As a life-long scuba diver, I’ve already witnessed changes. It is absolutely sickening. It is also a difficult thing to come to grips with because diving tourism involves air travel, fuel for boats, etc - elements that are contributing to their demise. So much that my own travel has declined. But even the 1.5 C target comes with a high probability of significant losses in our coral reefs. So if people are talking about being brutally honest, we need to grapple with that. And do these underwater cities end up restoring themselves after the Earth’s energy balance momentum begins to change back to favorable conditions? The fact is coral reefs may already be in hospice, and I absolutely applaud the work of scientists scrambling to find a way to make some of them more resilient to our planetary selfishness.

Expand full comment
Apr 18·edited May 6

Fantastic article, once again. For a beautiful, heartbreaking peek at what's going on under water, the movie "Chasing Coral" on YouTube (https://youtu.be/aGGBGcjdjXA?si=gmrqR2KGR483xjoP) is wonderful.

I agree we need to transition off fossil fuels immediately. But how to do it is the question. With a far-right extremist SCOTUS, and the ability of the fossil fuel industry to tie regulations up in courts for years, just trying to ban them is not likely to succeed. Plus, that would cause energy prices to skyrocket and hurt those least able to afford it the most. It would also fail to reach beyond the US border, thus not address 85% of global GHG emissions.

Senator Whitehouse gave a recent talk on the need for carbon pricing to achieve 50% GHG emission reductions by 2030 in the US: https://www.youtube.com/embed/fjuAoLoibAA?start=378&end=527&autoplay=1&rel=0. The graph he shows is from a report by the Hamilton Project of the Brookings Institute: "Climate tax policy reform options in 2025": https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/20240227_THP_ClimateTaxPaper.pdf. He also explains how the associated Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism will push the US carbon price around the world, giving it a global effect.

According to en-roads.climateinteractive.org, a strong steadily rising US carbon price pushed around the world with a CBAM is about 50% of the global climate solution to hold warming to 1.5°C, and it will make doing the other 50% of policy changes we need much easier.

US Economist Gregory Mankiw explains why political will is required to enable a carbon fee (from the movie "Before the Flood"): https://www.youtube.com/embed/b7e1y3CVPiI?start=194&end=243&autoplay=1&rel=0, where he says: “If we want to change the president's view of carbon taxes, we need to change the public's view of carbon taxes… Once the American people are convinced, the politicians will fall in line very quickly.“

Mankiw provided another quote (slide #4 in a list of quotes I collected for a presentation to deliver to Conservatives - the quote reference is in the presentation notes - https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BhAUXEV5qOuE6V9pvZOCRWR1oekxbGY6Juu4SG2o4fI/edit#slide=id.g24430ef3e49_0_86): "The closest thing I know to a panacea in the climate change debate is putting a price on carbon and rebating the revenue to citizens."

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen says we'll fail to address global warming without carbon pricing. See carboncashback.org/carbon-cash-back for her quote, and more about cash-back carbon pricing. Students can join cfdmovement.org to help build a collective action to create the political will to enable Congress to pass Carbon Fee and Dividend with a CBAM legislation. Everyone can join citizensclimatelobby.org to help do that.

Additional resources: bit.ly/cfdresources.

Expand full comment

Good luck with carbon taxes... ask any Canadian .....it dont work!


Expand full comment
Apr 18·edited Apr 18

Thanks! The fossil fuel industry knows how powerful a steadily rising carbon fee on fossil fuel production is for reducing emissions (and fossil fuel industry profits). It's no wonder it is doing all it can to kill it.

However, 80% of all Canadians are coming out ahead - receiving more money in their cash-back carbon dividend than they pay in total from the trickle-down effects of the carbon fee paid by fossil fuel producers.


The US will likely do it sometime this decade. With the EU carbon price rising and its CBAM starting in 2026, US exporters will begin paying the difference between the US carbon price ($0) and other countries' prices in trade. In other words, we'd better close the US carbon price gap soon!


Expand full comment

The bit about 80% of Canadians getting the tax back is nonsense.... that's the current governments rhetoric (the auditor general's reports confirms no one gets all of it back … we pay enough taxes on energy already.. economists just don’t get it ….low energy costs = better prosperity.

The sooner we vote in governments that waive off this whole Climate emergency scam and nonsense the better…. Its not real and even if it was its not affordable. Plus… only the western nations are committed to this lunacy with the rest trending to use much more FF than us so its not going to make any total difference to CO2 emissions.

We will end up very virtuous but very poor…. Roll on the next elections.

Expand full comment
Apr 18·edited Apr 18

I love how you started this thread by rejecting the scientific consensus about AGW, and now you've slinked over to ignoring the consensus of economists. What do you have against facts and experts? How much does the fossil fuel industry pay you to sell your soul (or at least your critical thinking ability)?

Cash-back carbon pricing puts most families ahead financially (especially the low and middle-income families) while it applies the most powerful lever to reduce climate pollution.


Expand full comment

My soul is none of your business and its not for sale.

You have a warped naive view of technical discourse ..there is never a consensus. Only after extensive work will laws be established …and only after strict acceptance of observation testing and repeated validation. Both economics and certainly climate science is far from that state of law making. On both we need far more discourse from all factions before policies can be set…

Forget carbon tax its a mugs game... I would rather leave the cash in the populations pockets to spend on the economy rather than constrain the key thing that drives it.. low cost energy.

Expand full comment

Bots have no souls.

Scientific consensus is a thing. Ask a legitimate scientific organization about it (climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus).

Cash-back carbon fee on fossil fuel production is the most cost-effective and equitable way to rapidly reduce climate pollution according to experts (clcouncil.org/economists-statement). But then again, you ignore experts in favor of polluter industry front groups.

Expand full comment

I have lived my life 755 miles from the nearest ocean, and yet when my sister worked for Habitat for Humanity in Kenya in the 1980s, I visited her and had a chance to snorkel amongst the coral reefs off the coast of Mombassa. I wore a t-shirt and sunscreen and still got the sunburn of my life, but the memories of those amazing coral reefs have stayed with me much longer than that sunburn. In fact in my mind, the coral reefs I saw are the very definition of the apex of life on this planet. If this doesn't motivate anyone who has seen pictures of or experienced a coral reef first hand to redouble your efforts to push harder for a low carbon future, then you need to check your pulse.

Expand full comment

It is incredibly valuable that scientists are being more explicit about what needs to be done to stop these ecological disasters and biodiversity loss, and not just documenting these events in the abstract.

Really cool you covered this again, because it is absolutely heartbreaking.

Expand full comment

I know I'm a broken record, and while she did write, "rapid phaseout of fossil fuels," the gist of the research at her institute is to displace and replace fossil fuels, with a minor in reduced energy use itself. It was fun to read the descriptions of trainees' work. Offshore wind and wave energy, marine propulsion, kelp farming, seasonal energy storage for northern grids, etc. Nice regional-specific areas of study. Do the universities in Kansas, Nebraska or Montana have serious programs to improve and utilize wind and solar energy?

Expand full comment

It's a direct connection more clear than many others with fossil fuels. That's for sure.

Expand full comment

To me this illustrates how painful it is to be alive right now. I know this has been true for a lot of human history, in one way or another, but watching something as breathtaking and astonishing as coral reef dying due to our actions is devastating. (Of course, there are other world events happening right now, equally as devastating). To see how much we humans can destroy leaves me speechless. I so hope we will save the reefs and I will do my part as best I can, but man, it hurts to live amidst a climate crisis. Thank you for your reporting as always, Heated 🌏❤️

Expand full comment

Based on facts I don’t agree we need to halt the use of fossil fuels to assist the health of coral reefs

Its always the game of the climate alarmists to find something to justify that CO2 is a prime pollutant…. and this aint it!

But..when it comes to other pollutions in the seas and oceans I agree we must take that seriously as the sea traffic pollution due to globalization and the manner in which we disturb the coastlines and fish to almost extinction is cause for concern. The use of plastics and how they get into the global water system must also be watched.

But its very hard to get excited about our very minor contribution due to the release of CO2 by human activity.

First there is no correlation with the cyclical nature of the health of coral and either increased water temperature or ocean composition change (acidic/alkaline) so CO2 is not a causation factor.

As the following links explain there are many other nonhuman induced factor.

Plus.. the trend on the health and adaptability of most corals is positive.

Exxon did not Kill the Coral Reefs - CO2 CoalitionCORAL REEFS NOT IN DANGER (youtube.com)



Expand full comment

See above for Nigel's daily overdose of reality denial.

What do we know through science?

Report: Nature's Decline is Unprecedented, due to

"These culprits are, in descending order:

(1) changes in land and sea use;

(2) direct exploitation of organisms;

(3) climate change".

"Climate change... impacts expected to increase... in some cases surpassing the impact of land and sea use change." - https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report/

What can we do?

"Explicit carbon prices remain a necessary condition of ambitious climate policies” - IPCC SR15

How to do it: carboncashback.org/carbon-cash-back.

You can help Congress do it from here: cclusa.org/cfd-write.

Expand full comment

Species Extinction Rates ‘Accelerating’????. Just propaganda from the same crowd that says we have a climate crisis… what a joke…. when we all know that bio diversity is improving as the planet warms, and we have been improving our relationship to this situation.. yes.. can do better.. but its not an emergency that we cannot fix with more global prosperity that wont happen without continued use of fossil fuels and certainly far less left wing woke DEI nonsense that the UN keeps pushing.

Face it…No one will want this cash back stuff and the rank and file especially those emerging wont trade prosperity to save the planet that does not need saving anyway.

Expand full comment

Talking about self serving....

This material is far more realistic..

Exxon did not Kill the Coral Reefs - CO2 CoalitionCORAL REEFS NOT IN DANGER (youtube.com)



Expand full comment

CO2 Coalition is a fossil fuel-funded disinformation generating front group. PR. Propaganda. Go to scientific organzations for your science, not polluter industry front men.


Expand full comment