We will not stop climate change entirely. The planet has already warmed roughly 1.3°C above pre-industrial levels, atmospheric CO2 has reached about 429 parts per million, and enough warming is locked into the system to guarantee decades of further impacts. The more precise question is whether humanity can limit warming to levels that avoid the worst outcomes, and the honest answer is: it’s still physically possible, but the gap between what’s happening and what’s needed remains large.
Where Global Temperatures Are Headed
The most widely tracked analysis of national climate pledges, from the Climate Action Tracker, projects that if every country meets its current 2030 and 2035 targets, the world would still warm to about 2.6°C above pre-industrial levels. That’s well above the 1.5°C goal set by the Paris Agreement and significantly above the 2°C threshold most scientists consider a hard ceiling for manageable impacts.
The distinction matters because climate change isn’t binary. Every tenth of a degree translates to measurable differences in sea level rise, heat extremes, crop failures, and species loss. Holding warming to 1.8°C would be far better than 2.6°C, and 2.6°C would be far better than 4°C. The trajectory is not fixed. It depends on what governments, industries, and financial systems actually do in the next ten to fifteen years.
Renewable Energy Is Growing Fast, but Not Fast Enough
The shift away from fossil fuels is real and accelerating. Global renewable energy capacity additions hit 666 gigawatts in 2024, and the International Energy Agency expects that to reach nearly 935 GW per year by 2030. Solar and wind account for 95% of all new renewable capacity because they’re now cheaper than both fossil fuels and other clean energy sources in most countries. Solar alone is expected to more than triple, making up roughly 80% of all new renewable electricity worldwide. Offshore wind capacity is on track to quadruple compared to the previous six-year period.
Here’s the catch: this pace still falls short of what’s needed. At the COP28 summit, countries pledged to triple global renewable capacity to over 11,000 GW by 2030. Current policies and market trends are projected to reach about 9,760 GW, a 2.7-times increase from 2022 levels. That’s impressive, but it’s roughly 25% above countries’ own stated ambitions while still missing the tripling target. The IEA estimates that if governments address grid bottlenecks, permitting delays, and financing gaps, an additional 20% of capacity could be unlocked, which would get close to tripling. Those are solvable problems, but they require deliberate policy action, not just market momentum.
Fossil Fuels Are Still Being Subsidized
Governments worldwide spent $725 billion in direct fossil fuel subsidies in 2024, roughly 0.6% of global GDP. That money goes toward keeping the price of gasoline, natural gas, and electricity artificially low for consumers and producers. Petroleum, natural gas, and electricity each account for about a third of the total. Under current policies, these subsidies are projected to decline only slightly relative to GDP through 2035.
This creates a fundamental contradiction. Countries are simultaneously investing in clean energy and propping up the fuels they need to phase out. Redirecting even a fraction of those subsidies toward renewables, grid upgrades, or adaptation in vulnerable countries would dramatically change the math.
Tipping Points That Could Slip Beyond Control
Climate scientists have identified several thresholds where warming triggers self-reinforcing changes that can’t be reversed on human timescales. The West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which holds enough water to raise global sea levels by several meters, could begin irreversible melting at around 1.5°C of warming. The Atlantic Ocean’s major circulation system, which regulates weather patterns across Europe and the Americas, could shut down within the next 20 to 30 years without aggressive emissions cuts.
A modeling study from the Potsdam Institute found that if global temperatures don’t return to 1.5°C by the end of the century, there’s roughly a one-in-four chance that at least one major tipping point will be crossed: collapse of the Atlantic circulation, the Amazon rainforest ecosystem, or one of the major ice sheets. These aren’t distant hypotheticals. Some of these systems are already showing signs of stress at current temperatures.
Carbon Removal Technology Exists but Isn’t Cheap
Even with rapid emissions cuts, most climate scenarios assume we’ll also need to pull CO2 directly out of the atmosphere. The technology to do this, called direct air capture, works today. The problem is cost. Purchase prices in 2024 ranged from $100 to $2,000 per ton of CO2 removed, with the average over recent years around $490 per ton. Several companies are aiming to bring that down to $250 to $400 by the end of the decade, with longer-term goals near $100.
For context, the world emits roughly 37 billion tons of CO2 per year from fossil fuels alone. At current prices, removing even a small fraction of that would cost trillions. Carbon removal will likely play a meaningful role eventually, but it’s not a substitute for cutting emissions at the source. It’s a cleanup tool for the hardest-to-eliminate pollution, like aviation and heavy industry.
Forests Are Being Lost at Record Rates
Tropical forests are one of the planet’s most important carbon sinks, absorbing billions of tons of CO2 each year. In 2024, tropical primary forest loss hit 6.7 million hectares, nearly twice the amount lost in 2023 and an area roughly the size of Panama. That translates to about 18 soccer fields of old-growth forest disappearing every minute, driven largely by massive fires.
This loss doesn’t just release stored carbon. It eliminates future absorption capacity. Protecting and restoring forests is one of the most cost-effective climate strategies available, yet deforestation is accelerating rather than slowing.
The Money Gap for Vulnerable Countries
Many of the countries most exposed to climate impacts, from flooding in South Asia to drought in sub-Saharan Africa, lack the resources to adapt. The UN Environment Programme estimates the adaptation finance gap for developing countries at $187 to $359 billion per year. Even if wealthy nations met their existing pledges under the Glasgow Climate Pact, that would close only about 5% of the gap.
This isn’t just a humanitarian concern. When vulnerable nations can’t adapt, the economic and political consequences ripple outward through migration, food prices, and supply chain disruptions. Closing this gap is a practical necessity for every country, not charity.
What “Stopping” Climate Change Actually Means
The warming that’s already happened is permanent on any timescale that matters to people alive today. Seas will continue rising, extreme weather will intensify, and ecosystems will keep shifting for decades regardless of what we do now. In that sense, we will not stop climate change.
What remains within reach is limiting warming to somewhere between 1.5°C and 2°C, avoiding the most dangerous tipping points, and building systems that help people survive the changes already locked in. The tools exist: solar and wind are economically dominant, electric vehicles are scaling, energy efficiency is improving, and the policy frameworks are in place in many countries. The gap is not technological. It’s political will, financial allocation, and speed of implementation. Every fraction of a degree matters, and the choices made between now and 2035 will determine which version of the future we get.