Bill Gates Isn't the Only One Shifting From Climate Doomerism to Energy Abundance

Is this "the end of the climate hawk era"?

In October 2025, Microsoft co-founder and philanthropist Bill Gates made headlines by declaring that "climate change is a serious problem, but it will not be the end of civilization." The admission came in a letter to world leaders weeks before COP30, the United Nations' 30th annual climate change summit, and focused on "adjust[ing] strategies for dealing with
climate change."

The environmental movement has espoused alarmist warnings about humanity's future for decades, most of which have not panned out, such as Paul Ehrlich's 1968 prediction that population growth and environmental decline would lead to mass starvation. More recently, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) warned dubiously in 2019 that "the world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address" climate change. Now it appears the climate discussion is being carried out with more deliberation and less fear.

Rather than focusing on global temperatures or greenhouse gas emissions, Gates said governments and technologists should worry about a more important metric: improving global living standards. "Our chief goal," according to Gates, "should be to prevent suffering, particularly for those in the toughest conditions who live in the world's poorest countries."

Despite being consistently optimistic about innovation's potential in addressing the challenge, Gates has indulged in alarmist rhetoric of his own, making his recent statement a sign of a real shift in the debate. A growing coalition of leaders and experts is pushing for more pragmatism about climate change.

President Donald Trump's top energy advisers—Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and Energy Secretary Chris Wright—have long said climate change is a challenge, but not the biggest one that humanity faces. "That distinction belongs to global energy poverty," Wright said in the foreword of a report he commissioned, which challenged many mainstream climate narratives.

The two secretaries have since
replaced the Biden administration's whole-of-government climate strategy with an "energy dominance agenda" that aims to couple affordable energy and economic growth with climate progress. Democrats in Congress, meanwhile, aren't ringing climate alarm bells as much as they once did, and global leaders have walked back some of their more extreme policies and rhetoric on the issue.

The Breakthrough Institute's Alex Trembath has coined this shift as "the end of the climate hawk era." Gone are the days of rigid net-zero commitment. Energy affordability is now in vogue. Paradoxically, this realignment is more likely to deliver the type of climate progress advocates have long wished for.

For most people in the world, climate change is a luxury concern. Even in prosperous countries like the U.S., climate change regularly polls below economic issues, and most Americans wouldn't pay $10 per month in higher electricity costs to fix the problem. With most future emissions expected to come from developing nations, the answer, as Gates pointed out, lies in preventing human suffering. People are more likely to care about environmental issues when they have access to basic needs like clean water, food, and reliable electricity.

Economic growth enables societies to invest in mitigation strategies such as
carbon-free energy sources and adaptation measures, including seawalls and air conditioning. This has already begun to pay off; climate-related deaths are declining thanks to higher global prosperity, and global temperatures are expected to be lower than initially projected a decade ago.

More progress is needed, but restricting access to affordable energy or implementing population control schemes are not the best approach. A better way is to improve human flourishing, unleash
innovation, and accelerate economic growth through capitalism.