The physicist and climatologist Christopher Rapley, at 77 years old, is one of those scientists who decided to step forward and mobilize for climate change: in 2021, he resigned from his position as an advisor at the Science Museum in London because there were fossil fuel company sponsorships in its exhibitions. From 2007 to 2010, he had been the director of this same institution, one of the many roles he has held in his country and internationally related to research. Knighted in the Order of the British Empire since 2003, he is currently one of the most authoritative and critical voices against the current economic system when discussing global climate change, a topic he addressed at the most recent Starmus Earth festival in Slovakia. We spoke with him.

Rapley, always with a smile on his face and also firm in his statements, began his career in the space world, working for years on designing instruments for NASA space missions. He is still a distinguished visiting scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. A Professor of Climate Science at University College London (UCL), he directed his country’s Antarctic program, the British Antarctic Survey, for almost 10 years (1998-2007). He was also the director of the Geosphere-Biosphere Program of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the same institution that awards the Nobel prizes.

Convinced that all possible means must be used to raise awareness of the urgency to curb emissions, he collaborated with Al Gore on his Live Earth campaign and advised David Attenborough on his BBC series “Climate Change: The Facts.” He even wrote and performed, together with playwright Duncan Macmillan, the acclaimed play 2071, which premiered in 2014 at the Royal Court Theatre in London and was later turned into a book by writer John Murray. The play portrays his life and career while explaining what global warming is and its impacts, as well as the controversies surrounding it. Professor Rapley, who did not miss a single concert or lecture at the Starmus Festival in Bratislava, acknowledges that humanity is not aware it is facing a phenomenon it has never experienced before and calls for more pressure on politicians to take it seriously, because “what happens in the next 10 years will affect hundreds, if not thousands, of years.”

You started by designing instruments for satellites to observe the cosmos, and now we have them focusing on our planet because, as you point out, this should be the main concern now. Is it really?

Many of us who do science think the same: the planet is sending us very strong signals, and the situation is indeed worrying because the climate is changing very rapidly, something that, in fact, the scientific community predicted 40 years ago. First, we were concerned about what was happening in the atmosphere with polluting gases, but now we see that the ocean’s temperature is also increasing, and with it, there are more extreme storms, more wildfires, and many other impacts. We have long known what needs to be done: rapidly reduce gas, oil, and coal emissions. We also know that atmospheric carbon and methane content is higher than ever. But unfortunately, we are not seeing progress, and temperatures are getting warmer.

Is the speed of climate change in recent years surprising to science?

It is not a surprise. The laws of physics, biology, and chemistry are immutable; they cannot be negotiated with. We have known for decades that this would happen, but when it arrives, it seems as if it was not known. It is very important to know that there are boundaries in the Earth system, phenomena called tipping points that cause this system to suddenly switch to a new mode of operation. Some of these points have been passed, and others are about to be. For example, at Starmus, it was discussed that part of Antarctica might have already crossed one of those tipping points, with melting so significant that it could raise the global sea level. And even if we think Antarctica is far from us in the northern hemisphere, from our daily lives, this could have a tremendous impact on everyone. It is such a large amount of ice that it can change sea levels along our coasts, alter ocean currents, and flood cities. And whether it happens depends on our behavior as humans.

There is a sector convinced that technologies like artificial intelligence will prevent the worst damage, that they will save us, just like other inventions have helped us in the past. What do you think?

It seems that there are people who hope technologies like artificial intelligence will solve the problem. At Starmus, international experts showed us how powerful it is becoming. They showed us how irresistible it is, but also how sometimes it makes us believe in hallucinations that do not exist and fails to show us the most equitable information for everyone. And what happens is that we do not know when AI is an irresistible hallucination and when it is reliable. Any technology can be used for good or bad, as has happened in the past. Its effects depend on two things: the quality of the tool and the quality of the person using it. Brian May, one of the Starmus organizers, is a brilliant guitarist. His instrument is good, but if he lent me his guitar, I could not do what he does. We have already seen cases where AI has been used to manipulate elections. Moreover, it is developing much faster than institutions can foresee – be they legal, political, or even economic institutions – to keep control over it. Now, it is ahead of what society knows how to handle. Other technologies are indeed truly positive, as we see with renewable energies, which are advancing.

New technologies require many scarce minerals. We hear from expert astronauts defending mining on the Moon. Is the solution extraterrestrial mining?

I am quite skeptical that we can obtain minerals from outside Earth in a commercially viable way, but perhaps I am wrong, and it might happen, although it is still years away. We also know that there are many valuable minerals at the bottom of the deep ocean, but it is undeniable that obtaining them requires mining activities that cause great damage to marine ecosystems. As oceanographer Sylvia Earle reminds us, it turns out that we all depend on those marine ecosystems for the oxygen we breathe, even more than from forests, and to balance the planet’s temperature, among other fundamental issues. We must be very careful when intervening in the Earth’s system to avoid perverse consequences. There often are, and we pay a high price for obtaining a benefit.

For many years, world summits have been held to reach agreements on solving climate change. This year will be the 29th, in Azerbaijan. The previous one was in Dubai. What do you think of these meetings of leaders?

I think all scientists are disappointed and surprised that the message we have tried to convey to society has not elicited a strong reaction from the political world, businesses, or the public regarding climate change. There are many positive actions, but at a level and pace far from what is necessary. I could be very cynical about the debates at conferences held in states that benefit greatly from the sale of oil and gas. Many people think they host these summits to slow progress. I do not know if that is true, but I do not think it is right.

Climate change is not a scientific problem but a social one. We have to work with academic specialists who understand how to motivate humans to act on issues that are good for us. Many people and institutions, including governments, claim they want to do something, but they get stuck, whether due to psychological problems or institutional barriers that prevent us from acting. I lead a team at UCL called the Climate Action Unit. There, we use a deep understanding of human behavior to overcome these barriers and create an action agenda, so that everyone discovers their ability to do something useful. We have found that when people tell a good story about how they have done something beneficial, others do the same, and more and more people get involved enthusiastically. It’s about building the moment for action, and we are having some success. I do not think the planet has noticed yet, and we know there is a long way to go, but it is our ray of hope.

Many people believe it is not an individual challenge but that the responsibility lies with large companies and globalization…

We are learning how to help society deal with this problem. Many people wonder why they have this responsibility when large companies go against it. And capitalism is at the center of the problem. It is not an externality but the cost of damages caused in corporate operations whose sole purpose is to make a profit. These corporations feel free; they release carbon dioxide or methane into the atmosphere but do not pay for the impacts. If they did, their behavior would change. Some propose adapting capitalism to take responsibility for the harm to present and future generations. Others believe that capitalism is a system that is highly proactive in corruption. Certainly, if profit drives behavior in that economic and financial world, corruption and hatred will always dominate. We need a system where the sole role of the company is not to make profits for its owners but to benefit the whole of society. If that were a legal requirement, the business world would change immediately. The problem is that the political world has to understand this, and it is often in the pocket of the business world, because politicians need their money to be elected, and when elected, they have to pay for what they received, so it would be very difficult to make a change.

From what you point out, we have a serious problem with democratically elected politicians and their dependence on companies. Do you see any solution to this?

I am concerned about attempts to dismantle democracy, to eliminate human rights that have been hard-won. Just when we want humanity to recover from past violence and work together for the good of all, powerful forces emerge trying to end the mechanism through which we can do this, which is through democratic agreements. All of us who believe in freedom, in democracy, and in a better future for our children and for all other living beings on the planet, must stand up and not let a small group of misguided people take prominence. In the end, they too will suffer just like everyone else. We need to change the way humanity functions.