Why fighting climate change requires a lot more than technology and optimism

Optimism, especially about our ability to solve big problems, is in brutally short supply these days. The gloom might be at its worst in the climate change arena, where the Trump administration is in the midst of an all-out assault on green energy and the world is poised to miss the Paris Agreement target of limiting warming to no more than 1.5° Celsius.Given that backdrop, I was struck by Bill Gates’ recent announcement of a major— and decidedly optimistic—shift in his thinking about climate change.

“We’ve made great progress” on addressing global warming, he writes, and he’s confident the changing climate “will not lead to humanity’s demise.” But it’s time to shift our attention from cutting near-term emissions to investing in ways to “improve life in a warming world.” Doing so, according to Gates, will require us to “focus on innovation.”Ensuring that global warming doesn’t exterminate humanity strikes me as a terribly low bar. I’d like our children to say that our generation left them a world better than the one we inherited, not just “I’m glad we’re not all dead.” Unfortunately, that goal is becoming harder and harder to reach, and technological innovation alone won’t be enough to get us there.

Innovation is an enormously powerful tool—often the best one we have. But it works best on problems where a single breakthrough can have a massive impact.

Consider, for example, how effective it’s been in areas like public health, where one new drug or vaccine has sometimes been enough to eliminate a disease. These solutions are developed and even manufactured by relatively small numbers of highly skilled people.

Technology handles that kind of problem superbly. Climate change, with its multiple causes, diverse impacts and