Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Podcast

A New Grand Theory of Why Decarbonization Is So Hard

Rob and Jesse talk with Jessica Green, author of the forthcoming book, Existential Politics.

Flooding.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Why has it been so hard for the world to make progress on climate change over the past 30 years? Maybe it’s because we’ve been thinking about the problem wrong. Academics and economists have often framed climate change as a free-rider or collective action problem, one in which countries must agree not to emit greenhouse gases and abuse the public commons. But maybe the better way to understand climate action is as a fight that generates winners and losers, defined primarily by who owns what.

On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Rob and Jesse talk with Jessica Green, a political science professor at the University of Toronto. She calls for “radical pragmatism” in climate action and an “asset revaluation”-focused view of the climate problem. Green is the author of the forthcoming book Existential Politics: Why Global Climate Institutions Are Failing and How to Fix Them. Shift Key is hosted by Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University, and Robinson Meyer, Heatmap’s executive editor.

Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, or wherever you get your podcasts.

You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.

Here is an excerpt from our conversation:

Jesse Jenkins: So what are some of the strategies that you think policy makers can take if they adopt this sort of asset theory mindset?

Jessica Green: So there’s kind of two pieces to this. One is to recognize the many flaws in the status quo approach, which sidesteps all of these questions of asset revaluation. So I spend a lot of time explaining why managing tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere or [greenhouse gases] in the atmosphere is not a helpful approach.

There is a huge swath of the policy space — and I know this may upset some of your listeners that are dedicated to things like greening the supply chain and voluntary net zero commitments and public-private partnerships and improving the robustness of carbon offsets. And you know, I document extensively in the book why these things do not work. And so even though many of us think, Oh, well, we’re past that, this is everywhere in climate policy. Anywhere you see net zero — anywhere you see the word ‘net,’ you have some kind of offset, whether it’s a carbon offset, CCS. This is really everywhere in climate policy.

So I think that’s step one. And then step two is to really address both pieces of the equation of fossil and green asset owners. One is you have to build green asset owners, which is the thing you guys talk about so much in your podcast. How do we do industrial policy and create carrots to incentivize particularly these decarbonizable industries to flip?

But the other piece, which is the one that nobody wants to talk about, is how do we constrain the material and political power of the fossil fuel industry or fossil asset owners? And that is the big one. And so I try, in my own pragmatist way, to talk about the international institutions that are available to us to think about constraining them both in trade, but also in tax and investment law. And I think those are ways that we can think more productively about how to lessen this power asymmetry between fossil and green asset owners.

Also mentioned in this episode:

Asset Revaluation and the Existential Politics of Climate Change, by Jessica Green, Jeff Colgan, and Thomas Hale

Tax Policy Is Climate Policy by Jessica Green

Why Carbon Pricing Falls Short, by Jesse Jenkins

Jesse’s 2014 article on asset specificity and climate change

Jesse’s downshift; Rob’s downshift.

Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Adaptation

This New Wildfire Risk Model Has No Secrets

CarbonPlan has a new tool to measure climate risk that comes with full transparency.

A house and flames.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

On a warming planet, knowing whether the home you’re about to invest your life savings in is at risk of being wiped out by a wildfire or drowned in a flood becomes paramount. And yet public data is almost nonexistent. While private companies offer property-level climate risk assessments — usually for a fee — it’s hard to know which to trust or how they should be used. Companies feed different datasets into their models and make different assumptions, and often don’t share all the details. The models have been shown to predict disparate outcomes for the same locations.

For a measure of the gap between where climate risk models are and where consumers want them to be, look no further than Zillow. The real estate website added a “climate risk” section to its property listings in 2024 in response to customer demand only to axe the feature a year later at the behest of an industry group that questioned the accuracy of its risk ratings.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
AM Briefing

Endangered Finding

On BYD’s lawsuit, Fervo’s hottest well, and China’s geologic hydrogen

Lee Zeldin.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: A midweek clipper storm is poised to bring as much as six more inches of snow to parts of the Great Lakes and Northeast • American Samoa is halfway through three days of fierce thunderstorms and temperatures above 80 degrees Fahrenheit • Northern Portugal is bracing for up to four inches more of rain after three deadly storms in just two weeks.


Keep reading...Show less
Red
Studying wildfire.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

There were 77,850 wildfires in the United States in 2025, and nearly half of those — 49% — ignited east of the Mississippi River, according to statistics released last week by the National Interagency Fire Center. That might come as a surprise to some in the West, who tend to believe they hold the monopoly on conflagrations (along with earthquakes, tsunamis, and megalomaniac tech billionaires).

But if you lump the Central Plains and Midwest states of Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas along with everything to their east — the swath of the nation collectively designated as the Eastern and Southern Regions by the U.S. Forest Service — the wildfires in the area made up more than two-thirds of total ignitions last year.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow