New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Why ‘Tipping Points’ Are the Wrong Way to Talk about Climate Change

A new paper warns the concept of “tipping points” doesn’t do much to encourage climate action from laypeople and policymakers

Drop of water from glacier

Meltwater drips from ice at an exposed portion of the Aletsch glacier on August 22, 2019 near Bettmeralp, Switzerland.

Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

CLIMATEWIRE | Unstoppable ice loss in Antarctica. Irreversible permafrost thaw in the Arctic. The shutdown of a gigantic Atlantic Ocean current.

Scientists have warned that these and other “tipping points” in the Earth’s climate system lie ahead if global temperatures continue to rise unabated. But there’s still great uncertainty about how and when the planet might cross these dangerous thresholds.

And without clearer public communication about what exactly a tipping point is — and what can be done to prevent it — the entire concept might not be that useful when it comes to promoting climate action.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That’s the warning presented in a new perspective paper, published Tuesday by a group of scientists, policy experts and communication specialists in the journal Nature Climate Change. Tipping points have captured the public’s imagination for years now, they argue — but it’s not clear the concept is driving any meaningful policy changes.

That’s partly due to widespread confusion about what a tipping point actually is, the paper suggests.

Early scientific literature on the subject presented the idea that certain aspects of the Earth’s climate system could have physical limits — and once the point of no return is crossed, these systems fall into a death spiral of unstoppable and irreversible change.

Studies suggest, for instance, that enough warming and drought in the Amazon could cause the ecosystem to tilt into an uncontrollable transformation from lush rainforest to dry grassland.

But over the years, as the concept has grown more popular, researchers have begun to apply the tipping point framework to a variety of other scientific and social systems. Papers have begun to suggest that there are tipping points in everything from energy pricing systems to humans’ eating habits.

Uncertainty over the likelihood of climate tipping points is another source of public confusion, the authors suggest.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.N.’s leading authority on climate science, has warned of a variety of possible tipping points in the Earth’s climate system. But some are more likely than others, and many are shrouded in uncertainty — in other words, scientists don’t know how close we are to toppling them.

That makes it hard to communicate the seriousness of tipping point threats or to inspire near-term action to prevent them.

If scientists knew for certain the Antarctic ice sheet would experience rapid and uncontrollable melting with exactly 1.5 degrees of global warming, policymakers might be more inclined to implement emergency measures to keep temperatures below that threshold.

But almost all global tipping point thresholds come with a wide range of uncertainty about when they’ll actually occur — if ever.

Instead, the authors argued, more tangible and immediate climate emergencies — such as extreme weather events, which are worsening around the globe as temperatures rise — may be more likely to inspire a greater sense of urgency among policymakers and the public.

That doesn’t mean tipping points can’t still be a useful concept in public messaging about climate change, the authors added. But scientists should communicate more clearly about their definitions and uncertainties.

That's because climate tipping points are still a major threat — even if their exact thresholds are still uncertain.

A major report last year — with contributions from more than 200 scientists — warned of 26 possible tipping points around the globe, affecting systems from ice sheets to tropical cloud cover.

It’s an issue that urgently requires more research and understanding, the report warned.

“We know enough to identify that the threat of Earth system tipping points demands an urgent response. Indeed, our best models likely underestimate tipping point risks,” it stated. “The world is largely flying blind into this vast threat.”

Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2024. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.

Chelsea Harvey covers climate science for Climatewire. She tracks the big questions being asked by researchers and explains what's known, and what needs to be, about global temperatures. Chelsea began writing about climate science in 2014. Her work has appeared in The Washington Post, Popular Science, Men's Journal and others.

More by Chelsea Harvey

E&E News provides essential energy and environment news for professionals.

More by E&E News

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe