by Daniel Brouse

What I Did on My Summer Vacation

I thought it might be a fun experiment to see how the extreme weather fueled by climate change is impacting you—and me.

I’ll start with “What I Did on My Summer Vacation.”

Within 15 feet of my backdoor, we’ve experienced more violent storms than ever. Events that used to happen once every thirty years seem to be happening right now.

The violent storms at my house have produced only about three inches of rain in total. But a couple of times, when the rain became truly extreme, it was giant p = mv pain rain. Thank the god of physics for friction and wind resistance—or we all might have been dead.

But the rain was the least of it.

The winds and lightning have been even more extreme. Winds have taken down branches and sections of trees on an almost daily basis, creating an unusual amount of chainsaw work for me. Lightning has been nearly daily as well.

We’ve had more power outages in these three months than we normally experience in a dozen years. Fortunately, the local infrastructure was upgraded recently, so most outages have been brief. New technology allows the utility to install breakers along the lines, helping isolate problems and restore power more quickly.

But that has presented a new problem: power surges.

Lights flicker, breakers trip, and electronic equipment gets hit with sudden changes in voltage. I hadn’t really considered surge protection for something as mundane as my room lighting. Now I do.

Another new extreme has been the flash drought.

Even with all these thunderstorms, the new climate atmosphere seems capable of sucking water out of everything—the soil, the plants, even the pool—within days, sometimes within a day, and occasionally within hours.

Overall, it has been one of the worst years for my home garden.

Oh, I almost forgot.

There were six heatwaves.

And then there were the days when the wildfire smoke made the air practically unbreathable. The smoke wasn’t coming from a fire in my backyard, but the atmosphere doesn’t care much about property lines. Wildfires hundreds or thousands of miles away can turn the local air quality into a serious problem.

And this is just what has happened within 15 feet of my backdoor.

For the next installment of this show-and-tell, I’ll expand the circle to the more exciting energy events that have occurred within 15 miles of my house: microbursts and straight-line winds powerful enough to collapse buildings, furious flash floods in town after town, and, of course, tornadoes.

The point isn’t that every storm, heatwave, drought, or wildfire is caused by climate change.

It isn’t.

The point is that the climate system is changing the amount of energy and moisture available to extreme events—and we are increasingly experiencing what that extra energy can do.

So here’s my question:

How is the climate energy hitting you?

by Daniel Brouse

Cloud feedback is one of the most important—and least understood—climate multipliers. That makes efforts to better understand and control aviation-related cloud formation particularly significant.

On August 18, 2026, the landmark £5 million “Operation Blue Skies” project was officially launched, marking the world’s first airspace-scale trial of contrail avoidance across an entire oceanic region.

The initiative targets the Shanwick Oceanic airspace in the eastern North Atlantic, one of the world’s busiest aviation corridors. The region is estimated to account for roughly 5% of global contrail warming.

Supported by the UK government and technology partners, the project will test whether relatively small operational changes—such as adjusting flight altitudes and routes to avoid atmospheric conditions conducive to persistent contrail formation—can significantly reduce aviation’s climate impact.

Contrails are more than short-lived streaks across the sky. Under cold, humid atmospheric conditions, aircraft exhaust can create ice crystals that persist and spread into cirrus clouds. These clouds can alter the Earth’s radiation balance by trapping outgoing heat, producing a warming effect that can substantially exceed the warming associated with the aircraft’s carbon dioxide emissions over short time scales.

The project is particularly important because contrails and their associated cloud effects remain among the largest uncertainties in assessing aviation’s total climate impact. Current estimates suggest that non-CO₂ effects, including contrails, account for roughly one-third of aviation’s overall climate impact.

Operation Blue Skies therefore represents more than an aviation experiment. It is a real-world test of whether targeted operational changes can interrupt a climate feedback with potentially significant consequences—without requiring new aircraft technology or eliminating flights.

If successful, the approach could provide a relatively inexpensive way to reduce aviation’s near-term warming contribution while researchers continue working to better understand the complex interactions among aircraft emissions, atmospheric moisture, clouds, and climate.

The significance extends beyond aviation. Climate change is increasingly revealing that the atmosphere is not simply a passive recipient of emissions. Feedbacks involving clouds, water vapor, ice, and atmospheric circulation can amplify or modify the initial forcing, sometimes producing effects far larger than the original disturbance.

Operation Blue Skies offers an opportunity to test whether understanding those feedbacks can translate directly into practical climate mitigation.

By Daniel Brouse and Sidd Mukherjee

For decades, we have studied the relationship between earthquakes and climate change. Early in that work, there was little evidence that changes in global temperature were having any meaningful effect on tectonic activity. That conclusion was reasonable at the time. Climate change was expected to progress relatively slowly, over centuries or even millennia, and the resulting changes in surface mass and hydrological conditions were correspondingly gradual.

That assumption no longer describes the world we are entering.

The rate of climate change has accelerated dramatically, and many of the associated physical changes are now occurring on timescales measured in decades, years, and—in some cases—even months. This does not mean that global warming is heating the Earth’s crust enough to expand tectonic plates and cause earthquakes. That effect remains negligible.

The more important mechanism is mass redistribution.

Climate change is rapidly moving enormous quantities of water and ice around the planet. Ice sheets are losing mass, glaciers are retreating, permafrost is thawing, groundwater is being depleted or redistributed, reservoirs and lakes are experiencing increasingly extreme fluctuations, and sea level is rising. These changes alter the loads imposed on Earth’s crust and, in some locations, the pressure and stress conditions surrounding faults.

Earthquakes are ultimately controlled by stress. A fault can remain locked for centuries while tectonic forces slowly accumulate until the stress exceeds the fault’s resistance to slip. Climate-driven changes in surface loading do not create the tectonic forces responsible for most earthquakes, but they can modulate the timing, location, and frequency of seismic events by nudging already-stressed faults closer to—or farther from—the point of failure.

That distinction is critical.

Climate change does not need to cause tectonic earthquakes to become a meaningful factor in seismic risk. It only needs to change the conditions under which faults fail.

Glacial Unloading

One of the clearest mechanisms is the loss of glacial and ice-sheet mass.

For thousands of years, enormous glaciers and ice sheets have imposed immense loads on the Earth’s crust. When that mass is removed, the crust responds through a process known as isostatic rebound. The underlying crust rises as the weight above it decreases, changing the distribution of stress within the lithosphere.

In regions undergoing rapid deglaciation, this unloading can alter stress on existing faults and increase seismic activity. The effect is particularly important because the removal of ice can continue for decades or centuries after the initial climatic warming.

The key point is simple: when climate change removes trillions of tons of mass from the surface, the crust responds.

Permafrost Thaw and Meltwater

The destabilization of frozen ground introduces another mechanism.

As permafrost thaws and glaciers retreat, meltwater can penetrate fractured rock and mountain systems. Increased fluid pressure within faults can reduce the effective normal stress holding the fault surfaces together. In simplified terms, water can make it easier for an already stressed fault to slip.

This does not mean that every episode of melting will produce an earthquake. Rather, it creates another pathway through which rapid environmental change can influence the mechanical conditions surrounding faults.

Where faults are already near failure, relatively small changes in fluid pressure can matter.

Hydrostatic Load Shifts

Climate change is also producing increasingly extreme changes in the distribution of surface water.

Severe droughts remove enormous quantities of water from reservoirs, lakes, soils, and groundwater systems. Extreme precipitation and monsoon events can then return massive amounts of water over remarkably short periods.

That changing weight alters the stresses imposed on the crust.

Large reservoirs have long been recognized as capable of inducing or modulating seismicity, particularly where water infiltration increases pore pressure along faults. Climate-driven swings in precipitation, drought, groundwater storage, snowpack, and reservoir levels can produce similar loading and unloading effects, although the magnitude and significance vary greatly by location.

The important issue is not simply how much water exists. It is where that water is, how rapidly it moves, and how that movement changes the stress field.

Sea-Level Rise

Sea-level rise represents another large-scale redistribution of mass.

As land-based ice melts, water that was previously stored on continents is transferred into the oceans. At the same time, the increasing weight of seawater changes the loading conditions along continental margins and beneath coastal regions.

These effects are generally small compared with the enormous tectonic forces responsible for earthquakes. Nevertheless, in regions containing faults already close to failure, even relatively small changes in stress can influence the timing of seismic events.

The scientific question, therefore, is not whether sea-level rise is going to cause earthquakes worldwide. It is whether rapid changes in ocean loading can measurably influence seismicity in susceptible regions.

The Planet Is Moving Water at an Extraordinary Scale

Perhaps the most remarkable evidence that this redistribution of mass is physically significant comes from Earth’s rotation itself.

When ice sheets lose mass, that water does not disappear. It is transferred from land—particularly from the high latitudes—into the global ocean. Over time, ocean circulation and gravity redistribute that water across the planet, with a substantial portion ultimately moving toward lower latitudes.

The quantity of water involved is so enormous that the redistribution is measurable in the Earth’s rotation.

The “Figure Skater” Effect

Earth is not a perfect sphere. Its rotation causes it to bulge slightly around the equator, making the planet an oblate spheroid.

The basic physics is familiar from a figure skater spinning on ice. When mass moves farther from the axis of rotation, the moment of inertia increases and the rate of rotation decreases. When mass moves toward the axis, the opposite occurs.

The redistribution of water caused by melting ice therefore changes Earth’s moment of inertia and slightly alters the length of the day.

This is not theoretical speculation. Modern geodesy can detect these changes.

Earth has lost well over 35 trillion tons (gigatonnes) of ice from its polar ice sheets and glaciers over the past few decades, with the resulting meltwater being redistributed through the global ocean system, ultimately increasing ocean mass at lower latitudes. That represents an extraordinary transfer of mass from the high-latitude continents toward the oceans and, through gravitational and rotational processes, toward the equatorial regions.

The mechanical consequence is the counterpart to isostatic rebound. Where ice loss removes an enormous surface load and allows the crust to rebound upward, the accumulation of additional ocean water places an increasing load on the seafloor and coastal crust. In effect, while the high latitudes are experiencing unloading, lower latitudes are experiencing climate-driven loading.

The magnitude of this redistribution is difficult to comprehend: tens of trillions of tons of mass are being transferred across the planet within a geologically instantaneous interval.

Climate change is therefore not merely changing atmospheric temperature. It is physically moving enormous quantities of matter across Earth’s surface—and the solid Earth responds mechanically to that redistribution.

From Temperature Change to Mass Redistribution

This is where the relationship between climate change and seismicity becomes more interesting.

The traditional question was:

Is a warmer atmosphere heating the crust enough to cause earthquakes?

The answer is essentially no.

The more important question is:

Is rapid climate-driven redistribution of ice, water, and surface mass capable of altering the stress and pressure conditions acting on faults that are already tectonically stressed?

The answer is yes, in principle—and in some settings, observations already demonstrate that environmental loading can modulate seismicity.

The magnitude of the effect varies enormously from one region to another. Tectonic forces remain overwhelmingly dominant, and climate-related loading should not be portrayed as a replacement for conventional earthquake science.

But that is precisely why the issue deserves attention.

A fault does not have to be pushed from a state of complete stability to failure by climate change. It may only require a small additional perturbation when it is already near its failure threshold.

As climate change accelerates, the frequency and magnitude of these environmental perturbations are changing as well.

The climate system is becoming a faster-moving component of Earth’s physical system. The question is no longer whether climate can interact with the solid Earth. It is how much, where, and how rapidly those interactions can alter seismic risk.