⚠️ The Edge of Everything: Why Tipping Points Might Save Us

Please see the corresponding SubStack episode

We’re standing at the edge of something we’ve never faced before as a species. Not just climate change—we’ve known about that for decades—but the moment when Earth’s fundamental systems might simply flip into new states we can’t undo. Like flipping a light switch, except the switch controls ocean currents that feed billions of people, or ice sheets that hold back meters of sea level rise.

It sounds apocalyptic because, frankly, it is. But here’s what keeps me up at night and gets me out of bed in the morning: the same physics that threatens to unravel our world also offers us the most powerful tool we’ve ever had to fix it.

Global Tipping Points Report 2025

Available for Broadcast on PRX

This is Heliox: Where Evidence Meets Empathy

Independent, moderated, timely, deep, gentle, clinical, global, and community conversations about things that matter.  Breathe Easy, we go deep and lightly surface the big ideas.

Thanks for listening today!

Four recurring narratives underlie every episode: boundary dissolution, adaptive complexity, embodied knowledge, and quantum-like uncertainty. These aren’t just philosophical musings but frameworks for understanding our modern world. 

We hope you continue exploring our other podcasts, responding to the content, and checking out our related articles on the Heliox Podcast on Substack. 

Transcript

0:25

Welcome back to the deep dive. Today we are staring down the cliff edge of climate change, almost literally. We're diving into this idea of tipping points, but not just as some distant scientific theory. We mean these specific kind of nonlinear moments where Earth systems just... flip into a new state. Yeah, a self-perpetuating state, often irreversible. It's like the difference between, say, a leaky faucet you can fix and a whole dam just graking. That's a good way to put it. And look... This deep dive, it's really a guide for you through two parallel imperatives. Okay. First, getting a handle on the immediate, potentially catastrophic threats. These earth system tipping points, or ESTPs. Right. These are the systems we're already pushing, getting perilously close to that irreversible edge. And the second reality. The second is about identifying the leverage points. Where can we push for intentional, positive global transformation? These are the positive tipping points, PTPs. Ah, the counterforce. Exactly. So our mission here is to map where the dangers are converging, but also crucially, where the opportunities for these, let's say, aggressive positive shifts are actually within reach right now. Exactly. Okay, so let's start with the heavy stuff. These ESTPs. When we talk about them, it feels... Significant. It's not just things getting slowly warmer. No, it's not gradual. We're talking abrupt, really substantial changes. Changes that lock in long-term consequences pretty much regardless of what we manage to do later on mitigation. That's the key point, isn't it? The irreversibility. It is. And the source material we looked at is, frankly, quite blunt about this. Current climate efforts, they're not just slow. They're insufficient to prevent these abrupt changes. So what's needed then? An immediate, massive acceleration and decarbonization. That's number one. But it has to be coupled with action on the other drivers, things like deforestation. We can't just focus on emissions. Right, the non-climate factors. And you mentioned the sources talk about front-loaded mitigation pathways. What does that mean in practical terms for us listening? It basically means we can't afford to spread out our emissions cuts nice and evenly over the next 30 years. Okay. Front-loaded means... The deepest, most aggressive cuts need to happen now, like in the next five, maybe 10 years, not easing into it. Why the rush? Because that minimizes the peak temperature we hit. And it shortens how long we stay above critical thresholds if we overshoot. Every fraction of a degree every year we delay. It really increases the risk of triggering these flips. Which brings us straight to that number we hear constantly, 1.5 degrees Celsius. What systems are really balancing on that particular knife edge? Well, unfortunately, several major ones look likely to have tipping points right around that 1.5 degree C mark. Such as? We're talking about things like locking in the eventual complete loss of the Greenland ice sheet. Wow. And the West Antarctic ice sheet. which, you know, commits us to meters of sea level rise down the line. Centuries, but it's locked in. Also the risk of thawing huge areas of permafrost, releasing all that ancient carbon. A feedback loop. A massive feedback loop. And destabilizing ocean circulation, like the subpolar gyre. critical systems. And I think the most tragic part of this is we're not just predicting future tipping points. We've already crossed one, haven't we? Yes, that's the scientific consensus now on warm water coral reefs. Already gone past the point. Their central thermal tipping point was estimated at about 1.2 degrees Celsius of warming. We're already past that globally. So even if we manage 1.5? Even under the most optimistic scenario, stabilizing right at 1.5, the sources say coral reefs are virtually certain that's over 99% probability to globally tip to die back. That's sobering. An ecosystem collapse happening right now, affecting how many people? Nearly a billion people depend on coral reefs for their livelihoods or coastal protection. It's huge. Okay, let's pull back a bit. You mentioned a global mediator system. AMO. The Atlantic circulation, why is that one so central? Right, the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation. Think of it like a giant heat conveyor belt for the Northern Hemisphere. It's crucial. Oh, central. It features in something like 45% of all the tipping point interactions studied. It influences almost half the other major system. Okay, so if it tips? If it collapses, the knock-on effects are profound. Serious cooling in the North Atlantic, which sounds counterintuitive with global warming, but yeah. Right. Severely altered rainfall patterns across the globe. And massive disruption to the monsoons that literally feed billions in West Africa and Asia. And speaking of regional impacts, the Amazon rainforest. That's facing a complex threat too, isn't it? Not just temperature. Absolutely. The Amazon dieback risk is a perfect storm, really. It's driven by the warming atmosphere, sure, and increased drying. But it's also massively impacted by direct human action, deforestation, burning. So what are the thresholds there? How much pressure can it take? The sources suggest it might flip with surprisingly little extra pressure. Maybe if deforestation hits just 10 to 20 percent of the original forest area. That doesn't sound like much. It isn't, considering the pressures. Or, alternatively, if the dry season length stretches out to five to seven months regularly, that could also trigger widespread dieback. So the Amazon survival is both a global climate issue and a local land use issue. They're intertwined. Completely intertwined. You can't solve one without addressing the other. This interconnectivity you mentioned, it sounds like the real hidden danger. It's not just one domino falling, it's the potential for a chain reaction, tipping cascades. That's exactly where the systemic risk lies. When one part of the Earth's system gets descalibized, it increases the odds of another part tipping. It's a feedback loop of instability. Can you give an example? Sure. Imagine the Amnesty collapses, as we discussed. That changes weather patterns globally. That could, in turn, make the Amazon dry season even longer, pushing it closer to its own tipping point. Right. One thing triggers another. Exactly. Dominoes. That's what makes the whole Earth's system potentially fragile in ways we haven't fully appreciated. So if these systems start to cascade, who bears the brunt? Right. Who feels the impacts across those critical areas like food security, water infrastructure? Well, billions are affected globally, make no mistake. But the single highest impact risk identified is monsoon disruption. Because of the sheer number of people relying on them? Precisely. It directly threatens food and water security for over 5 billion people. Think South Asia, Southeast Asia, East Asia, West Africa. We're talking about existential threats to entire regions if those rainfall patterns fail consistently. And the inequality is stark, even in places we might think of as relatively prepared. You mentioned Britain losing most of its arable land if AMOC collapsed. That's right. A collapse of that ocean current could plunge northern and central Europe into severe food and water issues. One study projected arable land suitability in Great Britain could drop from about 32 percent down to just 7 percent. 7 percent. Yeah. Imagine the societal upheaval. Yeah. All driven by a system failure potentially thousands of miles away. This just throws these massive global vulnerability gaps into sharp relief, doesn't it? Which communities face the most extreme threats, like actual uninhabitability? The sources are very clear on this. Small island developing states, SIDs, they face complete uninhabitability from sea level rise and other impacts. Total loss. Total loss. And the most extreme gaps in preparedness, the ability to cope, are concentrated in SIDs, but also West Africa, Central America, and the Amazon basin itself. So any response has to be about more than just climate science. Absolutely. Any effective response must be rooted in justice, equity, human rights. You cannot separate Earth system resilience from the well-being and rights of people. And that includes recognizing the vital role, for example, of indigenous territories and protected areas. They safeguard huge carbon stocks and biodiversity. Their governance is key. Which brings us to the governance piece more broadly. It sounds like our current financial system is sort of... sticking its head in the sand about these risks. That's a fair assessment based on the analysis. Current financial risk models massively underestimate the danger because they don't really factor in tipping points or these cascading effects. They assume gradual change. Exactly. They model gradual linear change, not abrupt catastrophic shifts. And that failure means we urgently need regulatory reform. We need to price risk properly. So we need precaution built into the system. Anticipatory governance, the sources called it. Yes. And what that means for global capital for finance? Yeah. It means a massive redirection. We need to pull capital away from activities that increase emissions and destabilize ecosystems. Think fossil fuel expansion, deforestation-linked agriculture. And push it towards? Towards ecosystem resilience, adaptation, sustainable infrastructure. We need governance that understands that preventing an ESTP is vastly, vastly cheaper than trying to deal with the consequences after it tips. Okay, it's easy to feel, well, overwhelmed by all the warnings about ESTPs. So let's pivot. Let's look at the other side of the coin. This shift in narrative championed by Brazil for COP30, moving from fear to hope by deliberately triggering positive tipping points, a global mutiram, they call it, a collective effort. Exactly. PTPs are our intentional counter strategy. A positive tipping point is essentially a self-propelling change toward the more sustainable, more stable state. How do they work? What's the mechanism? They generally work by using policy or technology or social influence, or usually a mix, to make the desired sustainable behavior. Well, the easiest option. The most affordable, the most accessible, or maybe just the most attractive, the most fashionable thing to do. I think renewable energy, sustainable diets, that sort of thing. But if they're so positive, why aren't they just happening everywhere all the time? What holds them back? You've hit the nail on the head. The challenge is overcoming what the researchers call balancing feedbacks. These are the forces that keep the old unsustainable system in place. Things like institutional inertia, we've always done it this way, or massive investments locked into old fossil fuel infrastructure, or direct things like fossil fuel subsidies making the old way artificially cheap. Got it. So a PPP is only really crossed when the positive momentum, the reinforcing feedbacks of the new way, becomes strong enough to overwhelm those balancing forces. making the old way harder, more expensive, less desirable than the new sustainable way. Well, we have proved this can happen, right? There are real-world examples where we've already crossed these PTPs, especially in energy. Oh, absolutely. We have clear successes. Look at the global adoption rates for solar PV and wind power. They're exponential in many places. And the way electric vehicles, battery storage, heat pumps are taking off in leading markets, This isn't slow incremental change anymore in some areas. And what's driving that? Cost. Cost is huge. Battery prices, for example, have just plummeted down something like 84% in the last decade alone. Wow, 84%. That's the kind of rapid cost reduction that defines a PTP being cross-strived. The new tech becomes financially superior. And that leads to things like Norway, where almost all new cars sold are now electric. That's a tipped system. So if technology is bringing the costs down, what's the most powerful tool governments have to really push things over the edge to accelerate these PTPs and break through that inertia you mentioned? Policy mandates. clear, legally binding targets and phase-out dates. Like banning petrol car sales. Exactly. Banning future sales of petrol and diesel cars by a certain date. Or mandating that new heating systems must be heat pumps, not gas boilers. These kinds of mandates are identified as the strongest tools. Why are they so effective? Because they send an unambiguous signal to the entire market. They coordinate finance, investment, R&D instantly. They basically pull the whole system across that threshold much faster than relying on market forces alone. Now, PTPs aren't just about big tech and infrastructure, are they? They can happen at the human level, too. Behavior, social norms. They absolutely do. That's the whole demand side of the equation. Behaviors that are easily seen and copied, things like cycling or walking instead of driving short distances or shifting to more sustainable diets, they have huge positive tipping potential. Can you give an example of that social tipping? Yeah, there's a neat example from Denmark, the Brenby Challenge. It involves training local community leaders like teachers, canteen managers, influential figures. And they then use community events, nudges, engagement strategies to normalize Platt-Rich diets. It's about changing what feels normal and desirable within a community. That's tipping social norms, not just technology adoption. That's fascinating. And finally, can we apply this PTP logic to nature itself? Can we tip ecosystems back towards health? Yes, we can. But it requires careful strategic intervention combined with empowering local communities. How so? Well, you can tip ecosystem restoration through specific actions. Things like reintroducing key species that were lost. Or using techniques like clumped tree planting to kickstart forest recovery. Reducing nutrient pollution and waterways. Triggering nature's own healing. Exactly. These interventions aim to activate nature's own reinforcing feedbacks, allowing the ecosystem to start healing itself and build resilience. but and this is crucial scaling this up successfully really depends on strong community governance and making sure the benefits are shared equitably the people living there need to be driving it and benefiting from it hashtag outro covering so wrapping this all up yeah what's the key takeaway for you listening to this It sounds like we need this dual focus. We have to act immediately and aggressively to prevent these irreversible ESTPs from tipping. That's the emergency brake. Right. And at the same time, we need to aggressively invest in and accelerate these PTPs, the positive shifts. Floor the accelerator on the solution. And preventing the catastrophic shifts. it really boils down to protecting fundamental human rights, doesn't it? Because the choices we make literally today will shape the basic life support systems for everyone who comes after us. Absolutely. And the core lever, it comes back to finance and politics. We need that massive redirection of capital we talked about. away from the things destabilizing our planet towards resilience and sustainable solutions. And political frameworks need to catch up. They have to. They need to stop treating these tipping point risks as some distant maybe event and start embedding them into immediate economic policy and planning. The threat is now. Which raises one final critical point. If the politics and finance are maybe lagging, where's the real pressure point for change emerging right now? It's increasingly at the intersection of science and law. This is fascinating. Legal actors, climate litigation cases, they're already starting to integrate ESTP risks into their arguments. How? By demanding that governments and corporations fulfill their existing legal and human rights obligations. Obligations to prevent dangerous interference with the climate system, which includes preventing tipping points. The law in some areas is actually moving faster than the regulators. So really preparing for tipping points, both preventing the bad and accelerating the good. It demands shifting our underlying frameworks. We need to prioritize what some are calling earth system justice. Earth system justice. Yeah, thinking about fairness within our generation, between present and future generations, and even acknowledging our relationship with other species and the planet itself, it's about designing a future that isn't just imposed on us by catastrophe, but one that we intentionally shape through cooperation, foresight, and a sense of justice. That really is the only viable path forward.