Growing up in the Black Hills, having access to Badlands National Park, and spending summers on the farm with my grandparents instilled my love of nature from a young age. When I was in elementary school, my family would hike up Black Elk Peak every summer to see the 360° view from an old fire tower. Being able to see the forest from above brought a sense of peace that I could only find when out in nature. I also remember looking for agates in the badlands. I loved that you could pick up a normal looking rock, crack it open, and find something beautiful inside.
Some of my most cherished childhood memories come from adventures on my grandparents farm. From bottle feeding calves, to driving around on a side-by-side, nothing could compare to the peacefulness of being 30 miles away from the nearest town. The first memory I could pinpoint about climate change was listening to my grandpa and uncle’s worries about crop loss due to the dry season and hot temperatures. I understood from a young age that our family’s livelihood was directly related to the climate and the changing weather patterns.
When I was 19 years old, I started reading scientific journals about climate change. I remember having a panic attack after reading the terrifying statistics of how we were heading towards doom with the warming of the planet.
Part of my anxiety came from the lack of concern from my surrounding community. I couldn’t understand why no one cared about this. Also, around this time my grandfather and grandmother both got diagnosed with Johns Hopkins Lymphoma from using Monsanto pesticides on their crops. The injustice of them being poisoned by a company that is also poisoning the planet set a fire under me. I changed my major from pre-med to civil and environmental engineering hoping that I would be able to use my degree to help “save the planet”.
After graduation, I worked on Wind Farm construction for a few years in Texas and later transitioned into designing renewable energy projects. Although I recognized that this work was necessary for the energy transition, I still felt underutilized. I wanted to do more for environmental justice and work with my city to adapt to the changing climate. I decided the best way to do this would be by enrolling in graduate school to pursue a master’s in Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy.
Starting grad school was a breath of fresh air. It is wonderful to be surrounded by peers who deeply care about the planet and the well-being of society. Even with this new support, my climate grief was creeping back in. With the classes I chose to take, I started learning about the many different climate change areas that need attention that I didn’t necessarily know about before starting school.
In March of 2024, I was able to pre-screen a documentary that provided information about corporations buying land in different countries in order to secure natural resources. This is called a land grab and it has a lot of human rights implications. Land grabs only benefit the political elite and oligarchies that can afford to buy, lease, or illegally obtain land. With all this new information, I started to become overwhelmed and knew that I needed to take some different steps to care for my mental health if I wanted to be able to sustain a career in this field.
I expressed these feelings to some of my classmates and found that I was not the only one struggling with these feelings. In my Environmental Systems Analysis class, we were able to have some class discussions on burnout and how to combat feelings of hopelessness. I tried a few different tactics that were able to help me change my perspective and started to feel a bit hopeful again.
My first tactic was reading the book “Climate Grief” by Shawna Weaver. Something that has stuck with me was her view on people who deny the scientific consensus on the rate and extent of climate change, its significance, or its connection to human behavior, otherwise known as a climate denier. Shawna said that we should view climate deniers as in the first stage of grief, denial. This of course excludes corporations that push green-washing techniques and false climate solutions. They are not in denial; they are on the offensive to protect their self-interests. Those who are not millionaires or billionaires that are denying climate change, however, should be given some slack.
Climate change is a scary concept. To face and solve our crisis, there are a lot of personal changes that will need to be made.
Denial can be seen as a defense mechanism against these uncomfortable truths. By meeting those where they are, with empathy, we can hopefully provide space and a safe place for someone to explore their climate denial and the reasons behind it.
Another defense against climate grief is getting involved in local solutions. I was able to become a stakeholder on my county’s Waste Management committee so I could provide input on what I would like to see in my community. I also joined the Women’s Environmental Network in the Twin Cities and have been involved with Big Brothers, Big Sisters as a mentor.
Building community and relationships through volunteering, joining a club or participating in local events are an extremely important part of resiliency. Having a community where you can share your fears about climate change makes them less intense and helps us feel less alone. It’s also important to focus on good climate news. We can’t fix everything in a day or even a year, but there are small things that are happening all over the world to help combat climate change. Seeing that other people and organizations are working together to solve this issue can help bring some hope back to this challenge.
My final defense involves some great mental health techniques that I have learned over the past few years. The first and maybe the most important tactic is to slow down and make time for something you enjoy – like art or going for a walk. You could also take time to dream about a different future that you want to create. In the photo below, I have included what I would like to see in my community in the future. We are always on the go, and when we get busy, our behavior patterns change. When you have less time in the day to yourself, you may be more likely to eat takeout or purchase drinks or snacks. These usually come in non-recyclable and non-compostable packaging, increasing the amount of waste you are producing. When we slow down, we allow ourselves more space and time to be mindful of the choices we are making.
Although I do have these great defense mechanisms to help with climate grief, I still have days where I feel hopeless. It is imperative to realize that these feelings are valid and are a way for us to understand that this is an important issue that requires our attention.
Grief is not linear; it comes in waves. We must rely on our communities to ride these waves to promote action and change.
I have assembled a list of additional resources that provide different types of media and spaces to address your climate and eco-anxiety. This list can be found here.
I have also assembled a list of news sources that focus on positive climate change news and some examples of climate solutions that are currently implemented in the United States. This list can be found here.
Chloe is a Civil and Environmental Engineer, and graduate student at Humphrey College of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota. Chloe served as a Minnesota Climate Impact Corps Member at Climate Generation throughout the summer of 2024. She is pursuing a master’s degree in Science,Technology, and Environmental Policy to develop cross-cultural competency to communicate scientific information among different communities in Minnesota. Her empathetic nature and dedication to justice will aid in ensuring that solutions have legitimacy and involve cross-boundary organizing to establish equity. In her free time she enjoys going on walks with her dogs, reading thrillers, downhill skiing and riding her bike.
The post Sustaining Hope While Experiencing Climate Grief appeared first on Climate Generation.
Climate Change
“Sink or swim”: WA Gov hugely underestimating decline in regional gas demand while sleeping on green exports, new report finds
PERTH, Tuesday 13 October 2026 — A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and Springmount Advisory reveals green commodity exports are an untapped economic opportunity for Western Australia in a declining Asian gas market, while offering a genuine solution for decarbonising Asia.
From Gas to Green: Building Western Australia’s Future State is a comprehensive analysis of the declining gas market in Asia, and the untapped economic opportunity for WA to become a global leader in green commodity exports while driving the regional shift away from fossil fuels.
The report offers key recommendations for the WA Government to support regional decarbonisation through an orderly phase out of gas exports in favour of green iron and other green exports. It comes as global climate leaders from across business, politics and advocacy prepare to meet for the Global Citizen Now: Perth event focused on decarbonising WA.
Key findings:
- Gas demand is falling across WA’s core markets in Asia: Gas demand fell in 2025 and is projected to continue to decline, driven by a combination of global geopolitical factors and domestic concerns.
- Policy shifts in key markets since the war on Iran now prioritise renewables and nuclear over gas: Japan, South Korea and China have legislated energy plans that prioritise renewables and nuclear over gas.
- New WA gas would arrive in a saturated, uncertain Asian market filled with cheaper gas: The US is now the world’s largest liquefied gas producer and plans to double its capacity as it also targets Asian markets.
- Green commodities offer a real solution to sustain WA’s economy: WA can lead Australia’s green commodity exports, which by 2060 could be worth almost a trillion dollars.
- Exporting more WA gas is likely to delay or impede Asia decarbonisation: Despite claims by the gas industry, there is no evidence that WA gas is displacing coal in Asia, and in fact diverts resources from genuine decarbonisation options.
Geoff Bice, WA Campaign Lead at Greenpeace Australia Pacific said: “As our export partners in Asia shift away from expensive and polluting gas, the WA Government has a golden opportunity to pivot our economy to green exports, like green iron, which is the most effective way to help our region to decarbonise.
“The writing is on the wall: gas is in decline, renewables are our future. In this context, it makes zero sense for the government to encourage high risk projects like Woodside’s reckless Browse gas proposal at Scott Reef.
“This report clearly shows that the WA Government faces a choice: sink or swim. They can either allow the gas industry to keep ripping off West Australians and continue propping up its decline, or choose the path that will deliver enormous benefits to the state and the world by becoming a leader in the rapidly expanding green economy.”
Tom Quinn, Managing Director of Springmount Advisory: “Western Australia prospers when it looks to the future and builds for future demand. Twenty years from now, what the world needs is green commodities made using WAs abundant renewable resources. Just like it did with iron ore in the 1950s and gas in the 1970s, WA should look to the future and build what the world will need, not sunsetting industries like gas that are already past their peak.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lucy.keller@greenpeace.org
A report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and Springmount Advisory reveals the untapped green economic opportunity for Western Australia in a declining Asian gas market, which also offers a genuine solution for decarbonisation in Asia.
Is Western Australia clinging to a fading gas industry while a thriving green future passes it by? As major Asian trading partners rapidly pivot away from volatile gas imports toward cheap solar and battery storage, this report exposes a high-stakes choice: risk becoming stranded in an oversupplied fossil fuel market, or harness WA’s unmatched sun and wind to lead the global clean energy transition.
Summary
From Gas to Green: Building Western Australia’s Future State reveals that Western Australia (WA) faces a critical juncture as falling Asian gas demand, geopolitical gas supply volatility and accelerating renewable energy deployment undermine the long-term economic viability of gas exports. By harnessing its world-class wind and solar resources, the report demonstrates that WA can execute an orderly phase-out of gas and pioneer a green commodity export economy that could generate $987 billion in economic value by 2060, create 24,000 ongoing jobs, and drive a 9.6% reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions.
Key Findings
- Gas demand is falling in Asia – WA can no longer rely on gas exports: Gas demand in core Asian markets fell in 2025 and is projected to continue to decline in 2026. Legislated energy plans in Japan, South Korea, and China now prioritise renewables and nuclear over gas.
- Asia is increasing renewables, importing gas just gets in the way: Evidence from markets like Thailand suggests that gas imports are increasingly crowding out cheaper renewable energy investments and battery storage rather than displacing coal, locking in more emissions over time.
- Green commodities offer a real solution to decarbonise Asia – this is a major win for WA: With world-class renewables, WA can lead Australia’s green commodity exports, which by 2060 could be worth almost a trillion dollars ($987 billion) and support a genuine 9.6% reduction in global emissions.
Recommendations to WA government
Recommendation 1: Plan an orderly gas phase-out aligned with a trading partner pivot plan
Implement a managed, orderly phase-out of gas exports aligned with trading partners’ decarbonisation pathways, rather than waiting for demand to collapse, by:
- Developing and implementing a staged phase-out of gas facilities aligned with feedstock supply expiry or typical end of facility lifespans.
- Committing to no new gas development for gas expansion, including Browse and Kimberley fields.
- Developing new, reciprocal trade relationships with existing gas trade partners, structured to progressively replace gas exports with green commodities – integrated with recommendation 2.
Recommendation 2: Develop an integrated green commodity export strategy, positioning WA as a global green iron manufacturing hub
Establish an integrated green commodity export strategy that immediately prioritises green iron development, positioning WA as a global green iron manufacturing hub, by:
- Committing to green commodity export targets to give industry and investors a clear demand signal.
- Prioritising green iron as the lead sector within the broader green commodity strategy, given WA’s iron ore endowment and first-mover potential.
Recommendation 3: Reject false solutions such as carbon dumping (CCS) and blue hydrogen
Reject carbon dumping (also described as carbon capture and storage, or CCS) and blue hydrogen as viable decarbonisation technologies, and prioritise green hydrogen and proven renewables for clean energy and fuel production by:
- Excluding blue hydrogen projects (and CCS-dependent projects) from all government support programs.
- Requiring existing hydrogen-based production (including ammonia, methanol, synthetic fuels) to have clear, near-term transition timelines to switch to green hydrogen production.
What you can do
Together, we can push for a prosperous green future.
You can help by:
- Sending an email to Environment Minister Murray Watt and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, calling on them to reject Browse.
- Sharing this story to help more Australians understand what’s at stake.
- Encouraging your friends and family to take action.
REPORT: “From Gas to Green” Building Western Australia’s Future State
Cleaner cooking projects in the UN carbon market will have to set aside a share of their credits to insure against the risk that the trees they save are lost to fire, drought or logging, after the market’s regulator rejected calls to exempt the sector.
The requirement is part of a new rulebook that the Paris Agreement carbon market regulator – the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body – approved last Friday for programmes that aim to cut emissions by distributing new and cleaner cookstoves in regions that still burn wood or charcoal for cooking.
These are the UN mechanism’s first rulebooks for cookstoves, one of the carbon market’s most popular credit types and also one of its most criticised for overstating climate benefits.
They consist of two methodologies: one for programmes that aim to cut greenhouse gas emissions by distributing more efficient cookstoves that burn less wood or charcoal, and a separate methodology for projects shifting households to lower-emissions cookers running on electricity or liquid petroleum gas (LPG).
Mkhuthazi Steleki, the South African chair of the Supervisory Body, said “this decision gives cleaner cooking projects a new pathway under the UN carbon market, with clear rules to ensure that each credit represents a real and credible emission reduction”.
Industry and NGOs lobby to weaken UN carbon credit rules in “coordinated” push
In copycat submissions and a private briefing to government officials, the groups have opposed a proposal to tighten safeguards for emissions offsetsLaunch of Africa Energy Bank delayed again in blow to oil and gas hopes
Repeated delays are raising questions about the bank’s momentum and whether it can mobilise investment to finance Africa’s oil and gas ambitions in an era of energy transition
Exemption push rejected
More efficient cookstove projects earn credits based on the amount of carbon they save by preserving trees that would have otherwise been cut down and burned for fuel. But if those trees later burn in a wildfire or are logged, the carbon stored would be released anyway, erasing the climate benefits of the credits.
Several carbon credit developers, conservation NGOs and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) disputed that cookstove projects face this risk, in what critics described as a “coordinated lobbying campaign”.
They argued that, unlike forest protection schemes, this type of credit represents a “flow” of avoided emissions rather than a “stock” of stored carbon that can be released. They also warned that requiring a buffer would impose disproportionate costs and undermine the financial viability of these activities.
But the UN carbon market regulator was not persuaded by the argument. It decided that projects would have to protect against this reversal risk by handing over a percentage of credits to a so-called “buffer pool” instead of selling them.
‘New paradigm’
The amount of credits to be given up is calculated by applying different methods for natural risks, like wildfires, droughts or hurricanes, and human-caused ones, such as logging or land clearing.
For natural risks, project developers will need to apply local risk values derived from new modelling published by a group of independent scientists.
Campaigners have broadly welcomed the decision. Federica Dossi, an expert at Brussels-based advocacy group Carbon Market Watch, said it sets a new paradigm for calculating reversal risk based on empirical data. “This approach is grounded in science and we hope to see this now being adopted by other carbon crediting mechanisms in the voluntary market,” she added.
Backers claim this method is more rigorous than current practice in the voluntary carbon market, which largely relies on expert guesswork.
Pre-COP draws attention to Pacific’s climate plight and 1.5C goal
Pushback over science
As Climate Home News previously revealed, the same industry and NGO groups that sought an exemption from the “buffer pool”, along with some corporate buyers, criticised the use of a study backed by the UN carbon market’s experts that recommended the new risk assessment approach.
The groups pushed for more flexible rules that would have allowed natural risk values drawn from other sources, including national databases, or from the project developers themselves.
While the Supervisory Body rejected this approach, it gave project developers and countries the option to propose alternative values that would first need to be vetted by the mechanism’s expert panel and then approved by the regulator.
A carbon market expert told Climate Home News that, while it is too early to say how this provision will be used, they expect requests will have to be backed up with solid scientific evidence, lowering the risk of unfounded claims.
Policy discounts questioned
To guard against human-caused risks, projects will need to apply a fla