setting a new standard

jack jordan, executive director of climate action evanston, says the ordinance is essentially a standard for building performance. 

“when we think about a building, how does a building perform? can you think about an athlete performing? a building performs for how much energy it’s using, where that energy is coming from, how energy efficient it is,” jordan said. 

buildings emit greenhouse gases a number of ways, depending on the type of building it is. residential buildings using natural gas appliances, such as stoves and furnaces, emit more than buildings that use electrical appliances. an example of a modification that could be implemented through the hbo is the electrification of natural gas appliances, such as water heaters, stoves and furnaces. 

jordan emphasizes that the transformation of these buildings will not only reduce emissions, but it will also improve indoor air quality as residents make the switch to electric appliances over natural-gas ones. 

connecting the community

the hbo also outlines a rulemaking process that creates two public bodies, the healthy buildings accountability board (hbab) and the healthy buildings technical committee (hbtc). 

the hbtc will focus on the technical aspects of transforming a building to use clean energy, while the hbab will be focused on equity concerns that arise as the buildings are modified. 

the two rulemaking bodies will take input from local community members and building owners over the course of the next year to design a plan for each building to begin to meet its net-zero goal. 

“the intent is not to raise rents, in particular, for folks that are in buildings that are either designated affordable housing or that we just want to maintain affordability,” said paula scholl, chair of the building electrification working group and member of the evanston environment board. “there will be a process by which at least 20% of the buildings will be considered equity prioritized. those would not only include affordable housing, but could also include our schools and houses of worship.”

most of the buildings included in the ordinance are located in evanston’s first, third, fourth and seventh wards. the seventh ward, home to northwestern university, has 91 buildings listed to be updated as part of the ordinance. other buildings included in the hbo are local schools, such as evanston township high school, apartment building complexes, the northshore evanston hospital, among others. 

councilwoman clare kelly, the only dissenting vote during the city council meeting that led to the passage of the hbo, argued that the ordinance was rushed, saying during the meeting that the city is “jumping to the end” of the process rather than laying out specific details and plans for each building before passing the ordinance. 

sustainable buildings of the future

the hbo will not only provide health benefits for evanston residents, but it will also create jobs, including for technicians to make upgrades, and lower energy costs for building owners in the long-term, jordan said. 

“this is a pathway to very well-paying sustainable employment, you know, technical employment that i think a lot of our young people would really appreciate, hands on work that is actively saving the planet,” he said. 

new york city and st. louis, among others, have established building codes focused on sustainability and energy efficiency. in st. louis, the building energy performance standard was passed in may 2020, and it targets municipal, commercial, institutional and residential properties 50,000 square feet and larger. 

“the more cities that do it, the more we get ideas, too. no ordinance is static. you can always change it and revise it and make it better over the years. so that’s the other thing is we want to encourage other folks to try something, and we’ll try to get the best ideas from everybody,” she said.

they must be doing something right as over 28% of newlab’s membership base has relocated from outside of michigan or in the case of international companies, have opened a north american office in detroit with newlab. with over 300 startups and over 1,000 members in their network, newlab is just getting started. if you have a radical new idea about how technology can improve the world around us, newlab is a great place to start.

discover how innovative technology and passionate engineers are redefining sustainability, turning everyday sewage into valuable resources that benefit our environment and communities. this story breaks down the future of waste management and shows how blue plains is leading the charge toward a more sustainable tomorrow.

see the full story below!

the biden administration passed the inflation reduction act in 2022, investing hundreds of billions into government expenditures focused on upscaling the us’ domestic energy production and manufacturing. in 2025, some of the major energy projects supported by the ira hang in uncertainty under the trump administration’s spending freeze.

the ira sparked a path for the united states to lower energy costs, increase clean energy production, and reduce carbon emissions by roughly 40 percent by 2030 while supporting displaced fossil fuel workers, unionization in the green labor market, and incentivizing new clean energy projects with subsidies.

as the us diversifies its energy resources, this leaves fossil fuel workers in a unique situation where they are displaced from high-road, union protected jobs while in possession of vital skills and experience in trades that could support the labor force in the transition to a green economy. 

an integrated circuit: fossil fuel jobs and clean energy jobs

“if you commit to using higher-pay workers, the cost of the project is going to be higher. and so there’s this trade off between, do you do the transition more quickly? do you do things in a way that protects the workers?” said david popp, an environmental economist from syracuse university. 

one thing the fossil fuel industry has had that the green industry has not yet is time. over the course of history, tradesmen and blue-collar workers have fought and advocated for unionized protections. this has resulted in jobs that tend to have higher wages and better protections for workers against threats such as wage retaliation for workplace injuries.

fossil fuel jobs generate fossil-dependent communities. as fossil fuel jobs are phased out, fossil fuel workers are displaced. nearly 3,200 workers per year will be displaced in california between 2021 – 2030 and another 2,500 workers will voluntarily retire each year. 

“renewable energy tends to be placed closer to where it’s going to be used,” popp said. “so even if people have skills that might be appropriate, it’s not necessarily that the fossil fuel jobs are going to leave and a bunch of new green energy jobs are going to come in.”

the latest clean investment monitor report found that from 2022 through the end of 2024, $289 billion had been invested into facilities that manufacture or deploy clean technologies. many of these projects have been cited in districts, currently represented by republicans, which tend to be largely dependent upon the fossil fuel industry. these fossil-dependent areas benefited from $223 billion of this investment, representing 77% of the total share. 

despite remaining separated in the minds of many americans, fossil fuel jobs and green energy jobs are intertwined. one major thing fusing them together is skilled and experienced trade workers.

a voltage boost: the ira’s new approach

the ira is different in that it is essentially an all carrot and no sticks approach to getting the united states to diversify its sources of energy, said popp. the ira incentivizes green energy projects through things like subsidies, capital investment, and tax credits to companies looking to invest in a new project. this is different from the novel approach that focuses on “sticks” such as employing cap and trade policies or carbon tax regulations. 

to support fossil fuel workers in this transition, the ira focused on three major factors: domestic manufacturing, prevailing wages and unionization, and apprenticeship. in 2024, unionization rates in clean energy surpassed traditional energy employment rates for the first time.

“the ira supports the transfer of skills for displaced workers in the fossil fuel industry by providing incentives for developers to integrate apprenticeship training programs into renewable energy projects,” said gary labarbera, president of the new york city and new york state building trades.

it also funds grants for vocational training and community college programs. prioritizing apprenticeship opportunities ensures ongoing training and retraining, equipping workers with the essential skills needed for careers in the green economy.”

surging ahead

since the 2025 inauguration, the trump administration has already put through more than 50 actions to eliminate federal climate mitigation and adaptation. the ira was a historical piece of legislation that outlined incentives and approaches that were both enduring and politically palatable as the industry diversifies. it provided monumental investments into the climate and an existing workforce.

while companies and industry leaders have been incentivized by the ira to support fossil fuel workers and fossil-dependent republican communities, advocates say that it is important to recognize that green jobs need unionization for a just transition. 

labarbera said: “in the unionized construction industry, this has resulted in well-paying jobs with medical and retirement benefits, enabling workers and their families to achieve middle-class stability. the transition to green energy must not be exploited by employers seeking to cut wages and benefits, ensuring that workers continue to receive fair compensation and protections.”

iron, fire, and the future is a compelling deep dive into the industrial history, economic struggles, and future prospects of redcar, a seaside town in north yorkshire, england. hosted by danny nicholson, a teesside university student, this podcast unpacks redcar’s journey from a thriving steelmaking hub to a town searching for its place in a rapidly evolving, greener world.

for over a century, redcar’s skyline was dominated by the smoke and steel of industry, providing jobs, prosperity, and a unique identity. historian dr. tosh warwick paints a vivid picture of redcar’s transformation from a quiet fishing settlement to an industrial powerhouse, driven by the steel industry’s boom.

however, as the late 20th century brought increased foreign competition, economic downturns, and political shifts, redcar found itself at the center of a nationwide industrial decline. the collapse of the steel industry devastated the local economy, stripping the town of its core identity and leaving many residents questioning their future.

in the search for renewal, redcar became a focal point in the uk’s transition toward net-zero carbon emissions. scientist matthew cotton discusses the town’s involvement in a government-backed hydrogen energy trial, an ambitious attempt to repurpose existing gas infrastructure for cleaner energy. however, despite the promise of innovation, the project was met with skepticism, safety concerns, and strong public opposition. residents feared being treated as “guinea pigs” in an uncertain experiment, leading to the project’s postponement in 2023.

with hydrogen energy set for potential revival in 2026, the podcast raises key questions: can redcar overcome the scars of industrial decline? how can the government and corporations regain public trust? and what does the future hold for a town caught between its industrial past and a greener tomorrow?

through expert interviews, community perspectives, and an engaging narrative, iron, fire, and the future sheds light on the challenges of transitioning to sustainable energy while honoring the rich heritage of a working-class town.

podcast transcript:

danny nicholson: welcome to iron, fire, and the future, a standalone podcast taking you through the rise, fall, and future of redcar, a town in north yorkshire, england. i’m danny nicholson, a teesside university student, here to join you on that journey. five hours north of london stands a seaside town where people once flirted for the picturesque views, the feeling of waves crashing against their feet, and sand in between their toes, and the prospect of a new future forged in steel.

on today’s podcast, we’re going to hear about the rise, fall, and future of redcar, a town which has found itself at the center of the nation’s net zero aspirations. we’re going to look at the aborted trial of hydrogen power in the town, why it failed and what might come next. but first, to set the scene, here’s historian tosh warwick, ph.d., to tell us a little bit about redcar’s past.

tosh warwick: redcar, for the past 150 years, approximately, the skyline has been defined by industry blast furnaces, you know, smoke an industrial river. but if you go back beyond that period, it was a kind of idyllic, scenic, you know, unspoilt landscape, and we see these in a lot of the, the artistic depictions of redcar before, when it was chiefly, a fishing settlement and surrounded by a largely agrarian, community, very much untouched by the the harshness of industry that, had already started shaping parts of of britain elsewhere.

by 1846, i think it was, when the railway extended to redcar that opens up all those opportunities for placing your works along that route as well, and towards redcar in the in the early 20th century you had the emergence of a company town, dormanstown, built for those workers.

so that’s how redcar became a key center of particularly steelmaking that had the furnace set to produce iron. but they had that kind of, aspiration to be integrated, whereby, you have the core ovens, you have the iron, the iron works nearby. so it’s all pretty, a smooth operation. then the iron goes to be processed to steel.

in the post for decades, there’s major, multi-million-pound investment in the broader redcar steelworks sites. you know, and there’s huge new, blast furnace furnaces being built. so you have this whole transformation of this land. and redcar becomes known as the main, certainly by the 1960s, (site of) steel manufacturing on teesside rather than middlesbrough, which was the birthplace of iron and steel manufacturing.

steelworkers were prepared well. so people that could prosper, work the industry, and progress. you know, you wouldn’t be able to do that in other industries. 

dn: the town wasn’t just booming from an industrial perspective. the influx of relatively well-paid jobs in steelworks in redcar and middlesbrough meant the town also became something of a leisure destination for workers keen to spend their hard earned cash on the rides and amusements along the seafront.

tw: it was real pleasant, redcar. because people went to redcar to spend their money. there would be organized trains from middlesbrough when the factories were shut. when, as a day off, people would pile into a train. some would even walk the eight miles from middlesbrough to the seaside. and the seaside was an area of release. it’s where people went to escape the smoke and the cluster in the dankness of living in the iron manufacturing town, “iron-opolis,” as middlesbrough was known.

you know, redcar was but thriving but unfortunately, like a lot of seaside resorts and like a lot of, industrial town, the 70s, 80s and onwards have proven to be a lot more depressing.

dn: for redcar, the prosperity didn’t last forever, and what came next was a damning period of a harsh new reality for this once thriving seaside town.

tw: yeah, there was a number of factors that led to major industrial decline. certainly in terms of the iron and steel work. so there was issues around the investment into the site in the 1970s. there’s a rise in foreign competition. there’s disputes with the trade unions. you know, unfortunately the blast furnace was blown in, in 1979, which is the same year that a certain margaret thatcher rose to prominence and became prime minister.

and those thatcher years on this so-called rationalization and this kind of, cutting back of british steel, as it was. redcar really felt the brunt of that. it was a real kind of acceleration of decline. in 1975, there was around 300,000 people employed in the in the steel industry, in great britain. by around the mid 1980s, that’s more or less halved.

by 1990, that’s below 100,000. it’s not just about the economic side. the economics is- obviously, you have to be able to pay your wages. you have to be able to keep a roof over your head. that’s key. we get that. but it’s about your kind of your mentality, your pride, your sense of place, your very being.

you know, you exist because of industry. you know, for that to be snatched away and to see this industry decline like it did in the 1980s, it’s devastating. you know, people move away. there’s a drain of skills in the teesside-redcar area. but it’s a cataclysmic divorce. it’s a real kind of break with the past.

the break with what you do. you know what we do here. we make, iron and steel. and then to be told that, well, actually you’re making less of that now and there will be less of you making it in the 70s and 80s- it has a major impact. and i think it has an impact in terms of people’s aspirations, in terms of what they believe can be achieved by staying in the area.

i think it, i think it it had a profound impact on people’s wellbeing.

dn: brandished with the struggles of the past few decades in 2023, the people of redcar were introduced to the chance of a new future shaped by escaping the smog and embracing green technology. i spoke to matthew cotton, a scientist on the hydrogen project who talks me through the project and struggles they faced.

matthew cotton: yeah. so the project in redcar was, initiated by a company called northern gas networks. so northern gas networks is a company that supplies natural gas. you know, they say they own a lot of the infrastructure for, providing gas that’s piped into people’s homes and businesses, which they use for cooking and for space heating and hot water heating.

and for a while, northern gas works, along with a lot of other utilities, has been interested in, sort of decarbonize their infrastructure. and, one of the ways in which they think they could do this is through, switching from natural gas to hydrogen. but there are some technical challenges involved with that. so hydrogen is a very small molecule- hydrogen atoms are very small.

and so the question about whether or not the infrastructure is going to prevent leaks- it’s very important. it’s also a highly reactive gas. so certain parts of the infrastructure, certain metals might might corrode or there might be chemical reactions that go on within the pipe. so there was a lot of scientific research around the feasibility of that.

and they have a quite a good safety case now. so they’ve sort of developed this infrastructure. it’s safe. but then they need to sort of trial this in real life. and so there were projects that were proposed in redcar and cleveland. and one of the reasons for them selecting redcar was precisely that sense that there is an industrial heritage in this region, that people are used to big infrastructure, they’re used to these sort of big industries, and therefore they thought this would be a good place to trial it.

unfortunately, both of those projects that were proposed, failed. now they failed in the sense that the official reason that the former conservative government gave was that there wasn’t enough actual hydrogen supply. you know, it’s a supply of hydrogen to make the project work, but it probably didn’t help that there was a lot of public backlash in redcar.

and this was happening during an election year when the government of the time was already kind of a bit on the back foot. and so this sort of combination of sort of technical and political reasons is probably why the project didn’t go ahead. 

dn: like the people of redcar, i was learning about hydrogen energy for the first time.

so i was keen to find out why hydrogen and what makes it a potential new solution to a greener future.

mc: there’s lots of- we have legally binding commitments to reduce our, greenhouse gas emissions, particularly our carbon emissions. some sectors, like the electricity sector, have done quite a good job of doing that, switching from first from coal to then gas, and then from gas to renewables.

but some sectors are quite difficult to decarbonize. and heating and hot water, sort of hot water heating and space heating are two of those sectors that have been difficult to decarbonize. and so hydrogen presented a bit of a solution because it’s relatively easy to change a regular gas boiler to a hydrogen boiler or relatively easy to change a gas cooking hub to a hydrogen hub.

and so it did present a bit of an opportunity for sort of reconfiguring the existing gas network that’s already there towards hydrogen, rather than using more electricity. if you like, to heat homes and heat water. the benefits, of course- so when you have hydrogen and you burn hydrogen instead of producing carbon dioxide, it fuses with oxygen and forms a water vapor.

so the only thing coming out of the tailpipe, so to speak, is water vapor. its overall green credentials are dependent on what type of hydrogen production method you use. so the most common method is what’s called gray hydrogen. gray hydrogen is really- it’s formed from natural gas. it uses this process- it’s steam methane reformation. that basically takes the hydrogen out of out of natural gas.

and then you’re still left with a kind of waste product, which you can use for other things. but it isn’t the most sort of environmentally friendly from a climate change perspective. a better version is what’s called blue hydrogen, which is to do exactly the same process. but then you combine that with carbon capture and storage. so you’re sort of capturing the carbon dioxide in and storing it, or utilizing it for another purpose.

and then there is green hydrogen, which is formed differently. that’s from the electrolysis of water. so you basically using electricity to split water molecules into component hydrogen and oxygen. and then you can use both of those gases. in theory the greenest version is the green hydrogen, but it’s not produced in huge quantities. it uses renewable energy which you might then use for another purpose.

so there is a sort of question of why would you use the renewable energy to produce hydrogen when you could just use that renewable energy in homes and businesses directly? but again, all of these things need to be produced at such a scale that it can replace all of the fossil fuels that we’re currently using. and that’s one of the big challenges for the industry.

dn: the ambitious project aim to inject hope back into the sleeping giant of redcar, but it faced backlash and it was quickly postponed in december of the same year it was introduced. 

mc: some of the research that we’ve done has shown that people are concerned about being early adopters, right. if you’re an early adopter, you take on a lot of the financial risk of this new technology.

if it doesn’t get scaled up and become part of the the normal landscape of energy generation. and so, that was a big concern that people had. the others were around safety risks, of course. as i say, hydrogen is very flammable. one of the things we find is that when you mention hydrogen to people, certainly people of my age and probably older, one of the first things that they think about is the hindenburg disaster, this, big sort of airship that set on fire, it was filled with hydrogen.

you know, it’s this very big sort of public spectacle at the time. it’s a very old example. but because we don’t have a lot of hydrogen around, that’s the first sort of cultural touchstone that people use to imagine hydrogen. so, there were concerns around risks. there are concerns around safety and concerns around sort of financial adoption.

and so the term that got sort of used quite a lot on social media amongst protest organizations campaigning against the village trials was- we’re being treated like guinea pigs. and that was that’s quite a powerful message locally to a lot of protest organizations. and so that was certainly a factor in why the village trial didn’t go ahead.

distrust of local authorities or distrust of government in some of the research that we did around community perspectives, some of the distrust was not also about government, but also about utilities. so there was mistrust not necessarily directed at the local authority per se, but towards utilities in general and how they are managed and, and a general sense of, well, would this be better, would this be worse?

so not sort of dismissing hydrogen out of hand, but just in general- how do we know that they’re not just coming here to sort of extract value from the community? 

dn: two years on from the postponement of the hydrogen village project in redcar, i went back to find out what people had to say on the project now, and what went wrong in the eyes of the public.

person 1: well, northern gas didn’t make it clear to me it was safe to use. i mean, all i know about hydrogen is it explodes. 

person 2: well, i just don’t trust the government. my dad used to work for british steel and his dad before him and i mean, look what happened there.

person 3: i really like the idea of doing something good for the environment in redcar and choosing a renewable energy source. i just think it didn’t go as well as it could have done because of the lack of communication. like a lot of residents didn’t understand what hydrogen energy was or like how it was beneficial.

person 4: i think it was a good idea. however, living in a deprived area like redcar, if the whole thing had gone wrong, the financial burden falling on the residents potentially would have had a massive impact on the area.

dn: pending approval from the government. the conversion to hydrogen energy in redcar is set to recommence in 2026, keeping in line with the strides taken towards sustainability commitments in the uk, this project was always aimed at being a learning opportunity. however, rather than being given an education on hydrogen, those involved were shown the key to the success of future initiatives: the people.

without the trust, support and passion of the local community, no project can truly thrive. and now people like matthew cotton and tosh warwick are striving to revive the bond between industry and community.

two years ago at the african climate summit in kenya, i met hajar ahjum-mathee from south africa, who shared her community’s struggles. outside the crowded conference hall, she expressed frustration. “they say we must pay more for electricity because of climate change,” she said. “but has anything changed? the air is still dirty. the heat is worse. and we are the ones who pay.”

her words made me question the way we’ve been approaching climate change solutions. we’ve been told that pricing carbon — making pollution expensive — will force industries to clean up their act.

but hajar’s perspective revealed a fundamental flaw in this economic model:

who really pays?

the market’s promise — and its failure

the south african government (2019), through the national treasury, implemented the carbon tax act to curb greenhouse gas emissions by assigning a cost to pollution, aiming to encourage businesses to transition to cleaner alternatives. according to the international monetary fund (imf) (2023), if companies paid for each ton of carbon emitted, they would find cleaner ways to operate.

this carbon tax act was rooted in neoclassical economic principles, with policymakers assuming that price signals alone would drive rational decision-making, leading to emissions reductions. however, this approach overlooked the complexities of human behavior and economic disparities. markets do not think—people do. and human behavior does not always align with economic models’ predictions.

by treating climate change as a market problem according to aldy and stavins (2011) — one that could be solved through the right pricing mechanisms — this act failed to account for the social and economic realities of those most affected.

on paper, emissions dropped. however, in townships like hagar’s, where energy costs rose as industries passed on expenses, the reality was stark. as reported by the international monetary fund (imf) in 2023, families already struggling with poverty found themselves paying higher electricity bills, while industries lobbied for exemptions and continued polluting, illustrating the unintended consequences of a purely market-driven approach. 

a different kind of solution

across the indian ocean, a different kind of solution was taking shape. according to the international energy agency (iea, 2025), india’s energy consumption was rising rapidly, and millions of households relied on inefficient incandescent bulbs, wasting vast amounts of electricity.

in response, india launched the ujala program in 2015, a nationwide effort to replace incandescent bulbs with energy-saving led bulbs. unlike carbon taxes, which rely on financial disincentives, ujala used insights from behavioral economics—understanding human biases, habits, and motivations to encourage change. instead of punishing pollution with higher costs and expecting people to buy leds based on long-term savings alone, the government made the transition effortless. through the program, they removed upfront costs, subsidized bulbs, and leveraged social influence, letting community leaders demonstrate the benefits first.

and the results?

ujala reports over 360 million led bulbs were distributed, reducing carbon emissions by more than 45 million tons annually. households saved money. energy demand dropped. and most importantly, the program did not burden the poor—it empowered them. this was climate action designed not just for economies, but for people.

why the market alone won’t save us

the difference between south africa’s carbon tax and india’s ujala program is more than just policy. it is a fundamental shift in how we think about change.

parry (2019) stated that market-based mechanisms (i.e., carbon taxes) are designed to encourage a shift toward low-carbon energy sources by raising the cost of fossil fuels, electricity, and consumer goods.

but in the real world, the center for behavior & the environment (2018) reported that addressing climate change requires more than just economic policies. it demands solutions that engage people emotionally, use social incentives, and design choices that encourage sustainable behavior.

a factory owner, for example, might find it easier to pass carbon costs onto consumers rather than overhaul operations. or, a low-income household might not invest in solar panels, even if they eventually save money, because the upfront cost is too high. this is where behavioral economics—the study of how people actually make decisions—becomes crucial. according to the climate change committee (2021), effective climate policies must be designed with an understanding of human behavior to drive meaningful change.

building a smarter climate strategy

imagine if south africa’s carbon tax had been paired with targeted rebates for low-income families—ensuring that those who could least afford higher energy prices weren’t the ones paying the most.

imagine if cities across the world applied ujala’s insights, making clean energy the easiest and most obvious choice, rather than something individuals had to actively seek out.

the solutions exist. we just have to be willing to rethink the way we implement them.

here’s how we do it:

1. make sustainability the default choice: many people want to reduce their carbon footprint, but small barriers — cost, inconvenience, lack of information — stop them. by designing default green policies, we can drive change effortlessly.

2. leverage social influence: people are more likely to adopt sustainable behaviors when they see others doing the same. community-based programs, peer-led initiatives, and visible commitments from businesses and governments can create a ripple effect.

3. prioritize equity in climate policy: carbon pricing and other market mechanisms must be designed to protect the most vulnerable. revenue from carbon taxes should be reinvested into community development.

4. use psychology, not just neoclassical economics: behavioral economics has shown that simple interventions — like framing choices in terms of immediate benefits rather than long-term savings — can significantly impact decision-making. climate policies should be designed with these insights in mind.

a future that works for everyone

hagar’s story is not unique. across the world, communities are suffering from climate policies that fail to account for real-world complexities. but we can change that by designing solutions that put people at the center.

the future of climate action isn’t just about economic models or carbon taxes. it’s about creating policies that work for everyone — policies that recognize human behavior, systemic inequality, and the importance of equity. india’s ujala program shows us that small, accessible changes can lead to transformative outcomes. meanwhile, south africa’s carbon tax highlights the dangers of relying solely on market-based approaches.

to achieve real change, we must integrate behavioral economics into our climate strategies. it’s not just about reducing emissions; it’s about making sure the solutions are fair, effective, and inclusive. by considering psychology, equity, and human behavior, we can create a future where sustainability doesn’t come at the cost of survival.

the road ahead is clear: we must move beyond rigid neoclassical economic models and build a climate strategy that works for people — and, in turn, the planet.