The training session organized by The Climate Reality Project (Santiago, July 9–11) offered a wealth of little-known scientific and technical data on the effects of the climate crisis. In fact, this information is not as widely disseminated as one might expect, considering its relevance to the lives of billions.

 

The event brought together around 500 NGO leaders and activists, professionals, businesspeople, public officials, researchers, and students interested in environmental issues, especially climate change. Twenty years ago, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore released the documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” warning of the severe consequences of global warming for humanity and biodiversity. This film inspired The Climate Reality Project—an initiative seeking “a global solution to the climate crisis by driving home its urgency across all sectors of society.”

 

Among the facts presented, one stands out: according to a NASA report, by 2070, vast areas of the planet will become uninhabitable due to rising temperatures and humidity, surpassing what humans can endure. South Asia, the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, and parts of southern China and Brazil are the most affected regions, together home to between 2 and 3.5 billion people. Five years ago, the estimate was between 1 and 3 billion—clearly, we are not making progress.

 

The first question, from an empathetic perspective, is: What will we do to prevent this bleak future for vast regions, primarily in the Southern Hemisphere and developing countries? Or rather, what will the countries of the Global North—who bear primary responsibility for the climate crisis—do to address this dilemma? While everyone must contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the main responsibility is clear.

 

The second question—even from a national interest perspective—is: Where will the inhabitants of those territories go if the situation does not change drastically? It is unrealistic to expect that billions of affected people will simply remain and wait to be scorched or drowned by nature’s new cycles.

 

The projected mass migration is inherently a source of conflict, especially given that some countries—like the United States during the Trump era—chose to close borders and tighten immigration laws while withdrawing from international commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Worse still, there are calls to return to an oil-based society, which is at the root of the problem.

 

Although our country is among the most vulnerable on the planet to the climate crisis, the water resources in southern Chile and Patagonia make us a place of global interest—a refuge during a heatwave that shows no sign of ending.

 

The urgent question is: Are we confronting this new reality? Are we planning responsibly for the next 10, 25, or 50 years—rather than merely digging ditches or criminalizing poor migrants?

 

Some decision-makers may understand this reality. But others seem oblivious—like the official who once irresponsibly told me that these long-term issues weren’t a problem because, by then, we’d all be dead.