Instant Genius - How the world needs to adapt to a changing climate

Episode Date: August 7, 2025

We’re no longer living in a world before climate change. Its impacts – from rising sea levels to more extreme weather – are already upon us, and will almost certainly get worse before they get better. But beyond cutting our emissions as fast as possible, what do we need to do to survive, and hopefully thrive, in this new world?  Today’s guest, researcher and author Susannah Fisher, joins us to explore that question. In her new book Sink or Swim, she lays out two possible futures: one where we fail to adapt and face the mounting chaos, and another where we make the hard choices needed to live in a hotter world. Which one of these we end up with, she says, is up to us. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's peak pollination season, and my business is scaling fast. To keep the nectar flowing, I need a phone plan with top priority data speed. That's why I chose Google Fi Wireless. My connections stay strong even when the hive is buzzing. Plus, unlimited plans started $35 a month. Now that's a deal that doesn't stay. Explore Google Fi Wireless plans today. Plus taxes and government fees.

GoogleFi Wireless is not subject to data traffic deprioritization during times of high network usage. You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save? Enough. Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your oceanfront room.

Just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay. Hilton for the stay. No one goes to Hank's for his spreadsheets.

They go for a darn good pizza. Lately, though, the shop's been quiet. So Hank decides to bring back the $1 slice. He asks Copilot in Microsoft Excel to look at his sales and costs. Help him see if he can afford it. Copilot shows Hank where the money's going and which little extras make the dollar slice work. Now, Hanks has a line out the door.

Hank makes the pizza. Co-Pilot handles the spreadsheets. Learn more at M365.com. This podcast is sponsored by name, audio and focal. Streaming has made music more accessible than ever, but true listening is about more than ease. It's about quality. British audio experts name audio,

alongside French acoustic specialist focal, combine handcrafted tradition with cutting-edge innovation and high-end materials, delivering digital precision with analogue warmth. So you can experience exceptional sound at home. Music just as the artist intended. Visit name audio.com to learn more. Hello and welcome to Instant Genius, a bite-sized masterclass in podcast form. I'm Tom Howarth, trends editor at BBC Science Focus.

We're no longer living in a world before climate change. Its impacts, from rising sea levels to more extreme weather, are already upon us and will almost certainly get worse before they get better. But beyond cutting our emissions as fast as possible, what do we need to do to survive? and hopefully thrive in this new world. Today's guest, researcher and author Susanna Fisher, joins us to explore exactly that question. In her new book, Sync or Swim, she lays out two possible futures,

one where we fail to adapt and face the mountain chaos, and another where we make the hard choices needed to live in this hotter world. Which one of these we end up with, she says, is ultimately up to us. So Susanna, welcome to Instant Gene. Hi Tom, thanks for having me. So climate change, it's an absolutely massive topic, hugely important to people all around the world. Often it can be quite confusing to know how much progress we've made so far and where we're heading. So I wonder if you could start off by giving us a summary of sort of where we're up to with climate change and what sort of likely outcomes in the coming decades are. Yeah, thanks. So the global community is really working hard. to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as fast as possible.

But what we're seeing at the moment is that level of ambition is not quite matching where we need to go. So right now, it looks like with everything that countries have pledged to do, we might be heading towards about 2.6 to 2.8 degrees of global warming. And that would really have significant consequences around the world. Now, we should say that the global aspiration is to keep much lower than that. and there's been lots of talk about keeping well below two degrees and the hope of limiting warming to 1.5. At those levels, we can really hope to limit much more of the dangerous consequences from climate change. But at the moment, we're not seeing the emission reductions going far enough or fast enough to keep us at those levels.

So if we do continue, as we're currently on the trajectory, to something like a 2.6 or 2.8 degrees of warming, we're really looking at quite significant global consequences. So global temperatures will become more extreme. We'll have more severe, more frequent heat waves. We'll have more unpredictable rainfall. Some areas will experience drought, others high levels of flooding. There'll be more weather which might lead to wildfires. And we'll also see changes in the seas and the oceans.

So we've got the risk of sea level rise. So low-line coastal areas will really be at risk from inundation and flooding. We'll see changes in the monsoon, which could affect prude production. We might see melting in the Arctic. more severe hurricanes, and ecosystems in nature will struggle to survive. Animals have not often experienced these conditions before where they live, so they'll be looking for cooler areas to go. Plants that grow in certain areas will no longer be able to survive so well.

So we're really looking at a whole host of effects across the world if we do go to those temperatures. But I should say that nothing is locked in, that we are at the moment leading up to another big global conference in Brazil this year, COP 30, where countries are again making commitments to reduce their emissions and to kind of work together to keep global temperatures down to more suitable levels. So we're still in a position of hope, a lot of time of advocacy and action around the world, but the current action we have on the table is taking us down to around a 2.5 and above degree world. And I guess an important point within that is the idea that that world, sort of 2.5 degrees

warmer is at least significantly less warm than what we were projected a few, even a few years ago. So there is some positive action that's working here. Yes, absolutely. We should, I don't subscribe to the argument that things aren't happening. I think some countries are working really hard on the transition. We're seeing the economics work in our favor. Often renewables are becoming cheaper and cheaper. It's just making sense to make the transition. And we are moving in that direction, but it just has to be faster. And I think it's a question of speed now, but as we start to feel the impacts of climate change, and just this year, we've had the European heat wave, other events around the world, we're really starting to feel the

consequences. So although we're really heading in the right direction, and we can all take hope from that, we need to keep pushing our governments and our actors around the world to go even faster so we can keep those emissions down as much as possible. Because as you kind of say, when we look at the warming that we're at the moment, you know, we've already had years that are basically at 1.5 degrees. Not that that means that we're averaging 1.5 degrees, but we're already kind of at the target that we set, which can be quite worrying for a lot of people. Yeah, we are. I think we've temporarily breached it. That doesn't mean, as you say, that we've breached the Paris goal, because that's more of a longer term average. But I think the key message here is every

fraction of a degree counts. So 1.5 is a wonderful target and we can all hold it kind of firmly, but also to remember that if that's breached, it's not a question of game over. It's a question if we need to limit warming as much as possible because every tiny bit of warming counts and will make a difference to how people can live their lives around the world. So one of the buzzwords that comes up a lot when we're thinking about sort of our projected pathways is this idea of tipping points. So I wonder whether you could clarify for our listeners sort of what some of those major tipping points are and how they could actually potentially change the pathway that we're on sort of beyond what we can really

predict or model very well. Yeah, a lot of the conventional modelling is based on understanding where we think the Earth system will move towards using the data points that we have. But there are certain things as known as tipping points within the Earth system where if they trip over, we would expect that we would move to a new and possibly irreversible state. So they're slightly different from some of the other variables in the system. And once they've tripped over, we're not quite sure what all those consequences will be. So some of the kind of major ones talked about in the Earth system are, for example, the risk of what's called Amazon dieback.

So if the Amazon gets to a position where it can't sustain itself with the kind of water cycling through the forest, there's a risk it will turn into savannah and not be able to kind of sustain itself as forest any longer. And the loss of that ecosystem would be a really major regional event for kind of wider climate systems. Another tipping point that's often talked about is the ocean circulation currents. So the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, the Amok, for short. It distributes heat around the world in a series of ocean currents. There is some fear that if that started to slow down, it would really shift how heat was distributed around the globe, it could affect rainfall, paddles, it could have really severe consequences. And that's

something that we're not really considering now when we're planning for the future, because it's such an unknown as to will it happen? And if it does, you know, what would that look like? That it's very hard to kind of contemplate and plan for, but the consequences are so significant that they are the kind of things we need to think about. And scientists don't really know when or if these effects might kick in, but they generally think about them in a range of temperatures. So they might think something would be more likely to happen at four degrees, for example. But often the range of when this would happen can start at 1.5 to 2 degrees. So the kind of range of possibility we are inching into right now in terms of where some scientists think this might start to kick in.

And that's another reason why this sort of every 0.1 of a degree matters, because we really sort of are entering uncharted unknown territory with a lot of these tipping points that we don't understand. Absolutely, yeah. So your book, Sink or Swim, is about how we adapt to climate change, which is slightly different to a lot of, I think, the general public's discourse on climate change is about how can we cut fossil fuel emissions. This is about how we live and thrive and create a better world

in a world that is warming. Maybe to start off with, if you could explain, what do we actually mean concretely, when we're talking about adaptation and climate change adaptation specifically? Yeah, absolutely. And firstly, I think it's important to say that the most important thing to do to prevent the need to adapt is continue to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. So I absolutely wouldn't want to use adaptation as an argument that we can stop worrying

about burning fossil fuels. But it's given that we're already where we are now with global temperature rise, that we will need to do some adaptation. In fact, we need to do it already to make sure that people can lead full and safe lives. So what adaptation means is really adapting our lives, our systems, the places we live to the impacts that we're experiencing. So that might be if you live somewhere hot and you're experiencing more heat waves, thinking about how people can live better in those conditions. If you're living somewhere where there's a high amount of flooding or increased

hurricanes, it's thinking what makes people safe in the context of hurricanes. And there's really a number of different ways to adapt. So quite a lot of adaptation focuses around management. water, because water is a huge issue with the impacts of climate change. So in London, for example, we have the Thames barrier. And it wasn't built exclusively for climate change, but it now performs an important function in protecting the city from flooding. In other places, they might need systems around irrigation, for example, because if you're growing crops and the water is very unpredictable, the rainfall is very unpredictable, using irrigation just helps you manage those kind of day-to-day or seasonal fluctuations and to continue to grow crops in places that have become drier, for example.

Other areas might be sea walls, so perhaps small-line developing states or big coastal cities right on a low-line plain may well build up seawalls or other forms of defences to stop the water coming in or to prevent storm surges when there are hurricanes. And another really important thing to do is to develop early warning systems. So, for example, in Bangladesh, they've experienced many cyclones over the last decades, and they've really put in place some really brilliantly working systems to protect people. So it's about getting the information out to people in advance that storms will be coming, directing them where they should go, telling them what's safe.

So these kind of measures can reduce the impacts on people who are most exposed. Extreme weather in places like Bangladesh is a really interesting example because obviously climate change is getting worse, which means that we're getting worse, more powerful storms. When you look at places like Bangladesh, the amount of deaths that they are having in these sort of climate disasters has reduced quite a lot in recent years. So I wonder whether you could explain what is going on there

and how that is an example of quite successful adaptation and perhaps then how we can go further. Yeah, so in Bangladesh, they've really put a lot of effort into developing their early warning systems. Because if a storm arrives and people aren't prepared, they're often caught in unsafe places, they don't know what to expect, and that could really increase the mortality

because they're caught in very risky spaces. So the way an early warning system works is first of all, a country or a government would need to be tracking the information or getting the information from partners to know that a storm is on its way. So the first part is the important sharing of information. And then they will translate that information into a format that's easily understandable for people in the area that's affected. So they might receive the information by text or on the radio, for example. That's telling them what's coming and what's the safest thing to do. And then often local governments or agencies will put in place safe places.

where people can go. So there might be cyclone shelters or in the case of an alert on a heat wave, it might be cooling spaces. It lets people know the kind of safe spaces and they move over to those and then they can stay there until it's safe essentially. So it's really about moving people out of harm's way and preparing them for what's to come. And we see that used really successfully in Bangladesh but also in other countries with heat. The UK is obviously rolled out to texting system also. So it's kind of widely used and it's actually a big kind of promotion right now to try and get early warning systems for everybody around the globe who needs them. It's a big global push. In the book, you mentioned some examples of maladaption as well, places where adaptation hasn't gone so well or is perhaps in conflict with other things that people need.

I wonder whether you could give some examples of cases that haven't been as successful. The cases of maladaptation are often down to how. people have been included in the and the choices that they're being offered around adaptation and how those choices are being designed. So, for example, we might see situations where, you know, it's felt by scientists, for example, that a different variety of crop will be more useful for a particular local area. But if in fact it doesn't meet what people want to need, if they don't like the taste of that crop, if they don't feel they can sell it on the market, then you'll really have difficulty in making that a successful adaptation because it doesn't also going to be.

meet with how people live their lives. Another aspect of maladaptation is it might be successful for a certain group of people. So for example, if you were to build a sea defense around a very particular settlement, those particular people might be safer. But what can sometimes happen is the danger then just goes to the next settlement down the coast or the kind of danger is displaced around. So in some cases, we might find that it might be adaptive for one community, but maladaptive for another. And then another, situation where we might experience maladaptation is where an adaptation isn't really proved for the longer term. So obviously when we're talking about climate change, things are going to keep changing

over the coming decades. So to go down an adaptation strategy, for example, that very heavily relied on extracting groundwater in an area where that was already scarce or a resource that was probably going to become less available is ultimately going to become maladaptive. So it's really a question of thinking about what risks people are facing now and what they're going to face in the future, but also how to make sure that people don't transfer risks onto others. When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed sponsored jobs. It gives your job post the boost it needs to be seen and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually

interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this shell will get a $75 dollar sponsored job credit at Indeed.com slash podcast. That's Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs. Pool days call for cookouts and lots of laundry. This Memorial Day at Lowe's.

Save $80 on a charbroil performance series four burner gas grill. Now just $199. Plus, get up to 45% off select major appliances to keep dishes, clothes, and food fresh. Having fun in the sun is easy with other. in your corner. Our best lineup is here at Lowe's. VALA to 527. While supplies last, selection varies by location. See associate or Lowe's.com for details. This podcast is sponsored by Name, Audio and Focal. With over 100 years of combined expertise, Name and Focal have been bringing music to listeners, just as the

artist intended. Since day one, this mantra has shaped every innovation in high-fi design, technology, and acoustic engineering, balancing craftsmanship and tradition with pioneering thinking. Name Audio pushes cutting-edge technology to ensure digital precision whilst sustaining Pratt, pace, rhythm and timing, the elusive quality that makes music feel alive and gives it emotional texture. Today, in partnership with French acoustic specialist focal, name audio creates systems that deliver exceptional sound, an unforgettable listening experience, experiences at home. Try it for yourself at a focal powered by name boutique. Visit focal powered by name.com for more information. One of the areas of the book that I think is very interesting and that a lot of people might

not have thought about before is the bits where you're talking about migration because these, as you kind of said in terms of things like maladaptation can be where you really need to have a discourse with people who are being affected. What are some of the key things that we need to think about when we're thinking about migration and how that is part of the adaptation picture? So I think the important thing about movement related to climate change is it can take many forms. So it can be people who are being displaced by an extreme event, for example, who suddenly hit by a flood, they moved for a local town within their own country. Or we might see people who move on a seasonal basis because there's just not enough water in

the summer or for a variety of reasons to find work elsewhere, people will move seasonally. So there's many different types of movement related to climate change. And one form is migration. People may choose to move within their country. And in some cases, they go across neighboring borders also with a small amount of international migration. And that's a different type of strategy to look for a better life and to find, yeah, a situation that's less impacted by climate change. I mean, migration and mobility decisions in general are very complex. And climate change and environmental factors are probably one part of those decisions, but a part that I think will become more important as climate change impacts become more severe. But I think it's really

important to think about that holistically and to think about how governments or policy makers might plan for that, you know, particularly within their own countries where most change will happen. What does it mean for people to be supported to move well? You know, can they move their social protection benefits or welfare benefits with them? Can they access support in new areas? But also, what's it like for host villages and towns and cities to receive people and how can those places really, you know, be supported to help people to integrate, to find the social networks that they need. So I think there's a lot of work to be done around making that, you know, a potential positive process and a positive adaptation path for people whilst recognizing that for many people, there's a

big sense of loss if they need to migrate. And there is a part there where, of course, many people don't want to and so it's not only a positive choice but also something that people, you know, can find very difficult. Because in the book, right, you paint these pictures between sort of these two alternate futures, one which is quite negative and scary and one which can be a more positive vision of how we can adapt to climate change. On the topic of mobility, human mobility specifically, it feels very much like we're in a world where people migrating, whether it's within a country, which, as you say, is the majority of migration related to climate. climate change or across borders is not received very positively.

So how do we actually go about sort of changing that? Because it feels like a very big change in the way that global governance has to work on this. Yeah, we are in a really challenging political environment for this right now. And I think the answer is that we need to go slowly and we need to build things from both sides. And we can't necessarily start in the places that are most politically hostile either. I think that there are a few good examples around the world. There are examples, for example, of regional movement protocols in the Caribbean where, you know, after an extreme event, people can move between different islands and get support.

We're seeing examples now in the Pacific of specific relationships between Australia and Tuvalu, for example. So there are small isolated examples of things happening and things happening that are working. So I think it's a question of trying to build on what we know is working at the same time as trying to open up a broader conversation in some of these places. where migration has become such a contested topic for, you know, variety of reasons totally unconnected to climate change. But the kind of core idea of the book is that some of these are new political conversations that climate impacts are making more pressing. And climate change does somewhat alter, you know, the political context

in that certain countries have historical responsibility for what has happened here. And that needs to play into who has responsibility to support and, you know, make migration pathways more practical and more feasible for the, who need them. As you say, you know, a lot in the book, it's about hard choices. And I think that when it comes to people moving, there are, you know, as you said earlier, whether you protect one town from rising sea levels means that you probably can't protect all towns. And you do have to make some very difficult choices around who can stay and who can go in this. Yeah. And there we're moving really on to the question of relocation. So as well as migration,

we might have situations where particular communities are being asked to move in a more structured and planned way away from low-line coastlines because their sea defences just can't be maintained anymore. And that is, of course, a hugely difficult and controversial process. And why should one town be chosen over another? So it's really a question of how all these hard choices are made and also who's engaged in making them. And I think that's the kind of key political question around mobility. How do we open those questions up so they become more visible to the people who are going to be experiencing them? So another key point, Part of this adaptation story is our food system, which at the moment is not very aligned with

sort of being robust in a warming world. What are some examples of what a climate-proof global food system looks like? How do we future-proof ourselves? Well, when we talk about the food system, it's important to think about adapting it, but of course we need to think about the context that it's also a huge contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and contributing to loss of biodiversity. So it really needs to be reformed on a number of angles of which managing climate risk is an important part, but also kind of part of the bigger picture. So in terms of thinking about specifically the resilience angle of that, partly it's about the diversity we have within the system. So the food system we have right now is heavily reliant on a few core crops

and a few core growing areas. And the reality of climate impacts is we will be much more secure, if we have a diversity of crops so that a particular event or disease is not going to wipe out a significant portion of global supply. So that's both thinking locally, what's being grown within a country or a region, how can that be diversified, but also thinking about the global networks, because food is obviously not just about what's grown locally now. It's massively about trading relationships and the flow of food and other substances between countries. So one part of it It's about the diversity of the system and the diversity of where food is grown. Our food system is massively developed to be incredibly efficient.

And in some ways, we might think with adaptation, do we have to build a bit more redundancy into the system for the just-in-case scenarios? It's a little bit of odds with how the food system is currently organized, but it builds in the ability to manage shocks and stresses, which at the moment, you know, it doesn't have so much flexibility within the system. I think it's also important to think what do regions have locally, you know, what can be locally produced, and also how can we reduce food waste overall, so there is just more food available. And there's really interesting research coming out now on something called multi-bred basket failure, which is looking at when multiple areas will experience crop failures or droughts at the same time, which is more likely to happen as the temperature increases. So then you might see multiple areas of a particular crop unable to produce that year.

I think there's some interesting work emerging around how do you manage for that and manage for those trading relationships to make sure you have very diverse relationships across areas that might be affected at the same time. One of the other things I wanted to ask about is how, because the food system, it is very much intertwined with nature and land use. And there's quite a lot of conflict there in terms of we need perhaps more land given over to nature at a time when we also need more land to grow crops and feed the global population. And I wondered what your thoughts are on that conflict there between those two things that we perhaps need to adapt. The contest over global land is a really pressing one. And it's both in, as you say, the land that we need for growing food. And of course,

that's very dependent on the food that we choose to grow and how we choose to grow it. And that area is very contested in the research in terms of therefore how much land do we actually need to feed the growing population. Combine with the fact that we're making global commitments to manage biodiversity, which require us to manage more land sustainably in a biodiverse way. And there's also actually the third component to this that increasingly we need land to absorb carbon as part of our efforts to reduce the effects of greenhouse gas emissions. So there's a real push on global land and it's not quite clear how this is going to play out. I think the question of nature is an interesting one because nature can help us adapt, but we also need to

adapt nature. Yeah, so there's the contest over global land, which is a significant issue, but there are broader issues with how we adapt nature. And there's really two parts to it, because nature is really helpful to help people and communities adapt. So for example, when we grow mangroves along coastal areas, that helps protect people from storm surges. When we bring nature into cities, that makes them much more livable, it makes the heat much more manageable. When we have spongy areas in cities, that help to absorb. floodwater. So nature is a really crucial part of adapting, but also nature itself needs to adapt or needs to be helped to adapt because, for example, species are now living in the conditions that

they weren't adapted to live in before. So some are wanting to move to cooler latitudes. Some need to be supported to do so. So it's an important balance in how we manage nature and also how we support nature. And I think historically there's perhaps been an idea that nature's needs were somewhat separate from the local communities who were living there. And it's led to perhaps another area of contestation or perceived conflict between people and, for example, the natural environment. But we're increasingly actually seeing that areas, for example, are forests that are managed by indigenous people and local communities often have better outcomes for biodiversity and for carbon sequestration. So it's not a question of nature or people when we talk about. preserving areas for nature, it's actually often a question of how can local groups and indigenous communities be supported to manage their land and the land around them in ways that

builds biodiversity and manages the carbon as needed. A lot of these problems, whether it's fish or human migration or the large-scale preservation of biodiversity around the globe or preventing conflict over water, it all relies on quite a healthy geopolitical ecosystem where people can come together and reach a global. agreements. And we have done some of that with sort of, you know, the 30-30 deal to protect biodiversity and things like that. How confident are you that we can make more of those agreements to adapt in the way that's needed? And if there are some changes in the way that sort of systems like the UN work to do that, what would some of them be? I think because of the

amount of change that we need to see to fully adapt to climate change. And as you say, the fairly challenging kind of geopolitical context we're in right now. I really see this as a mosaic of solutions. So yes, the multilateral system is key and is an important part, but we also will need to see action in all other parts of society and areas where there might not be the same blockages as we're currently experiencing. So we need to see business and private sector start to understand what climate risk will mean for them across their supply chains, what they might to do both to protect their own interest, but also to think about adaptation of people living and working for them. We'll want to see probably local groups getting more involved in their own local adaptation

because not all of this is going to be done centrally or managed in a central way. It'll be local people thinking in their kind of mutual solidarity networks about who needs support in a heat wave, who might be affected by flooding. There are other levers. There's the kind of legal litigation lever, which is being used now to push some of the companies and governments in different directions. And there's also a variety of tools being used to try and direct finance. So moving away from kind of public policy, but more towards how might finance, you know,

be directed in a way that really reflects the costs of climate risks. And so kind of also help adaptation in that way too. So I think that, you know, we really do need to put our support behind the international institutions. They are going to be a really critical part of that. They are the only system that we have that brings countries together that seeks to put the international public good ahead and that has that potential to negotiate on these legal agreements that will hopefully prevent further warming. But I also think we need to move to that

understanding that it's going to be a multitude of different approaches, which are going to need to come together from actors across from business to local people, to different scales of government that are going to be able to address the scale of this challenge. Despite sort of all of this, you do end the book on a hopeful note. You have a few words sort of to provide readers with hope and a positive outlook for the future. How is it that you keep yourself hopeful when you're dealing with sort of thinking about climate change every day? And what advice would you give to our listeners who also sometimes perhaps find this topic overwhelming? I've thought a lot about this because I work on climate change

day in, day out. So I am constantly reading these reports and experiencing, you know, almost the fear of what's coming and how we can respond. And I think what gives me hope is seeing individuals doing wonderful things. And I talk about some of those in the book, people who've made great adaptation strategies, who've led campaigns who are really pushing things forward. So I think there's something about taking the power of the individual that we can all do things in our local area or in wider campaigns. And actually being part of something, I think helps you feel hopeful because you realise that you have the chance to change something. And I know a lot of people and young people in particular feel a lot of climate anxiety

around what might be coming in the reports they see in the media. And one of the best things to do, I think, to address those fears is to really get involved, because it's once you start being able to change things at a different scale, that you can feel some sense of the progress that we can make together. So I think we need to keep in mind that we don't have a choice, really, that we have to keep hopeful and we have to keep working, because as we talked about at the beginning,

it's not a, there's no point when this is kind of finished. We need to keep fighting to make sure that the global temperature increases as limited as possible. Every fraction of a degree counts. We need to make sure we're stopping to burn fossil fuels being the most essential part of this whole conversation. And then once we have those in place, making sure that we are adapting as we can. So I think to get involved, to see the power that people can have and to hold hope for the future is the best thing and the only thing really that we can all do. I was Susanna Fisher, author of Sync or Swim, How the World Needs to Adapt to a Changing Climate,

which goes on sale on the 14th of August. Thanks for listening to another episode of Instant Genius. Brought to you by the team behind BBC Science Focus. If you like what you just heard, why not go subscribe to Instant Genius on your preferred podcast platform? You can also watch our presenters and guest speaking in person on our YouTube channel at Science Focus. The current issue of BBC Science Focus magazine is on sale now.

and you can pick up a copy wherever you buy your favourite magazines or downloaders on your app store of choice. You can also find us on Apple News or online at sciencefocus.com. This podcast is sponsored by Name, Audio and Focal. The texture and emotional depth of music can be lost through digital sources or poor signal. Name Audio believes you can have digital precision with analogue warmth. Alongside French acoustic specialist focal, Name creates high-end audio systems, combining innovation with craftsmanship, so you can listen to music, just as the artist intended. Discover more at namea Audio.com.

Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goals, because we're built for what you're building. Fit for your ambition for Citizens Bank. Enjoy more ways to save at Ralph's, like low prices in every aisle. And when you download the Ralph's, At Ralph's app, you can clip and save more with digital coupons every week. Plus, you can earn fuel points to save up to $1 per gallon at the pump. At Ralph's, you can enjoy more ways to save and more rewards every time you shop. So it's always easy to save big every day with savings and rewards. Ralph's SoCal for over 150 years.

Savings may vary by state. Fuel restrictions apply. See site for details.