Climate action has a communication problem

Climate action has a communication problem

City Climate

Hardly any other social issue is currently the subject of such emotional and heated debate as climate policy. For many people, the focus is on sacrifices, bans, higher costs, or political conflicts. This is precisely what has given the issue a negative image in many countries.

It is often overlooked that many measures to combat climate change can yield immediate benefits—regardless of long-term climate goals. Cleaner air, quieter cities, lower energy costs, and more livable public spaces are not abstract visions of the future, but concrete improvements in everyday life.

Perhaps this is precisely where one of the biggest problems in the debate lies: climate protection is often portrayed as a burden, even though many measures could directly improve quality of life.

 

Why the debate often falls flat

Many political discussions focus on restrictions: driving less, higher carbon prices, stricter rules, or new taxes. This quickly gives the impression that climate protection is primarily about making sacrifices.

At the same time, positive effects are often barely highlighted:

  • better air quality
  • less noise
  • less dependence on energy imports
  • cooler cities in the summer
  • more modern infrastructure
  • Lower operating costs thanks to efficiency

Yet many international examples show that these very factors can foster broad acceptance. Cities with more green spaces, better public transportation, or less traffic noise are often considered both more livable and economically attractive.

 

Quality of life instead of sacrifice

The real challenge, therefore, may lie less in technology and more in communication. People respond much more strongly to concrete improvements in their daily lives than to abstract long-term goals for 2040 or 2050.

 

A good example is air quality:
Phasing out fossil fuels not only reduces CO₂ emissions, but often also reduces particulate matter and nitrogen oxides. This has a direct impact on health and quality of life.

Terms such as “energy independence,” “clean cities,” or “lower operating costs” often resonate more strongly with many people than purely moral debates about climate change.

The question is therefore increasingly: How can sustainability be seen as progress—and not just as a constraint?

 

Facts and Figures

  • According to the WHO, air pollution causes millions of premature deaths worldwide each year
  • Cities with more green spaces can significantly reduce heat islands
  • Energy-efficient buildings reduce operating costs and energy consumption in the long term
  • Public transportation systems reduce noise, emissions, and land use
  • Many European cities are investing heavily in infrastructure that improves quality of life and enhances climate resilience

 

Climate protection is unlikely to succeed in the long term if it is communicated solely in terms of sacrifice. It may be crucial to place greater emphasis on tangible improvements: cleaner air, quieter cities, modern infrastructure, and a higher quality of life. After all, that is precisely where people can truly experience sustainability firsthand.

 

This image was created using AI.

Vienna Forms Climate Alliance with Businesses

Vienna Forms Climate Alliance with Businesses

Field (26)

Cities’ climate goals are often viewed as a political challenge. But without the economy, infrastructure, and major employers, they are virtually impossible to achieve. This is precisely where Vienna’s new “Climate Alliance” comes in: A total of 17 companies have joined forces with the city to commit to actively contributing to the transformation into a climate-neutral metropolis.

Among the participants are the Ottakringer Brewery, Wiener Stadtwerke, and the Billa supermarket chain. The initiative demonstrates that climate policy is increasingly becoming a strategic economic issue—not just an environmental one.

 

From Individual Projects to Systemic Change

Many companies are already implementing individual sustainability measures, such as energy-efficient buildings, electric mobility, solar power, and lower-emission supply chains. However, the challenge increasingly lies in integrating these measures into a cohesive system.

The Climate Alliance is designed to make this very step possible. The city and businesses plan to work more closely together in the future—for example, in the areas of energy supply, mobility, the circular economy, and CO₂ reduction.

Cities, in particular, play a central role in this regard. They account for the majority of global emissions, yet they are also hubs for innovation, infrastructure, and investment.

 

Climate neutrality is becoming a key economic factor

It is no longer just about environmental policy. International investors, EU regulations, and rising energy costs are drastically changing the demands placed on companies. Sustainability is increasingly becoming a competitive factor.

For cities like Vienna, this means:
Those who build climate-friendly infrastructure more quickly could enjoy economic benefits in the future—from modern energy supplies to more resilient supply chains.

The Climate Alliance thus reflects a broader trend: climate neutrality is increasingly becoming a shared responsibility of government, industry, and urban infrastructure.

 

Facts and Figures

– Vienna aims to become climate-neutral by 2040
– Cities account for around 70 percent of energy-related CO₂ emissions worldwide
– A total of 17 companies are participating in the new Vienna Climate Alliance
– Companies are under increasing pressure from EU climate regulations, ESG requirements, and rising energy costs
– Investments in climate-friendly infrastructure are considered a key market for the coming decades

 

The true significance of such alliances does not lie in individual measures. What matters is whether they give rise to new urban systems in the long term—from energy and mobility to public services. That is precisely where the future of climate-neutral cities will be decided.

Episode 16: Bavarian Forest – National Park, Forest Wilderness, and Sustainable Regional Development

Episode 16: Bavarian Forest – National Park, Forest Wilderness, and Sustainable Regional Development

Bavarian Forest

A region that is building its future on the forest

The Bavarian Forest is one of the most unspoiled landscapes in Central Europe. Dense forests, moss-covered streams, raised bogs, and remote mountain villages characterize a region that was long considered economically underdeveloped—and has turned that very fact into a strength.

With the Bavarian Forest National Park—Germany’s oldest national park—a new approach took root here early on: not controlling nature, but letting it be. Today, the region is regarded as a model for how nature conservation, sustainable tourism, and regional development can work together.

The Bavarian Forest does not rely on spectacular displays. Its strength lies in its tranquility, vastness, and authenticity.

 

Getting Here & Getting Around – A Natural Region with Train Service

Despite its rural location, the Bavarian Forest is easily accessible. Major train stations include Plattling, Zwiesel, and Grafenau.

The mobility concept within the region is particularly noteworthy:

  • The so-called GUTi Ticket allows guests to use many bus and train lines for free
  • The Igelbus connects hiking areas, national park centers, and trailheads without the use of cars
  • Numerous bike and hiking trails are directly connected to public transportation

The region demonstrates that sustainable mobility can work in rural areas as well—provided it is organized effectively.

 

Accommodations – intimate and close to nature

The Bavarian Forest relies primarily on family-run hotels, guesthouses, and nature-based accommodations rather than large hotel complexes.

Many companies are making targeted investments in:

  • energy-efficient renovations
  • Wood from regional forestry
  • Biomass heating systems and solar energy
  • locally sourced foods and short supply chains

There is also a growing trend toward modern nature lodges and sustainable chalets that deliberately emphasize minimalist architecture and eco-friendly designs.

 

Activities – Experience the wilderness instead of just consuming

In the Bavarian Forest, the focus is on experiencing nature. The national park’s philosophy is particularly inspiring: “Let nature be nature.”

Popular activities include:

  • Hikes through wild forest areas and along ancient jungle trails
  • Hikes to the Großer Arber or the Lusen
  • Visits to the National Park's wildlife enclosure, home to lynx, wolves, and bears
  • Cycling on quiet forest paths and former railroad tracks
  • Cross-country skiing and snowshoeing in winter

The transformation of the forests is particularly striking. Where dead trees were once considered a “disaster,” new wilderness is now emerging—more resilient and ecologically valuable.

 

Cuisine – down-to-earth and regional

The cuisine of the Bavarian Forest is simple, authentic, and deeply rooted in the region.

Typical examples are:

  • Game dishes from sustainable hunting
  • Trout from clear mountain streams
  • Bread, cheese, and cold cuts from small family-owned businesses
  • Herbal products, mushrooms, and regional beers

Many restaurants are increasingly turning to organic products and working closely with local producers.

 

Sustainability Factor – From Problem Area to Model Region

The Bavarian Forest serves as a prime example of how sustainable development can work in rural areas.

Key components include:

  • Consistent conservation efforts by the national park
  • Promotion of regional economic cycles
  • Sustainable tourism strategies instead of mass tourism
  • Environmental education through visitor centers, ranger programs, and schools
  • Protection of wetlands, waterways, and old-growth forests

The national park itself is not only a protected area but also an economic driver for the entire region.

 

The Power of the Wilderness

The Bavarian Forest isn't a place of grand spectacles. Its appeal unfolds gradually—through silence, forests, and the feeling of being closer to nature's rhythms once again.

That is precisely where its strength lies. The Bavarian Forest demonstrates that sustainable tourism does not have to be spectacular to be successful. Sometimes all it takes is a landscape that is allowed to develop on its own—and people who understand that this is exactly where the future lies.

 

For more information: https://www.ferienregion-nationalpark.de/

 

Next episode: The Lech Valley in Tyrol—one of Europe’s last wild rivers and sustainable mountain tourism off the beaten path.

Artificial photosynthesis – how artificial leaves could revolutionize energy production

Artificial photosynthesis – how artificial leaves could revolutionize energy production

Artificial photosynthesis

For decades, researchers have been trying to replicate one of nature’s most efficient processes: photosynthesis. Plants use sunlight, water, and CO₂ to produce energy—emission-free and with virtually no waste. Scientists now aim to artificially reproduce this very principle. In the long term, the idea behind it could mean nothing less than a new form of energy production.

While traditional solar power systems generate electricity, many research groups are now working on so-called “artificial leaves” designed to convert solar energy directly into storable energy sources—such as hydrogen or synthetic fuels.

 

When sunlight becomes fuel

Artificial photosynthesis combines elements of chemistry, materials science, and energy technology. The goal is to develop systems that function similarly to plants: they use sunlight to trigger chemical reactions and enable energy to be stored for the long term.

The focus is particularly on green hydrogen. Researchers are working on materials and catalysts that can directly split water using solar energy. This could not only generate energy but also enable its transport and storage—one of the biggest challenges facing renewable energy systems.

The difference from traditional solar power systems lies in the approach: the focus is not on electricity, but on the direct conversion of solar energy into chemical energy.

 

Research bridging the gap between the laboratory and industry

The technology is still largely in the research stage. Many systems currently operate reliably only under laboratory conditions or have not yet achieved efficiency levels that are economically viable. Nevertheless, universities, research centers, and companies around the world are investing heavily in this field.

The reason is strategic: if artificial photosynthesis becomes scalable, regions with high levels of solar radiation could in the future not only export electricity but also produce climate-neutral energy sources. This would fundamentally transform the global energy sector.

Europe, too, is increasingly investing in such programs—particularly in connection with hydrogen strategies and the search for long-term energy storage solutions.

 

Facts and Figures

  • The sun provides the Earth with more energy in an hour than humanity consumes in an entire year
  • Natural photosynthesis usually achieves an efficiency of only about 1–2 percent
  • Some modern experimental artificial photosynthesis systems are already achieving efficiencies of over 10 percent in the laboratory
  • The European Union plans to invest hundreds of billions of euros in hydrogen and energy technologies by 2030
  • Green hydrogen is considered a key technology for industry, steel production, aviation, and long-term storage
  • According to international forecasts, the global hydrogen market could reach a value of several trillion dollars by 2050

 

Artificial photosynthesis is not yet a market-ready solution. But just as with solar energy decades ago, today’s basic research could eventually lead to a key technology. The real question now is no longer whether artificial photosynthesis is technically feasible—but how quickly it can be scaled up economically.

 

The Austrian chemist Erwin Reisner is conducting research at the University of Cambridge for more than a decade on so-called “artificial leaves.” The goal of the project is to technically mimic the natural process of photosynthesis: using sunlight, water, and CO₂, the aim is to produce climate-neutral energy sources and synthetic fuels. The technology is directly modeled after real plants—but with the goal of producing storable energy instead of biomass.

Overview of the research project:
Professor Erwin Reisner – Cambridge Department of Chemistry

World Bee Day: No biodiversity, no food diversity

World Bee Day: No biodiversity, no food diversity

Copy of pro.earth Editorial Template NEW(1332)

World Bee Day on May 20 draws attention to the enormous importance of wild bees and honeybees. The United Nations established this day to highlight the importance of bees and other pollinators for biodiversity, agriculture, and food security. The date commemorates the Slovenian beekeeper Anton Janša, who was born on May 20, 1734, and is considered a pioneer of modern beekeeping.

 

In Germany alone, there are about 600 different species of wild bees; in Europe, there are around 2,000, and worldwide, approximately 20,000 species. They belong to the order of insects known as Hymenoptera. Most species are solitary, while only a few wild bees—such as bumblebees—form social colonies.

Wild bees and honeybees, along with beetles, flies, and other insects, pollinate a wide variety of wild and cultivated plants. The value of this pollination service is estimated at 2 billion euros in Germany and in the high hundreds of millions of euros per year in Austria.

But the variety on our menu is priceless: nuts, fruits, and vegetables—without bees, we would have to do without so many of them! This also applies to the pollination of the food plants of many wild animals—bees contribute to biodiversity through their pollination activities.

About 75% of the most important crop species rely on pollination by insects. Roughly one-third of global agricultural production depends directly or indirectly on pollination. A single honeybee often visits hundreds of flowers in a single flight.

But bees and other insects are facing increasing challenges. Monotonous landscapes, pesticides, diseases, and climate change are taking their toll. That’s why every blooming garden, balcony, or roadside is important.

Unlike honeybees, which are cared for and protected by beekeepers as domesticated animals, wild bees are left to fend for themselves. Many species are endangered in this country and face immense pressure due to the sealing off of our natural areas. This also reduces the amount of land available for agriculture. Remaining farmland and fields are being used more intensively, and smaller plots are being consolidated to make them more efficient to farm. As a result, vegetated field margins—known as field edges—can be lost, and with them, valuable refuges for bees and many other insects. Our flowering areas are thus declining—a factor that contributes significantly to bee mortality.

 

Even small steps can make a difference:

– choose native, non-hybrid flowering plants,

– avoid using chemical pesticides,

– create a continuous display of blooms from spring through fall,

– Preserve meadows, hedgerows, field margins, and small-scale structures as habitats,

– leave some wild areas in the garden and

– Buy local honey and support local beekeepers.

World Bee Day highlights the importance of these tiny creatures—their impact on nature, biodiversity, and our food supply is enormous.

foodwatch laboratory test: 30 residues of banned pesticides detected in rice, spices, and tea

foodwatch laboratory test: 30 residues of banned pesticides detected in rice, spices, and tea

Copy of pro.earth Editorial Template NEW(1331)

Many foods sold in supermarkets are contaminated with pesticides that are no longer approved in the EU. This is shown by an international foodwatch laboratory test of rice, spices, and tea. A total of 64 products from Austria, Germany, France, and the Netherlands were tested. Two-thirds of all products tested (43 out of 64) were contaminated with pesticides banned in Europe—including private-label brands from Rewe, Aldi, Edeka, and Lidl, as well as products from Teekanne, Twinings, Meßmer, and the spice manufacturers Fuchs/Ostmann and Kotanyi. 

 

Many of the pesticide active ingredients found are banned in Europe, but end up back on our supermarket shelves via imported food—a phenomenon known as the “pesticide boomerang.” The European Commission could have lowered the maximum residue limits for such banned substances to the lowest possible level long ago. A legal opinion commissioned by foodwatch, among others, shows that the Commission would already be authorized to do so under current EU law.

The European Commission is currently planning to revise the rules governing imported food. However, on the one hand, the proposals fall far short of what is needed. On the other hand, Federal Minister of Agriculture Alois Rainer has so far rejected the EU plans. foodwatch called on the German minister to abandon his obstructionist stance and advocate for a zero-tolerance policy in Brussels: food containing residues of banned pesticides must not be imported into the EU.

 

Foodwatch calls for a recall of contaminated products in Germany and Austria

In Germany, foodwatch examined 19 products; 13 were contaminated with pesticides—all of which contained substances that are no longer approved in Europe. Three products even exceeded the legal limit: Fuchs Cumin, Kania Cumin, and the REWE Chili Mix. foodwatch is calling for these products to be recalled immediately.

Overview of all products tested ©️foodwatch Germany

 

The results for Austria are alarming: A total of 30 instances of banned pesticide residues were found in 10 of the products tested. Four products contained pesticide residues exceeding the legally established limits. The consumer protection organization called on the relevant authorities to immediately remove these four products from the market.

Overview of all products tested ©️foodwatch Austria

“Many pesticides are not approved in the EU for good reason: some of them have been linked to serious health problems. At the same time, they harm our soil, our water, and our flora and fauna. It is unacceptable that residues of such substances still end up in our food and thus on our plates.”

Markus Linkeseder, foodwatch Austria

 

According to the foodwatch test, the following products were found to be particularly contaminated: paprika, chili, cumin, and green tea. Without exception, all samples contained residues of unauthorized pesticides.

 

The results in detail: 

Cumin: 217 times the permitted limit

  • Six pesticides were detected in the Fuchs Kreuzkümmel product—four of which are not approved in the EU. One of these, the herbicide flamprop, was found at a level significantly above the limit. The limit is 0.01 mg/kg, but the product contained 1.65 mg/kg—165 times the limit.
  • Two pesticides not approved in the EU were also found in Kania Cumin (Lidl’s private label ), one of which exceeded the maximum limit—again, flamprop. In this case, the level was as high as 2.17 mg/kg. This means the product contained 217 times the permitted level.
  • Ostmann Cumin : 3 pesticides, 2 of which are not approved

 

Pesticide cocktail in paprika powder

Particularly alarming: paprika products. The foodwatch test shows that anyone who uses paprika powder is consuming a wide range of chemicals—even if the amounts are very small:

  • Ostmann "Rosen-scharf" bell peppers (part of the Fuchs Group): 13 pesticides, 3 of which are not approved in the EU.
  • Le Gusto Sweet Paprika (Aldi's private label ): 12 pesticides, 4 of which are not approved.
  • Kania Sweet Paprika (Lidl private label): 8 pesticides, 5 of which are not approved
  • Yes! Sweet paprika (REWE): 8 pesticides, 5 of which are not approved

In Austria, in

  • Kotányi Extra Sweet Paprika: 7 residues of unauthorized pesticides
  • S-Budget Sweet Paprika: Six residues of unauthorized pesticides
  • Le Gusto ground sweet paprika: five residues of unauthorized pesticides were detected.

 

Rewe Chili Mix Contains the Most Pesticides

  • REWE Chili Mix: 22 pesticides, 7 of which are not approved; 1 pesticide (chlorfenapyr) exceeds the limit
  • Ostmann Chili Flakes: 8 pesticides, 3 of which are not approved

 

Even tea with problematic residues

  • Teekanne Finest Green Tea: 2 Unapproved Pesticides
  • Meßmer Green Tea: also contains 2 unauthorized pesticides

In Austria, the following concerning results have been found: At least two unauthorized pesticide residues were detected in each of the green teas tested—including products from SPAR, Twinings, and Westminster.

Positive: Mivolis’s children’s gastrointestinal tea, “Westminster”black tea(Aldi’s private label ), and Lord Nelson Black Earl Grey (Lidl’s private label) were free of pesticide residues.

 

Rice also contains residues

  • Yes! Basmati rice (REWE): 3 pesticides, 2 of which are not approved
  • EDEKA Herzstücke Long-Grain Rice: 1 unauthorized pesticide

Positive: No residues were found in Dr. Oetker rice pudding, Oryza Ideal rice, and Ben’s Original no residues were detected.

 

Shocking: In the run-up to the tests, some manufacturers and retail chains had stated, in response to inquiries from foodwatch, that they were able to rule out pesticide contamination posing a health risk through comprehensive testing. However, the results show that these controls are clearly insufficient for some manufacturers and retailers.

 

Foodwatch warns against the EU Omnibus Package

Instead of strengthening consumer protection, however, the proposed EU Omnibus Package on food and feed safety threatens to further weaken existing safety standards. This would make it easier to use hazardous pesticides and further increase the levels of residues in our food. With a petitionaddressed to Members of the European Parliament, foodwatch is calling on consumers to take action against the weakening of food safety standards through the Omnibus Package and thus prevent the legislation from being adopted.

Link

foodwatch report with all the findings

Greenpeace Report: Half of Europe Lacks Access to Public Transportation

Greenpeace Report: Half of Europe Lacks Access to Public Transportation

Copy of pro.earth Editorial Template NEW(1330)

A lack of bus and train connections cuts off 56 percent of the European population from local public transportation. This is shown by the new study “Access Denied” by the Öko-Institut, commissioned by Greenpeace Central and Eastern Europe. This is primarily due to a lack of service, high prices, and a lack of accessibility. The results clearly show how differently mobility poverty is experienced. Women and seniors, for example, avoid public transportation much more frequently because they feel unsafe on it or because using it is physically too strenuous for them.

 

In the countries surveyed, up to 56 percent of people say they do not use buses, trains, or other forms of public transportation because they are not available in their local area. Those particularly affected by a lack of mobility include low-income individuals, older adults, and women.

 

Germany shows the sharpest decline in forced car ownership

The lack of alternatives forces up to 19 percent of the European population to own a car, even though a car represents too great a financial burden for them. The proportion of these individuals who have to cut back on everyday expenses such as groceries or heating in order to remain mobile rose the most in Germany—by two percent—between 2018 and 2024. In the majority of the 30 European countries surveyed, this proportion decreased during the period under review.

“Mobility poverty arises where transportation is unavailable, unaffordable, inaccessible, or insufficiently usable in everyday life. For a socially balanced and climate-friendly transportation policy, it is therefore crucial to closely examine the causes and the groups affected.”

Nelly Unger, Project Manager at the Öko-Institut

 

In Germany, more people than in any other country surveyed say that high prices deter them from using public transportation. At just under six percent, the figure in Germany is nearly three times higher than the European average.

 

Women and seniors are more likely to avoid public transportation due to safety concerns

Nearly half of the people in Germany (48 percent) never use buses or trains. Only 11 percent use them daily. Both figures are significantly lower than in other European countries. A major reason for this is the poor public transportation network, particularly in rural areas.

 

Austria's rural areas are particularly affected

In Austria, these shortcomings are particularly evident in rural areas. Greenpeace is calling for a massive expansion of public transportation services throughout Austria.

The urban-rural divide in public transportation is particularly evident in Austria. Nearly 28 percent of people in rural areas complain about infrequent service, inconvenient schedules, or a complete lack of public transportation options. In cities, by contrast, only 1.5 percent of the population shares this view. Furthermore, excessively long public transit travel times in rural areas are a significantly more common reason for relying on a personal car than in other European countries. As a result, an increasing number of low-income households are cutting back on other essentials to afford a car. By 2024, this already affected three percent of Austrians—more than the combined populations of Linz and Klagenfurt.

 

The causes of limited mobility are varied

Mobility poverty refers to a situation in which individuals or households are unable to achieve the level of mobility necessary for social participation. This includes access to jobs, education, health care, shopping, social contacts, and other essential services.

The study examines mobility poverty using eleven indicators for up to 33 European countries, including all EU member states. It focuses on four dimensions:

  • the availability of transportation services,
  • access to essential services,
  • the affordability of mobility, as well as
  • the suitability and usability of mobility options.

In addition to a lack of availability, cost is also a factor. In some European countries, up to six percent of the population does not use public transportation because it is too expensive. While up to 15 percent do use it, they find the cost to be a significant financial burden.

When millions of people in Europe are cut off from bus and rail service, it points to a systemic failure of transportation policy. People are currently experiencing firsthand just how costly dependence on gasoline-powered cars can be when they see their gas receipts. A well-developed, affordable public transit system makes daily life more affordable for many, ensures social inclusion, and strengthens acceptance of climate protection measures. As the federal government now discusses relief measures, buses and trains must be at the center of these considerations.

Marissa Reiserer, Greenpeace mobility expert   

 

Making public transportation more attractive and accessible

The study identifies several strategies for reducing mobility poverty. These include improved regional connections, more frequent service, demand-responsive schedules, accessible infrastructure, and enhanced safety at stops and on vehicles—for example, through lighting, emergency call systems, or clear reporting procedures in the event of incidents.

Targeted financial assistance can also help make transportation more accessible. The study cites social tickets, affordable subscription options, and free services, among other measures, as potential tools, particularly for vulnerable groups.

“Europe needs transportation systems that promote social inclusion while also being climate-friendly,” emphasizes Dr. Viktoria Noka, an expert on the social energy and mobility transition at the Öko-Institut. “To achieve this, public transportation must become more attractive—for example, through affordable fares, better regional planning, greater safety, and improved accessibility.”

 

Link

Full report: “Access Denied: Transport Poverty in Europe” (English)

No—the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has not “debunked” climate change.

No—the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has not “debunked” climate change.

Copy of pro.earth Editorial Template NEW(681)

No—the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has not “debunked” climate change.

No—climate scientists have not admitted that it was all made up.
And no—a reassessment of individual extreme scenarios does not mean that human-caused warming suddenly doesn’t exist.

The context of the current debate is much more sobering:
For the next generation of climate models (CMIP7), some earlier high-emission scenarios, such as RCP8.5 and SSP5-8.5, are now considered less plausible than they were 10 to 15 years ago.

 

Why?
Because actual trends have changed:
Renewable energy has become significantly cheaper, technologies have become more efficient, global coal consumption has grown more slowly than expected, and many countries have reduced their emissions, at least to some extent.

That doesn't mean:
"The warnings were wrong."

On the contrary:
The fact that extreme scenarios seem less likely today is also due to the fact that technological advancements and political measures are having an impact.

Anyone who concludes from this:
“Then climate change was a hoax,”
is making the same mistake as those who, for years, have portrayed every worst-case scenario as an inevitable future.


Facts and Figures

The global average temperature has already risen by about 1.3–1.5°C since the start of industrialization.
Heat waves, droughts, heavy rainfall, and extreme weather events are increasing measurably worldwide.

Current realistic warming trajectories are now more likely to be in the range of about 2 to 3°C by 2100—not necessarily 4 to 5°C, as in some older extreme scenarios.

But even a 2–3°C rise is no trivial matter from an economic, environmental, and geopolitical perspective:
Rising adaptation costs, water stress, crop failures, insurance claims, and instability in particularly affected regions remain real risks.

The real lesson to be learned from the current debate is therefore not:
“It was all a lie.”

Rather:
Science continues to refine its models.
Scenarios are constantly being adjusted to reflect real-world developments.
And a serious discussion requires neither hysterical alarmism nor ideological denial of reality.

Anyone who claims today that climate change does not exist at all is ignoring not only scientific data but also the measurable trends of recent decades.

 

Sustainable Economy Summit: Why the Economy of the Future Needs to Be Reimagined

Sustainable Economy Summit: Why the Economy of the Future Needs to Be Reimagined

Copy of pro.earth Editorial Template NEW(1328)

A few weeks ago, representatives from the business, academic, political, and civil society sectors gathered in Berlin for the Sustainable Economy Summit. The event focused on a question that is increasingly becoming a key strategic issue for Europe: How can the economy operate within planetary boundaries without sacrificing competitiveness and stability?

 

One of the most prominent speakers was Maja Göpel. For years, the political economist and sustainability researcher has been regarded as one of Europe’s leading advocates for a socio-ecological transformation of the economy. At the summit, she made it clear that sustainability is no longer merely a matter of image, but is becoming the foundation of economic resilience.

“An economic system must serve society”

Maja Göpel

 

Above all, the summit demonstrated one thing: the debate is shifting. Away from voluntary, isolated measures—toward the question of how energy, raw materials, supply chains, and growth can be fundamentally reorganized.

From Climate Protection to the Location Issue

For a long time, sustainability was discussed primarily as an environmental obligation. Now, however, it is increasingly becoming a geopolitical and economic necessity.

Rising energy prices, dependence on raw materials, extreme weather events, and fragile supply chains are putting immense pressure on companies in Europe. At the same time, new markets are emerging in the areas of the circular economy, renewable energy, climate-friendly industry, and sustainable technologies.

It was precisely this shift that was the focus of the summit. The discussion centered not on sacrifice, but on sustainability as a key economic factor.

Maja Göpel emphasized that many economic crises cannot be viewed in isolation. Energy, climate, resource consumption, and social stability are directly interlinked. Those who ignore these connections increase economic risks in the long term.

 

The next industrial revolution is already underway

The Sustainable Economy Summit made it clear that the global economy is already in the midst of a new phase of transformation. Göpel made it clear what the current phase of transformation is really about:

“We have reached a turning point where we must decide whether we want to cut costs within the existing economic structure or truly make those structures sustainable for the future. Renewal requires clear political direction; otherwise, many solutions that have long been developed will not be widely implemented quickly. But that is what we need to achieve new economic strength.”

While China is investing heavily in green technologies and the U.S. is launching multi-billion-dollar industrial programs, Europe is under pressure to redefine its competitiveness. Sustainability is increasingly becoming a key driver of innovation and investment.

Among other things, the following topics were discussed:

• Circular economy and raw material security
• Sustainable financial systems
• Climate-friendly industrial processes
• Energy transition and security of supply
• Sustainable mobility
• Biodiversity as an economic risk
• AI and resource efficiency

 

The summit thus also signaled a shift in direction: sustainability is no longer treated merely as a moral issue, but as an integral part of modern industrial and regional policy. Dr. Eckart von Hirschhausen emphasized the link between ecological and social resilience:

“What we are discussing here concerns not only markets, but the very foundations of our lives. A healthy environment is a prerequisite for all economic activity. The summit shows that this understanding is gaining increasing traction within the business community.”

Sustainable Economy Barometer 2026

A key element of the summit was the presentation of the 2026 Sustainable Economy Barometer. The findings show that, for many companies, sustainability is a key factor in competitiveness and securing their future—yet at the same time, a reliable regulatory framework remains a crucial prerequisite for further investment. Furthermore, it became clear how important dialogue between the business community, policymakers, and civil society is for bringing together different perspectives and developing viable solutions.

 

Facts and Figures

• The Sustainable Economy Summit took place on April 21 and 22, 2026, in Berlin.
• The event was held at AXICA near the Brandenburg Gate.
• Key topics included the circular economy, the energy transition, sustainable finance, mobility, and biodiversity.
• The summit is organized by the non-profit Sustainable Economy gGmbH and takes place every two years.
• Maja Göpel is one of Europe’s leading experts on sustainable transformation and was a co-founder of Scientists for Future.

 

Related links about Maja Göpel

Maja Göpel on values and the fixation on the self

"This is a fantastic innovation mission" - transformation researcher Maja Göpel

Flat-Rate Family Ticket for the Summer Months

Flat-Rate Family Ticket for the Summer Months

Copy of pro.earth Editorial Template NEW(1326)

Deutsche Bahn has announced that it will offer a family package for long-distance travel within Germany for 99.90 euros during the coming summer months. The offer is aimed specifically at families for whom a vacation would otherwise be too expensive due to high fuel prices. A great incentive to travel more sustainably!

 

When making the announcement on May 12, 2026, railway chief Evelyn Palla said, “Family summer vacations must not be ruined,” adding, “Germany needs stability and security right now,” in reference to the international energy crisis and the resulting high prices for jet fuel and gasoline.

However, the media has pointed out Deutsche Bahn’s difficult financial situation and views the ticket as a strategic move and marketing initiative designed, among other things, to offset the decline in popularity caused by massive delays.

 

Key figures

  • The family ticket is valid for up to 5 people, including at least one child aged 6–14 (up to 4 children) and one or two adults (over 15 years of age)
  • Children under the age of 6 generally ride for free and can therefore be brought along at no additional cost to the flat-rate ticket
  • The ticket can be used regardless of the degree of kinship
  • This applies to round-trip travel within Germany on long-distance routes (all long-distance trains – ICE/IC/EC)
  • Frommid-Junethrough September 14, 2026
  • Seat reservations are included in the price of 99.90 euros
  • You must select a specific train route to use
  • DB has not yet announced whether tickets are subject to a quota or the exact start date of the promotion (the date from which a route can be booked in this way)

 

This offer can save you several hundred euros compared to existing ticket deals. Let’s hope there will be enough trains and tickets available. In our view, promotions like this are definitely helpful in encouraging people to switch from driving to taking the train.