Trees and debris lay on the beach in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene in Treasure Island, Florida. There’s a debate raging between those calling for “climate pragmatism” and others who see it as a corporate excuse to avoid fundamental change. It’s an argument that misses the point. Having waited so long to get serious about climate action, we need to set ambitious goals. But we’ll never reach them if we don’t focus on the tough, pragmatic choices that will move us forward in the real world. To solve the climate crisis, we need to dive into the “messy middle.” The “middle” does not mean halfway, compromise measures. It’s way too late for that. The messy middle refers to the difficult decisions that need to be made, guided by science and hardheaded economics. It requires bridging the gap between scientific facts and human needs—and understanding the priorities of people who are impacted by this crisis and its solutions. Advertisement This approach to environmental action tends to produce results that can be sustained over time because they are aligned with real-world economic incentives. We’re not going to change human nature, so durable progress requires meeting people where they are and finding a path that works for them. It’s change that builds year over year, like compound interest . Methane matters A decade ago, we were in the midst of a heated debate about fracking. There were serious concerns about health human health and water pollution—but very little discussion about the climate impact of methane leaking from those wells and pipelines. Researchers have since uncovered that much more was leaking into the atmosphere than previously thought. And it turns out that fixing this problem is one of the fastest and most cost-effective ways to limit global warming in the short term. Progress […]