth tens of billions of dollars,” he said.
“It would be definitely better if we lost all our money and this wasn’t
necessary,” said Murphy, the 33-year-old founder of Nebular, a New York
investment fund named for a vast cloud of space dust and gas.
Murphy is among a new wave of investors who are putting millions of dollars into
emerging companies that aim to limit the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth —
while also potentially destabilizing weather patterns, food supplies and global
politics. He has a degree in mathematics and mechanical engineering and views
global warming not just as a human and political tragedy, but as a technical
challenge with profitable solutions.
Solar geoengineering investors are generally young, pragmatic and imaginative —
and willing to lean into the adventurous side of venture capitalism. They often
shrug off the concerns of scientists who argue it’s inherently risky to fund the
development of potentially dangerous technologies through wealthy investors who
could only profit if the planet-cooling systems are deployed.
“If the technology works and the outcomes are positive without really
catastrophic downstream impacts, these are trillion-dollar market
opportunities,” said Evan Caron, a co-founder of the energy-focused venture firm
Montauk Capital. “So it’s a no-brainer for an investor to take a shot at some of
these.”
More than 50 financial firms, wealthy individuals and government agencies have
collectively provided more than $115.8 million to nine startups whose technology
could be used to limit sunlight, according to interviews with VCs, tech company
founders and analysts, as well as private investment data analyzed by POLITICO’s
E&E News.
That pool of funders includes Silicon Valley’s Sequoia Capital, one of the
world’s largest venture capital firms, and four other investment groups that
have more than $1 billion of assets under management.
Of the total amount invested in the geoengineering sector, $75 million went to
Stardust, or nearly 65 percent. The U.S.-Israeli startup is developing
reflective particles and the means to spray and monitor them in the
stratosphere, some 11 miles above the planet’s surface.
At least three other climate-intervention companies have also raked in at least
$5 million.
The cash infusion is a bet on planet-cooling technologies that many political
leaders, investors and environmentalists still consider taboo. In addition to
having unknown side effects, solar geoengineering could expose the planet to
what scientists call “termination shock,” a scenario in which global
temperatures soar if the cooling technologies fail or are suddenly abandoned.
Still, the funding surge for geoengineering companies pales in comparison to the
billions of dollars being put toward artificial intelligence. OpenAI, the maker
of ChatGPT, has raised $62.5 billion in 2025 alone, according to investment data
compiled by PitchBook.
The investment pool for solar geoengineering startups is relatively shallow in
part because governments haven’t determined how they would regulate the
technology — something Stardust is lobbying to change.
As a result, the emerging sector is seen as too speculative for most venture
capital firms, according to Kim Zou, the CEO of Sightline Climate, a market
intelligence firm. VCs mostly work on behalf of wealthy individuals, as well as
pension funds, university endowments and other institutional investors.
“It’s still quite a niche set of investors that are even thinking about or
looking at the geoengineering space,” Zou said. “The climate tech and energy
tech investors we speak to still don’t really see there being an investable
opportunity there, primarily because there’s no commercial market for it today.”
AEROSOLS IN THE STRATOSPHERE
Stardust and its investors are banking on signing contracts with one or more
governments that could deploy its solar geoengineering system as soon as the end
of the decade. Those investors include Lowercarbon Capital, a climate-focused
firm co-founded by billionaire VC Chris Sacca, and Exor, the holding company of
an Italian industrial dynasty and perhaps the most mainstream investment group
to back a sunlight reflection startup.
Even Stardust’s supporters acknowledge that the company is far from a sure bet.
“It’s unique in that there is not currently demand for this solution,” said
Murphy, whose firm is also supporting out-there startups seeking to build robots
and data centers in space. “You have to go and create the product in order to
potentially facilitate the demand.”
Lowercarbon partner Ryan Orbuch said the firm would see a return on its Stardust
investment only “in the context of an actual customer who can actually back many
years of stable, safe deployment.”
Exor, another Stardust investor, didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Other startups are trying to develop commercial markets for solar
geoengineering. Make Sunsets, a company funded by billionaire VC Tim Draper,
releases sulfate-filled weather balloons that pop when they reach the
stratosphere. It sells cooling credits to individuals and corporations based on
the theory that the sulfates can reliably reduce warming.
There are questions, however, about the science and economics underpinning the
credit system of Make Sunsets, according to the investment bank Jeffries.
“A cooling credit market is unlikely to be viable,” the bank said in a May 2024
note to clients.
That’s because the temperature reductions produced by sulfate aerosols vary by
altitude, location and season, the note explained. And the warming impacts of
carbon dioxide emissions last decades — much longer than any cooling that would
be created from a balloon’s worth of sulfate.
Make Sunsets didn’t respond to a request for comment. The company has previously
attracted the attention of regulators in the U.S. and Mexico, who have claimed
it began operating without the necessary government approvals.
Draper Associates says on its website that it’s “shaping a future where the
impossible becomes everyday reality.” The firm has previously backed successful
consumer tech firms like Tesla, Skype and Hotmail.
“It is getting hotter in the Summer everywhere,” Tim Draper said in an email.
“We should be encouraging every solution. I love this team, and the science
works.”
THE NEXT FRONTIER
One startup is pursuing space-based solar geoengineering. EarthGuard is
attempting to build a series of large sunlight deflectors that would be
positioned between the sun and the planet, some 932,000 miles from the Earth.
The company did not respond to emailed questions.
Other space companies are considering geoengineering as a side project. That
includes Gama, a French startup that’s designing massive solar sails that could
be used for deep space travel or as a planetary sunshade, and Ethos Space, a Los
Angeles company with plans to industrialize the moon.
Both companies are part of an informal research network established by the
Planetary Sunshade Foundation, a nonprofit advocating for the development of a
trillion-dollar parasol for the globe. The network mainly brings together
collaborators on the sidelines of space industry conferences, according to Gama
CEO Andrew Nutter.
“We’re willing to contribute something if we realize it’s genuinely necessary
and it’s a better solution than other solutions” to the climate challenge,
Nutter said of the space shade concept. “But our business model does not depend
on it. If you have dollar signs hanging next to something, that can bias your
decisions on what’s best for the planet.”
Nutter said Gama has raised about $5 million since he co-founded the company in
2020. Its investors include Possible Ventures, a German VC firm that’s also
financing a nuclear fusion startup and says on its website that the firm is
“relentlessly optimistic — choosing to focus on the possibilities rather than
obsess over the risks.” Possible Ventures did not respond to a request for
comment.
Sequoia-backed Reflect Orbital is another space startup that’s exploring solar
geoengineering as a potential moneymaker. The company based near Los Angeles is
developing a network of satellite mirrors that would direct sunlight down to the
Earth at night for lighting industrial sites or, eventually, producing solar
energy. Its space mirrors, if oriented differently, could also be used for
limiting the amount of sun rays that reach the planet.
“It’s not so much a technological limitation as much as what has the highest,
best impact. It’s more of a business decision,” said Ally Stone, Reflect
Orbital’s chief strategy officer. “It’s a matter of looking at each satellite as
an opportunity and whether, when it’s over a specific geography, that makes more
sense to reflect sunlight towards or away from the Earth.”
Reflect Orbital has raised nearly $28.7 million from investors including Lux
Capital, a firm that touts its efforts to “turn sci-fi into sci-fact” and has
invested in the autonomous defense systems companies Anduril and Saildrone.”
Sequoia and Lux didn’t respond to requests for comment.
The startup hopes to send its first satellite into space next summer, according
to Stone.
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, whose aerospace company already has an estimated fleet of
more than 8,800 internet satellites in orbit, has also suggested using the
circling network to limit sunlight.
“A large solar-powered AI satellite constellation would be able to prevent
global warming by making tiny adjustments in how much solar energy reached
Earth,” Musk wrote on X last month. Neither he nor SpaceX responded to an
emailed request for comment.
DON’T CALL IT GEOENGINEERING
Other sunlight-reflecting startups are entering the market — even if they’d
rather not be seen as solar geoengineering companies.
Arctic Reflections is a two-year-old company that wants to reduce global warming
by increasing Arctic sea ice, which doesn’t absorb as much heat as open water.
The Dutch startup hasn’t yet pursued outside investors.
“We see this not necessarily as geo-engineering, but rather as climate
adaptation,” CEO Fonger Ypma said in an email. “Just like in reforestation
projects, people help nature in growing trees, our idea is that we would help
nature in growing ice.”
The main funder of Arctic Reflections is the British government’s independent
Advanced Research and Invention Agency. In May, ARIA awarded $4.41 million to
the company — more than four times what it had raised to that point.
Another startup backed by ARIA is Voltitude, which is developing micro balloons
to monitor geoengineering from the stratosphere. The U.K.-based company didn’t
respond to a request for comment.
Altogether, the British agency is supporting 22 geoengineering projects, only a
handful of which involve startups.
“ARIA is only funding fundamental research through this programme, and has not
taken an equity stake in any geoengineering companies,” said Mark Symes, a
program director at the agency. It also requires that all research it supports
“must be published, including those that rule out approaches by showing they are
unsafe or unworkable.”
Sunscreen is a new startup that is trying to limit sunlight in localized areas.
It was founded earlier this year by Stanford University graduate student Solomon
Kim.
“We are pioneering the use of targeted, precision interventions to mitigate the
destructive impacts of heatwave on critical United States infrastructure,” Kim
said in an email. But he was emphatic that “we are not geoengineering” since the
cooling impacts it’s pursuing are not large scale.
Kim declined to say how much had been raised by Sunscreen and from what sources.
As climate change and its impacts continue to worsen, Zou of Sightline Climate
expects more investors to consider solar geoengineering startups, including
deep-pocketed firms and corporations interested in the technology. Without their
help, the startups might not be able to develop their planet-cooling systems.
“People are feeling like, well wait a second, our backs are kind of starting to
get against the wall. Time is ticking, we’re not really making a ton of
progress” on decarbonization, she said.
“So I do think there’s a lot more questions getting asked right now in the
climate tech and venture community around understanding it,” Zou said of solar
geoengineering. “Some of these companies and startups and venture deals are also
starting to bring more light into the space.”
Karl Mathiesen contributed reporting.
Tag - Climate adaptation
BRUSSELS — Current plans to tackle global warming will only save 3 percent of
Europe’s Alpine glaciers from disappearing this century, with most melting away
within the next two decades, a new study has found.
The ice fields of Central Europe are vanishing faster than anywhere else on
Earth,according to research led by Switzerland’s ETH Zurich. Overall, the
scientists found that 79 percent of the world’s glaciers will not survive this
century unless countries step up efforts to curb climate change.
“The Alps as we know them nowadays will completely change by the end of the
century,” Lander Van Tricht, the study’s lead author, told POLITICO.
“The landscape will be completely different. Many ski resorts will not have
access to glaciers anymore … the ones we keep are so high and so steep that they
are not accessible anymore. So the economy will be confronted with these
changes,” he said.
“And even the small glaciers provide water downstream” for vegetation and
villages, he added. “This will also change.”
Their study, published Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change, is the first
to calculate the number of glaciers remaining by the year 2100 under different
warming scenarios. Previous studies have focused on size or ice mass, the
factors determining future sea-level rise and water scarcity, as glaciers hold
70 percent of the world’s freshwater.
The researchers hope their findings, including a database showing the projected
survival rate of each of the world’s 211,000 glaciers, will help assess climate
impacts on local economies and ecosystems.
“Even the smallest glacier in a remote valley in the Alps, even if it’s not
important for sea-level rise or water resources, can have a huge importance for
tourism, for example,” said Van Tricht. “Every individual glacier can matter.”
The researchers found that 97 percent of Central European glaciers will go
extinct this century if global warming hits 2.7 degrees Celsius above
pre-industrial levels — the temperature rise expected under governments’ current
climate policies.
That means only 110 of the region’s roughly 3,200 glaciers would survive to see
the next century. Those are located in the Alps, as the region’s other mountain
range, the Iberian Peninsula’s Pyrenees, is set to lose its remaining 15
glaciers by the mid-2030s.
If the world manages to limit global warming to 1.5C or 2C, in line with the
Paris Agreement, the Alps would lose 87 percent or 92 percent of glaciers,
respectively. At warming of 4C, a level the world was heading toward before the
2015 climate accord was signed, 99 percent of Alpine glaciers would disappear
this century, with just 20 surviving the year 2100.
In all scenarios, however, the majority of Central European glaciers melt away
in the coming two decades. The scientists write that for this region, “peak
extinction” — the year when most glaciers are expected to disappear — is
“projected to occur soon after 2025.”
Glaciers located in high latitudes — such as in Iceland and Russian Arctic — or
holding vast amounts of ice have the best survival chances, Van Tricht said.
Alpine glaciers “are in general very small” and “very sensitive” to climatic
changes like warmer springs, he said. The biggest ice fields, such as the Rhône
glacier, will survive 2.7C of warming but not 4C, he added.
The second-worst affected region is Western Canada and the United States, home
to the Rocky Mountains, where 96 percent of the nearly 18,000 glaciers are
expected to disappear this century under 2.7C of warming.
Overall, the study projects a dramatic disappearance of glaciers around the
globe: At 2.7C of warming, 79 percent of glaciers worldwide would go extinct by
the end of the century, rising to 91 percent at 4C. The melt-off is expected to
continue after 2100, the researchers add.
Drastic cuts in planet-warming emissions could save tens of thousands of
individual glaciers, however, with the extinction rate slowing to 55 percent at
1.5C and 63 percent at 2C.
The rate of disappearance shocked even the scientists, Van Tricht said. Around
mid-century, when glacier loss reaches its peak, “we lose at a global scale
2,000 to 4,000 glaciers a year,” depending on the level of warming. “Which means
that if you look at the Alps today, all the glaciers we have there, you lose
that number in just one single year at the global scale.”
BRUSSELS — Climate change is already costing Europe dearly.
This summer’s droughts, heat waves and floods will cost the European Union an
estimated €43 billion this year, knocking nearly half a percentage point off the
region’s economic output, according to a study published Monday.
The same study estimated that the cumulative damage to the European economy will
reach about €126 billion by 2029.
“These estimates are likely conservative,” said the authors of the study,
Sehrish Usman of the University of Mannheim, and Miles Parker and Mathilde
Vallat, economists at the European Central Bank.
Extreme weather events are becoming more frequent as greenhouse gases warm the
world.
In 2024, natural disasters, including catastrophic flooding in Spain, destroyed
assets worth $31 billion in Europe, according to the insurance company MunichRe.
“Climate change has increased the frequency and intensity of extreme weather
events like floods, droughts, heat waves, wildfires, and all of this is
contributing to the rising economic cost for the European regions,” Usman said
at an event in Brussels on Monday.
The study included physical damage to buildings and infrastructure as well as
impact on worker productivity and efficiency, and spillover effects on other
parts of the economy. It did not include damage from wildfires that burned more
than 1 million hectares in Europe this year.
“These events are not just temporary shocks,” said Usman. “They manifest their
impacts over time.” Floods can disrupt supply chains. Droughts can cripple
agricultural yields.
“Initially, this is just a heat wave,” she said. “But it affects your
efficiency, it reduces your labor productivity.”
Droughts were the most damaging, causing an estimated €29.4 billion of loss to
the EU this summer. Heat waves and floods caused damages of €6.8 billion and
€6.5 billion, respectively.
Southern Europe, a region particularly vulnerable to climate change, was hit
hardest. Cyprus, Greece, Malta and Bulgaria suffered losses of more than 1
percent of their economic output.
“Denmark, Sweden, Germany show relatively lower damages but the frequency and
magnitude of these events, especially floods, are also increasing across these
regions,” the researchers wrote.
The findings come just after climate scientists reported that global warming
made a heat wave in July in Norway, Sweden and Finland 2 degrees Celsius hotter
than it would have otherwise been. Scientists have also calculated that
wildfires in Spain and Portugal were made 40 times more likely by climate
change.
BRUSSELS — The European Union’s climate chief has warned that the Gulf Stream
could collapse in a few decades after Dutch scientists found key ocean currents
are weakening faster than thought.
The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), the system that forms
part of the Gulf Stream — an Atlantic Ocean current that keeps Europe from
becoming frigid — could start shutting down in the 2060s as a result of climate
change, according to a study by Utrecht University researchers published this
week.
European Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra described the findings in a social
media post as a “wake-up call.”
The Gulf Stream, he noted, “carries warm tropical waters north, keeping Northern
Europe’s winters far milder than regions on the same latitude, like Canada. This
new study says that the Gulf Stream could collapse in our lifetime.”
Shutdown of the AMOC would see temperatures in Europe plummet even as global
warming marches on. This would also reduce rainfall and likely bring even drier
summers, with devastating consequences for agriculture.
Earlier this month, European Commission Vice President Teresa Ribera — in charge
of the EU’s overarching green policy — suggested that the AMOC should be “added
to the list of national security acronyms in Europe” given the severe impact of
a shutdown.
The Dutch study, which analyses 25 different climate models, found that under a
moderate emissions scenario — meaning a rise in global temperatures of around
2.7 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels this century — the AMOC could
start collapsing from 2063.
The planet has already warmed to 1.3 C, and is on track to warm to 2.7 C under
governments’ current climate plans. Under a high-emissions scenario of warming
above 4 C, which is considered unlikely, the shutdown could occur as early as
2055, they found.
Previous studies said a collapse was unlikely to happen this century.
WHAT ARE THE CHANCES?
Sybren Drijfhout, chair of ocean and earth science at the University of
Southampton and a researcher at the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute,
said the Utrecht study was “solid.”
Drijfhout, who was not involved in the Utrecht paper, published a separate study
Thursday that reached a similar conclusion about the AMOC reaching a tipping
point this century, entering a decline before shutting down after the year
2100.
According to this study, the unlikely high-emissions scenario has a 70 percent
chance of leading to such an AMOC collapse, while the moderate scenario — the
2.7 C increase the planet is on track for at the moment — sets out a 37 percent
chance.
Yet even a low-emissions scenario in line with the 2015 Paris climate accord
targets that limit warming to below 2 C, the researchers write, give a 25
percent chance of a shutdown.
“As far as current models suggest, we conclude that the risk of a northern AMOC
shutdown is greater than previously thought,” Drijfhout and his colleagues
wrote.
In his post, Hoekstra expressed frustration about climate becoming less of a
priority in European politics in recent years despite the threat posed by global
warming.
“There’s a sense out there that climate change has taken a backseat because
we’re so busy dealing with [other] pressing concerns,” he wrote.
“Progress takes time … it’s not linear,” he continued, and insisted that
“there’ll be moments when attention wanes. So a big thanks to these scientists
for giving us another serious climate wake-up call.”
In February 2022, as Russia marched on Kyiv, Oleksandr Dmitriev realized he knew
how to stop Moscow’s men: Blow a hole in the dam that strangled the Irpin River
northeast of the capital and restore the long-lost boggy floodplain.
A defense consultant who organized offroad races in the area before the war,
Dmitriev was familiar with the terrain. He knew exactly what reflooding the
river basin — a vast expanse of bogs and marshes that was drained in Soviet
times — would do to Russia’s war machinery.
“It turns into an impassable turd, as the jeep guys say,” he said. He told the
commander in charge of Kyiv’s defense as much, and was given the go-ahead to
blow up the dam.
Dmitriev’s idea worked. “In principle, it stopped the Russian attack from the
north,” he said. The images of Moscow’s tanks mired in mud went around the
world.
Three years later, this act of desperation is inspiring countries along NATO’s
eastern flank to look into restoring their own bogs — fusing two European
priorities that increasingly compete for attention and funding: defense and
climate.
That’s because the idea isn’t only to prepare for a potential Russian attack.
The European Union’s efforts to fight global warming rely in part on nature’s
help, and peat-rich bogs capture planet-warming carbon dioxide just as well as
they sink enemy tanks.
Yet half of the EU’s bogs are being sapped of their water to create land
suitable for planting crops. The desiccated peatlands in turn release greenhouse
gases and allow heavy vehicles to cross with ease.
Some European governments are now wondering if reviving ailing bogs can solve
several problems at once. Finland and Poland told POLITICO they were actively
exploring bog restoration as a multi-purpose measure to defend their borders and
fight climate change.
Poland’s massive 10 billion złoty (€2.3 billion) Eastern Shield border
fortification project, launched last year, “provides for environmental
protection, including by … peatland formation and forestation of border areas,”
the country’s defense ministry said in a statement.
“It’s a win-win situation that achieves many targets at the same time,” said
Tarja Haaranen, director general for nature at Finland’s environment ministry.
BOGS! WHAT ARE THEY GOOD FOR?
In their pristine state, bogs are carpeted with delicate mosses that can’t fully
decompose in their waterlogged habitats and slowly turn into soft, carbon-rich
soil known as peat.
This is what makes them Earth’s most effective repositories of CO2. Although
they cover only 3 percent of the planet, they lock away a third of the world’s
carbon — twice the amount stored in forests.
Yet when drained, bogs start releasing the carbon they stored for hundreds or
thousands of years, fueling global warming.
Some 12 percent of peatlands worldwide are degraded, producing 4 percent of
planet-warming pollution. (To compare, global aviation is responsible for around
2.5 percent.)
In Europe, where bogs were long regarded as unproductive terrain to be converted
into farmland, the picture is especially dramatic: Half of the EU’s peatlands
are degraded, mostly due to drainage for agricultural purposes.
As a result, EU countries reported 124 million tons of greenhouse gas pollution
from drained peatlands in 2022, close to the annual emissions of the
Netherlands. Some scientists say even this is an underestimate.
Various peatland restoration projects are now underway, with bog repair having
gained momentum under the EU’s new Nature Restoration Law, which requires
countries to revive 30 percent of degraded peatlands by 2030 and 50 percent by
2050.
The bloc’s 27 governments now have until September 2026 to draft plans on how
they intend to meet these targets.
On NATO’s eastern flank, restoring bogs would be a relatively cheap and
straightforward measure to achieve EU nature targets and defense goals all at
once, scientists argue.
“It’s definitely doable,” said Aveliina Helm, professor of restoration ecology
at the University of Tartu, who until recently advised Estonia’s government on
its EU nature repair strategy.
“We are right now in the development of our national restoration plan, as many
EU countries are,” she added, “and as part of that I see great potential to join
those two objectives.”
NATO’S BOG BELT
As it happens, most of the EU’s peatlands are concentrated on NATO’s border with
Russia and Kremlin-allied Belarus — stretching from the Finnish Arctic through
the Baltic states, past Lithuania’s hard-to-defend Suwałki Gap and into eastern
Poland.
When waterlogged, this terrain represents a dangerous trap for military trucks
and tanks. In a tragic example earlier this year, four U.S. soldiers stationed
in Lithuania died when they drove their 63-ton M88 Hercules armored vehicle into
a bog.
And when armies can’t cross soggy open land, they are forced into areas that are
more easily defended, as Russia found out when Dmitriev and his soldiers blew up
the dam north of Kyiv in February 2022.
A destroyed Russian tank sits in a field on April 28, 2022 in Moshchun, Ukraine.
| Taras Podolian/Gazeta.ua/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images
“The Russians there in armored personnel carriers got stuck at the entrance,
then they were killed with a Javelin [anti-tank missile], then when the Russians
tried to build pontoons … ours shot them with artillery,” Dmitriev recounted.
Bog-based defense isn’t a new idea. Waterlogged terrain has stopped troops
throughout European history — from Germanic tribes inflicting defeat on Roman
legions by trapping them beside a bog in 9 AD, to Finland’s borderlands
ensnaring the Soviets in the 1940s. The treacherous marshes north of Kyiv posed
a formidable challenge to armies in both world wars.
Strategically rewetting drained peatlands to prepare for an enemy attack,
however, would be a novelty. But it’s an idea that’s starting to catch on
— among environmentalists, defense strategists and politicians.
Pauli Aalto-Setälä, a lawmaker with Finland’s governing National Coalition
Party, last year filed a parliamentary motion calling on the Finnish government
to restore peatlands to secure its borders and fight climate change.
“In Finland, we have used our nature from a defense angle in history,” said
Aalto-Setälä, who holds the rank of major and trained as a tank officer during
his national service. “I realized that at the eastern border especially, there
are a lot of excellent areas to restore — for the climate, but also to make it
as difficult to go through as possible.”
The Finnish defense and environment ministries will now start talks in the fall
on whether to launch a bog-repair pilot project, according to Haaranen, who will
lead the working group. “I’m personally very excited about this.”
POLAND’S PEATY POLITICS
Discussions on defensive nature restoration are advancing fastest in Poland —
even though Warsaw is usually reluctant to scale up climate action.
Climate activists and scientists started campaigning for nature-based defense a
few years ago when they realized that Poland’s politicians were far more likely
to spend financial and political capital on environmental efforts when they were
linked to national security.
“Once you talk about security, everyone listens right now in Poland,” said
Wiktoria Jędroszkowiak, a Polish activist who helped initiate the country’s
Fridays for Future climate protests. “And our peatlands and ancient forests,
they are the places that are going to be very important for our defense once the
war gets to Poland as well.”
After years of campaigning, the issue has now reached government level in
Warsaw, with discussions underway between scientists and Poland’s defense and
environment ministries.
Wiktor Kotowski, an ecologist and member of the Polish government’s advisory
council for nature conservation, said initial talks with the defense ministry
have been promising.
“There were a lot of misunderstandings and misconceptions but in general we
found there are only synergies,” he said.
Damaged Russian vehicle marked V by Russian troops and then re-marked UA by
Ukrainians bogged down in the mud on April 8, 2022 in Moshchun, Ukraine. |
Serhii Mykhalchuk/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images
“What the ministry of defense wants is to get back as many wetlands as possible
along the eastern border,” Kotowski added. “And that is what is required from
the point of view of nature restoration and climate as well.”
Cezary Tomczyk, a state secretary at Poland’s defense ministry, agreed. “Our
objectives align,” he said. “For us, nature is an ally, and we want to use it.”
JUST … DON’T DRAIN THE SWAMP
Governments in the Baltics have shown little interest so far. Only Lithuania’s
environment ministry said that defense-linked wetland restoration “is currently
under discussion,” declining to offer further details.
Estonia’s defense ministry and Latvia’s armed forces said that new Baltic
Defence Line plans to fortify the three countries’ borders would make use of
natural obstacles including bogs, but did not involve peatland restoration.
Yet scientists see plenty of potential, given that peatlands cover 10 percent of
the Baltics. And in many cases, the work would be straightforward, said Helm,
the Estonian ecologist.
“We have a lot of wetlands that are drained but still there. If we now restore
the water regime — we close the ditches that constantly drain them and make them
emit carbon — then they are relatively easy to return to a more natural state,”
she said.
Healthy peatlands serve as havens for wildlife: Frogs, snails, dragonflies and
specialized plant species thrive in the austere conditions of bogs, while rare
birds stop by to nest. They also act as barriers to droughts and wildfires,
boosting Europe’s resilience to climate change.
The return of this flora and fauna takes time. But ending drainage not only puts
a fast stop to pollution — it also instantly renders the terrain impassable.
As long as the land isn’t completely drained, “it’s one or two years and you
have the wetland full of water,” said Kotowski, the Polish ecologist.
“Restoration is a difficult process from an ecological point of view, but for
water retention, for stopping emissions and for difficulty to cross — so for
defensive purposes — it’s pretty straightforward and fast.”
And at a time when Europe’s focus has shifted to security, with defense budgets
surging and in some cases diverting money from the green transition,
environmentalists hope that military involvement could unlock unprecedented
funding and speed up nature restoration.
“At the moment, it takes five years to obtain approval for peatland rewetting,
and sometimes it can take 10 years,” said Franziska Tanneberger, director of
Germany’s Greifswald Mire Centre, a leading European peatlands research
institute. “When it comes to military activities, there is a certain
prioritization. You can’t wait 10 years if we need it for defense.”
THE TRACTOR FACTOR
But that doesn’t mean there’s no resistance to the idea.
A Russian tank seized inside of the woodland is examined by Ukrainian soldiers
in Irpin, Ukraine on April 01, 2022. | Metin Aktas/Anadolu Agency via Getty
Images
In Estonia, the environment ministry halted one peatland restoration effort
earlier this year amid fierce opposition from locals who worried that rewetting
would lead to flooding and forest destruction. Scientists described such
concerns as unfounded.
The biggest threat to peatlands is agriculture — an awkward reality for EU
governments desperate to avoid drawing the ire of farmers.
In both Finland and Poland, any initial defensive restoration projects are
likely to focus on state-owned land, sidestepping this conflict for now. But
scientists argue that if countries are serious about large-scale bog repair,
they have to talk to farmers.
“This will not work without involving agricultural lands,” said Kotowski, the
Polish ecologist. A whopping 85 percent of the country’s peatlands are degraded,
in most cases because they have been drained to plant crops where water once
pooled.
“What we badly need is a program for farmers, to compensate them for rewetting
these drained peatlands — and not only compensate, to let them earn money from
it,” he added.
There are plants that can be harvested from restored peatlands, such as reeds
for use in construction or packaging. Yet for now, the market for such crops in
Europe is too small to incentivize farmers to switch.
The bogs-for-defense argument also doesn’t work for all countries. In Germany,
where more than 90 percent of peatlands are drained, the Bundeswehr sounded
reluctant when asked about the idea.
“The rewetting of wetlands can be both advantageous and disadvantageous for
[NATO’s] own operations,” depending on the individual country, a spokesperson
for the Bundeswehr’s infrastructure and environment office said.
NATO troops would need to move through Germany in the event of a Russian attack
in the east, and bogs restrict military movements. Still, “the idea of
increasing the obstacle value of terrain by causing flooding and swamping … has
been used in warfare for a very long time and is still a viable option today,”
the spokesperson said.
BOGGING DOWN PUTIN
Scientists are quick to acknowledge that a bogs-for-security approach can’t
solve everything.
“Of course we still need traditional defense. This isn’t meant to replace that,”
said Tanneberger, who also advises a company that recently drew up a detailed
proposal for defense-linked peatland restoration.
Bogs can’t stop drones or shoot down missiles, and war isn’t good for nature
— or conservation efforts.
Soldiers of the “Bratstvo” (Brotherhood) battalion under the command of the 10th
Mountain Assault Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine sit on the muzzle of a
captured Russian tank stuck in a field on April 2, 2022 in Nova Basan Village,
Chernihiv Oblast, Ukraine. | Andrii Kotliarchuk/Global Images Ukraine via Getty
Images
And in Ukraine, the flooding of the Irpin basin was economically and
ecologically destructive.
Among outside observers, there was initial excitement about the prospect of a
new natural paradise. But villagers in the region lost their lands and homes,
and the influx of water had a negative effect on local species that had no time
to adapt to the sudden change.
“Yes, it stopped the invasion of Kyiv, and this was badly needed, so no
criticism here. But it did result in environmental damage,” said Helm, the
Estonian ecologist.
Unlike Ukraine, EU governments have the chance to restore peatlands with care,
taking into account the needs of nature, farmers and armies.
“Perhaps it’s better to think ahead instead of being forced to act in a hurry,”
she said. “We have this opportunity. Ukraine didn’t.”
Zia Weise reported from Brussels, Wojciech Kość from Warsaw and Veronika
Melkozerova from Kyiv.
BRUSSELS — The European Union is suffering its worst wildfire season on record,
surpassing 1 million hectares burned on Thursday.
Fires have burned 1,016,000 hectares — an area larger than Cyprus or around a
third of the size of Belgium — since January, data from the bloc’s European
Forest Fire Information System analyzed by POLITICO shows.
This is the first time the EU hits the 1 million hectare milestone since EFFIS
started keeping records in 2006. The previous worst wildfire season, in 2017,
clocked just below 988,000 hectares.
Nearly two-thirds of losses occurred since Aug. 5, when EFFIS showed only
380,000 hectares burned. The vast majority of the fires have occurred in the
Iberian Peninsula.
Spain accounts for more than 400,000 hectares burned, while in much-smaller
Portugal, flames have consumed more than 270,000 hectares — or 3 percent of the
country’s entire territory. In Spain, where records stretch back to the 1960s,
this year is the worst fire season since 1994, according to government data.
Both countries have endured searing heat in recent weeks, desiccating forests
and turning the peninsula into a tinderbox. Climate change is exacerbating
wildfire risk, bringing more frequent and intense heat waves and droughts.
But scientists say that the main driver of the catastrophic fires in Spain and
Portugal is an overabundance of flammable vegetation on abandoned land and
authorities’ failure to take preventive measures. Spain’s special prosecutor for
environmental issues this week opened an investigation into the lack of fire
prevention plans.
Wildfires also release large amounts of planet-warming carbon dioxide, with the
EU on track for a potential new record for fire-related pollution as well, EFFIS
data shows.
BRUSSELS — Exhausted firefighters. Traumatized evacuees. Charred villages. Red
horizons, all flames and smoke.
The dramatic images from wildfires tearing through Spain and Portugal year after
year have become a mainstay of Europe’s increasingly blistering summers, a
symbol of the devastation wreaked by climate change.
But while global warming fuels the flames, the Iberian Peninsula isn’t destined
to turn into a fiery hellscape every year. Experts say that most of the
damage is, in fact, preventable — if only authorities at regional, national and
European levels would act.
“Climate change plays a role here, that’s for sure, but it’s not the main cause,
and this cannot be used as an excuse for what governments must do in terms of
prevention,” said Jordi Vendrell , director of the Pau Costa Foundation, a
nonprofit focused on wildfire management.
This year’s fire season is already the worst on record. Across the European
Union, blazes have consumed more than 1 million hectares so far this year — an
area larger than Cyprus. Most of that land has burned over the past two weeks in
the Iberian Peninsula, where at least six people have died.
The scale of this year’s disaster has kicked off an unusual reckoning in both
countries as to why Spanish and Portuguese citizens are exposed to such a deadly
threat each year.
“My house, my neighbor’s house, my entire town of Castrocalbón has gone up in
flames because our authorities are incompetent,” 74-year-old Josefina Vidal
cried out at a protest in the central Spanish city of León on Monday. Across the
border in Portugal on Tuesday, mourners at a firefighter’s funeral declared
Prime Minister Luís Montenegro persona non grata.
Politicians on both sides of the border are keen to avoid being held
responsible, and are taking pains to blame the fires on uncontrollable factors
like climate change and arson, or past decisions taken by their political
rivals. At best, the debate centers on firefighting resources.
Yet experts say that preventing destructive blazes is both simpler and cheaper
than fighting them. And the conditions that create firestorms are largely due to
how countries manage — or rather, don’t manage — their land.
THE CLIMATE FACTOR
That’s not to say climate change isn’t playing a role.
The global increase in temperatures, driven by the burning of fossil fuels, does
not spark fires. But it creates conditions for flames to spread with ease: More
intense and frequent heat waves — such as the searing heat Spain and Portugal
endured in recent weeks — dry out soils and plants, rendering forests and land
more flammable.
Scientists stress that while halting global warming is crucial to avoid even
worse heat waves and droughts, governments must also urgently minimize the risk
of climate-fueled disasters.
The scale of this year’s disaster has kicked off an unusual reckoning in both
countries as to why Spanish and Portuguese citizens are exposed to such a deadly
threat each year. | Brais Lorenzo/EPA
In the case of fires, that mostly means ensuring there’s less stuff for flames
to feast on.
While climate change is ratcheting up fire risk, “the fires we’re seeing are the
result of decades of rural exodus and the absence of forest management,” said
Arantza Pérez Oleaga, vice dean of Spain’s Official College of Forestry
Engineers.
LEAVING THE LAND
As more and more farmers and shepherds migrated to cities in recent decades,
uncontrolled vegetation took over the forests, meadows, orchards and cropland
they once managed. An estimated 2.3 million hectares of Spanish land are now
abandoned.
This provides abundant fuel for catastrophic wildfires. The amount of biomass in
Spain has surged by 160 percent over the past 50 years, said Eduardo Rojas
Briales, forest expert at the Polytechnic University of Valencia.
Halting land abandonment is the key to preventing fires, experts say. Yet
currently, with the rural population aging and struggling to make a living, it’s
a trend that’s expected to continue.
“We need a strong primary sector,” said Víctor Resco de Dios, forest engineering
professor at the University of Lleida. Crops such as olive orchards
“traditionally served as firebreaks,” he added. “Now we have the problem that
with rural abandonment, crops are less common.”
The wild shrublands and young forests that sprang up in their place may look
like land returning to its natural state. But Resco de Dios says that the
romantic “Disney ecology” vision many Europeans have of untouched nature is not
only a fantasy — it’s actively dangerous.
“We need to make people understand that cutting trees is not an ecological
crime,” he said. “On the contrary … if we plant trees and then we forget about
them, then we’re just planting the fires that we’ll have in 20 or 30 years from
now.”
Forestry experts, scientists and even conservationists agree: Letting Europe’s
nature grow wild, without active management, is fueling the devastating fires.
Prevention, they say, means creating diverse landscapes, felling trees to create
fire breaks, and developing a rural policy that ensures farmers and shepherds
can make a living.
Crucially, it also means letting some fires burn, as long as they don’t spin out
of control — ending what experts call a counterproductive policy of
extinguishing all flames. In the Mediterranean, “our landscapes, they burn in
the past, they are burning in the present, and they must burn in the future,”
Vendrell said .
PREVENTION PARADOX
Yet political debates about fire management tend to focus on fighting the flames
when the land is already burning. In Spain, for example, conservative-led
regions and the left-wing central government spent the past week trading blame
over firefighting resources.
Experts say that preventing destructive blazes is both simpler and cheaper than
fighting them. | Pereira Da Silva/EPA
But governments more readily invest in firefighting equipment than prevention.
Spain’s firefighting budget is double that of its prevention spending, even
though preventing fires is much cheaper than fighting them.
“If we want firefighters to be able to stop a fire, of course, they have to have
the means,” said Resco de Dios. “But … they cannot do their job, even if they
have all the resources in the world, because the landscapes that we have do not
allow them to work.”
Still, the task governments are facing isn’t easy, or cheap. Halting land
abandonment will take significant long-term investment in rural communities,
said Pérez Oleaga.
Stimulating demand for material such as wood is essential, she added. “There is
a reason why there are fewer fires in places like Soria or the Basque Country,”
where “the forests are pruned and managed because you still have sawmills and
other businesses that make a living from the forests.”
The Spanish environment ministry, which also oversees policies related to
demographic change, did not respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for
Portugal’s environment ministry blamed the fires on extreme weather, but said
that the country was planning to invest €246 million a year until 2050 in
measures to boost forestry industries and land management.
There are signs that fire prevention is getting more attention amid growing
frustration over how authorities handle the fires. On Thursday, Spain’s special
prosecutor for environmental issues opened an investigation into the lack of
forest management plans in connection with the fires.
But all experts interviewed acknowledged that politicians have few incentives to
take preventive action, given that the results are often not visible for years
or decades after the next election.
“For a politician, the calculation is simple,” said Pérez Oleaga. “You can take
a picture next to the firefighting plane you bought with EU funds, but you don’t
get to have a ribbon-cutting ceremony when you use public cash to clean up a
forest.”
BRUSSELS — Climate change supercharged last week’s European heat wave and
tripled the death toll, a group of scientists said Wednesday.
Extreme temperatures baked large swaths of the continent in late June and early
July, exposing millions of Europeans to dangerous levels of heat.
Looking at 12 European cities, the researchers found that in 11 of them, heat
waves of the type that peaked last week would have been significantly less
intense — between 2 to 4 degrees Celsius cooler — in a world without man-made
global warming.
This climate-induced change in temperatures, the scientists said, led to a surge
in excess deaths in those cities. Of the 2,300 additional fatalities linked to
high temperatures, around 1,500 of them can be attributed to global warming,
they estimated.
“Climate change is an absolute game changer when it comes to extreme heat,”
said Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London, which
co-led the research.
A construction worker in Italy and a street cleaner in Spain were among those
thought to have died of heat stroke last week. But most heat-related deaths,
particularly among the elderly, go unreported. The scientists said the vast
majority of deaths they analyzed occurred among Europeans aged 65 or older.
As a result, heat is often dubbed a “silent killer,” though it’s no less deadly
than other climate-related disasters. The scientists noted that last week’s heat
wave killed more people than devastating flood events in recent years, which
resulted in several hundred deaths.
“Our study is only a snapshot of the true death toll linked to climate
change-driven temperatures across Europe, which may have reached into the tens
of thousands,” said Garyfallos Konstantinoudis, also a climate specialist at
Imperial College London.
Global warming, driven by burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural
gas, is increasing the severity and frequency of heat waves in Europe and
worldwide. An aging population also makes Europe more vulnerable to the health
effects of extreme temperatures.
The European Environment Agency has warned that heat-related deaths are expected
to increase tenfold if the planet warms 1.5 C, and thirtyfold at 3 C. The planet
is already 1.3 C hotter than in preindustrial times and on track to warm 2.7 C
this century.
THE TOLL OF EXTREME HEAT
The rapid analysis published Wednesday — which uses methods considered
scientifically reliable but has not undergone peer review — was led by
researchers at Imperial College London and the London School of Hygiene &
Tropical Medicine.
The scientists looked at deaths in Milan (where they estimated 317 fatalities
were due to changes in the climate), Barcelona (286), Paris (235), London (171),
Rome (164), Madrid (108), Athens (96), Budapest (47), Zagreb (31), Frankfurt
(21), Lisbon (also 21) and the Sardinian city of Sassari (six) between June 23
and July 2.
“These numbers represent real people that have lost their lives in the last days
due to the extreme heat. Two-thirds of these would not have died were it not for
climate change,” said Otto.
Last week’s heat also drove up wildfire risk across Europe, with fires still
raging in many parts of the continent. The analysis does not include deaths
linked to fire or smoke. In Spain, for example, two farmers were killed trying
to flee encroaching flames last week.
The Spanish government separately monitors heat-related excess deaths and found
that between June 21 and July 2, more than 450 people died due to extreme
temperatures — 73 percent more than in the same period in 2022, which saw record
numbers of deaths.
WESTERN EUROPE’S HOTTEST JUNE
The EU’s Copernicus climate monitoring service, meanwhile, said Wednesday
morning that last month was the third-hottest June on record worldwide.
For Europe, it was the fifth-warmest June, though the western part of the
continent saw its hottest June on record, the scientists said — just above the
2003 record, which was followed by a summer marked by deadly heat.
The temperatures in Europe are further amplified by what Copernicus terms an
“exceptional” marine heat wave in the Mediterranean Sea. The water surface
temperatures have hit their highest level on record, not just for June but for
any month.
“June 2025 saw an exceptional heat wave impact large parts of western Europe,
with much of the region experiencing very strong heat stress. This heatwave was
made more intense by record sea surface temperatures in the western
Mediterranean,” said Samantha Burgess, strategic climate lead at the European
Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts.
“In a warming world, heat waves are likely to become more frequent, more intense
and impact more people across Europe,” she added.
Cory Bennett contributed to this report.
PARIS — Air conditioning isn’t the key to address ever-more-intense heat waves,
France’s minister for ecological transition said Tuesday in response to the
far-right presidential candidate Marine Le Pen’s proposal for a “major air
conditioning equipment plan.”
“Our issue with air conditioning concerns heating,” Agnès Pannier-Runacher
explained, calling air conditioning an “inadequate adaptation” to rising
temperatures.
“When you cool a room, you need heat to obtain the cold — which means you’re
necessarily heating another area,” the French official told reporters. “You’re
heating up the streets, which increases hot spots.”
A 2020 study on air conditioning use in Paris underlined that “if AC systems
release heat into the street, as is most often the case, the outside air is
warmed and the heat wave worsens,” with an impact of several degrees Celsius
depending on how widespread the use is.
“Although it is an efficient solution for households that can afford it, AC
makes the situation worse for households who cannot or do not want to adopt it,”
the study published in the Environmental Research Letters scientific journal
added.
The French have not traditionally been big fans of air conditioning, but the
number of French households installing cooling systems is growing.
In a post on X on Monday, Le Pen accused the government of forcing ordinary
people to suffer the heat while the “so-called French elites” benefit from air
conditioning.
Frédéric Falcon, a lawmaker from Le Pen’s National Rally, said that his party’s
goal is to install air conditioners “as widely as possible, in administrations,
schools, retirement homes and private homes.”
French authorities have supported supplying strategic buildings and public
transport with cooling systems but prioritized other ways of keeping
temperatures down that do not emit greenhouse gasses, like planting more trees
and better insulating buildings.
The night from Monday to Tuesday was the warmest on record, according to
France’s weather service, and Tuesday is expected to be “one of the 10 warmest
days ever recorded in France,” with maximum temperatures of up to 41 degrees
Celsius in the capital city of Paris.
Giorgio Leali and Aude Le Gentil contributed to this report.
Europe must act quickly to face extreme heat as temperatures surpass 40 degrees
and thousands of excess deaths are predicted in the coming days.
Southern Europe is in the midst of a soaring heatwave with temperatures reaching
up to 46 degrees Celsius in Spain’s Huelva region — a new national record for
June. Meanwhile, Italy, Greece, Portugal and the Western Balkans are also facing
scorching highs, along with wildfires and civilian victims.
A World Health Organization expert issued a stark warning on Monday, calling for
more action to stop tens of thousands of “unnecessary and largely preventable
deaths.”
“It’s no longer a question of if we will have a heatwave, but how many are we
going to experience this year and how long will they last,” said Marisol
Yglesias Gonzalez, technical officer for climate change and health at the WHO in
Bonn.
As for how many people could be at risk, Pierre Masselot, a statistician at the
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, told POLITICO this heatwave
could cause more than 4,500 excess deaths between June 30 and July 3. The
countries likely to experience the highest excess death rates are Italy,
Croatia, Slovenia and Luxembourg, he said. “The worst days will likely be
[Tuesday] and Wednesday.”
Heat claims more than 175,000 lives across the WHO’s Europe region — spanning
from Iceland to Russia — each year. A major study co-authored by Masselot and
published in January, which covered 854 European cities, warned that deaths from
heat would rise sharply if significant climate adaptation is not prioritized.
The WHO on Monday echoed that climate change, driven by the burning of fossil
fuels, means heatwaves will become more frequent, dangerous and intense, leading
to more serious illness and death.
Almost two-thirds of Spanish towns have been slapped with health risk warnings,
including 804 at the highest alert level, according to data from the Aemet
national weather agency. A spokesperson stated that intense heat is expected
across the country until July 3. Meanwhile, heat alerts are also in place in
France, Italy, Portugal and Greece.
Southern Europe is in the midst of a soaring heatwave with temperatures reaching
up to 46 degrees Celsius in Spain’s Huelva region — a new national record for
June. | Toni Albir/EPA
The Greek government has also issued warnings about air pollution from wildfires
that have ripped through coastal towns near Athens. Meanwhile, more than 50,000
people have been evacuated in Turkey, primarily due to a fire near Izmir.
In Albania, 26 wildfires were reported between Sunday and Monday, while in
Serbia, meteorologists reported that last Thursday was the hottest day since
records began in the 19th century.
The WHO has advised staying hydrated, avoiding the midday heat and keeping homes
cool, particularly for vulnerable groups, including older adults, children,
outdoor workers, pregnant women and individuals with chronic health conditions.
Those on medications like antidepressants or blood pressure drugs should also
take care, Yglesias Gonzalez said, as these can affect the ability to regulate
body temperature.
However, it’s not just about managing heatwaves when they strike, but also about
being more prepared, the WHO said. In a 2022 survey, only 21 of the 57 countries
in the WHO Europe region reported having a national heat-health action plan. Of
those, 14 were in the EU.
Of the WHO’s core recommendations, the most commonly implemented are timely
alert systems and communication campaigns. But countries are lagging in
preparing their health systems and preventing heat exposure through better urban
planning, Yglesias Gonzalez said.
The WHO will issue new updated guidance for governments next year, including
advice on “people-centered cooling” strategies at the urban and regional level
to protect people from heat, she added.