Germany’s public broadcaster ARD has recently rolled out an “anti-AC campaign,” alarming citizens about the supposed “dangers” of air conditioning. This initiative seems particularly misguided as Europe grapples with a severe heat wave that has compelled governments to close schools, shut down iconic tourist sites, reduce business hours, and, most tragically, led to dozens of fatalities.
What’s happening in Europe is the grim outcome of two decades steeped in climate dogma: minor inconveniences have transformed into rigid policies and cultural norms that prioritize emission reductions over human survival.
For the past 20 years, we have been told that climate change poses the greatest existential threat to humanity. We have been urged to take immediate action, even if it means sacrificing comfort and convenience, to avert catastrophe. The initial proposed solutions included silly but manageable changes, such as banning plastic grocery bags and paper straws. However, the demands have escalated to campaigns aimed at drastically reducing meat consumption, increasing calls to restrict gas stoves, and government mandates encouraging drivers to switch from gas-powered cars to electric vehicles.
Many of these measures have caused daily inconveniences. We’ve learned to sip drinks quickly before paper straws dissolve. Others have raised the cost of living: electric stoves are typically more expensive than gas ones, and EVs can lose significant range in extreme heat or cold — as seen in viral videos of “dead” vehicles stranded at Chicago charging stations during subzero winters. We also face higher electricity bills and rolling blackouts as utilities shutter coal and gas plants in favor of intermittent solar and wind. In one case, a utility company even remotely took control of smart thermostats for thousands of Colorado households during peak summer heat, leaving homeowners powerless to intervene.
Most people tolerated these inconveniences, higher costs, and even temporary loss of control as necessary sacrifices for the planet. Yet research shows many measures deliver minimal CO₂ reductions — and some are counterproductive. Life-cycle assessments, for example, find that cotton reusable bags often have a much higher carbon footprint than single-use plastic bags unless reused dozens or hundreds of times.
Americans have at least taken some comfort in avoiding the full brunt of Europe’s draconian demands. Europe positioned itself at the forefront of the climate crusade, chasing net-zero emissions by 2050. Many countries shuttered coal plants, phased out nuclear power, banned fracking, and curtailed natural gas production. These policies reduced affordable energy supplies, drove energy prices sharply higher, and increased reliance on weather-dependent renewables. Shortly after Spain celebrated periods of 100 percent renewable electricity in 2025, the Iberian Peninsula suffered a massive blackout affecting millions in Spain and Portugal for over 10 hours.
Europe’s war on fossil fuels has also lowered living standards. Europeans today are much poorer than their American counterparts. The European Union’s share of global consumption fell from 25 percent in 2008 to 18 percent in 2019, while the U.S. share rose from 25 percent to 28 percent. Even in once-affluent cities like Brussels, Belgium, teachers and nurses stood in line for discounted groceries. In Germany, per capita meat consumption has dropped to its lowest level since 1989.
Yet, climate orthodoxy has cultivated a culture that accepts lower standards of living and rejects modern comforts in the name of fighting climate change. During the 2022-2023 energy crisis, European government campaigns urged people to turn down heating, take shorter showers, wear extra layers, and “don heavier sweaters and woolen socks” to cut gas demand by 15 percent.
European climate crusaders’ aversion to modern comforts extends to air conditioning, long framed as wasteful and sinful, with politicians pushing passive cooling instead. Today, only about 20 percent of European homes have AC, compared to nearly 90 percent in the United States. As this summer’s heat wave pushes temperatures above 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit), even hospitals struggle with stifling wards where only select rooms have cooling.
The World Health Organization warned that heat has claimed more than 200,000 lives across the EU and associated countries in the past four years, and nearly all preventable. France’s weather agency has noted that current temperatures are comparable to the 2003 heat wave, underscoring that Europe is not experiencing unprecedented new extremes.
While activists will blame every heat wave on climate change, the alarming rise in preventable heat deaths is a wake-up call. Within two decades, the narrative surrounding climate action has shifted from “small gestures for the planet” to policies that endanger lives.
When leaders in Brussels reportedly keep air conditioning running on upper floors while restricting it for those below, or when governments dismiss life-saving technologies like reliable cooling in pursuit of abstract future goals, their priorities are dangerously out of sync. This hypocrisy is especially glaring as prominent voices in the climate movement, including Bill Gates, have begun pushing back against the “doomsday outlook,” arguing that climate change will not lead to humanity’s demise and that resources must also address immediate crises like poverty and disease.
It’s time to reject the false choice between climate concern and human welfare. Governments can address environmental challenges without sacrificing comfort, reliability, or lives on the altar of ideological purity. The heat-related deaths across Europe are not just a preventable tragedy; they are a warning that orthodoxy without common sense and realism costs lives. Human flourishing should never be treated as collateral damage in the name of abstract ideology.
