'We can halt warming – and we must': IPCC scientist on why Europe keeps choosing fossil fuels

By Beatrix Asboth & Angela Symons & operatőr/vágó Vizi Attila Published on 26/05/2026 - 6:32 GMT+2 Share Comments Share Facebook Twitter Flipboard Send Reddit Linkedin Messenger Telegram VK Bluesky Threads Whatsapp Copy/paste the article video embed link below: Copied

'Budapest will also hit 50°C, the only question is when', predicts Hungarian climate scientist Diána Ürge-Vorsatz, a professor at CEU.

Hungary's election of Péter Magyar’s Tisza Party in April brought hope for a renewed focus on environmental protection and climate targets.

ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT

It's already starting to bear fruit: the country established the Ministry for the Living Environment this month, putting environmental protection, nature conservation and animal welfare to the top of the agenda for the first time in 16 years.

"The Hungarian scientific community has welcomed with great enthusiasm the creation of a ministry responsible for the living environment," Hungarian physicist and world-renowned climate researcher Diána Ürge-Vorsatz, a professor at CEU, tells Euronews.

Restoring soil health and wetlands, changing agricultural practices and safeguarding forests are all issues that still await solutions. Ürge-Vorsatz, who also serves as vice-chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), says while environmental experts are optimistic about the future, the success of any measures will also depend on ordinary people.

Europe's energy crisis and the case for renewables

Soaring energy prices linked to geopolitical tensions in Iran have once again exposed Europe's vulnerability to fossil fuel shocks. It's led many countries to double down on efforts to boost homegrown renewable power.

Pointing out that this is the third energy crisis in a decade, following the post-pandemic rebound and Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Ürge-Vorsatz says: "That should be a strong enough signal that it is not worth relying on highly centralised regions for our energy supply when there is an alternative."

Alternatives exist for both oil-based transport and gas-based heating, she says, though industry is more challenging to decarbonise. The deeper problem, however, is how governments respond when crisis hits.

Related

• Petrostates tried to squash this historic climate ruling. The UN just voted to back it
• ‘Colossal profits’: Christian leaders lambast fossil fuel giants as they demand EU windfall tax

"Every time there is a crisis, instead of stopping to think that it is a serious problem that we are so exposed to these shocks – and that we should finally start laying the foundations to free ourselves from this dependence – we do something else: we adopt quick, temporary crisis measures which in fact lock us even more firmly into this dependency over the longer term."

That pattern plays out consistently, she says: rather than insulating buildings or reducing demand for natural gas, governments focus on securing supplies from elsewhere. Fossil fuel companies, meanwhile, have little incentive to change course.

"When the oil price is very high, it is of course very bad for consumers – but fossil fuel companies make huge profits, so the message they receive is not that they should exit this industry."

And the consequences of inaction are already being felt – not just in energy bills, but in rising temperatures.

Stemming Europe's record temperature rise

New heat records are expected in Budapest again this summer – the direct result of decades of rising emissions. The city's Chief Landscape Architect has previously warned that young trees may not survive the combined stress of heat and water shortage.

Copernicus data shows Europe is the fastest-warming continent on Earth, heating up at twice the global average, with Hungary warming even faster than the European average.

"We have already warmed so much that sooner or later Budapest will also see 50 degrees," Ürge-Vorsatz predicts. "The question is not whether that will happen, but when."

Air-conditioned public spaces, known as climate shelters, are one response being adopted across European cities, but Ürge-Vorsatz says they address the symptom rather than the cause. The real culprit is planet-warming emissions released by the burning of fossil fuels.

Related

• ‘Exceptionally high’ temperatures to hit parts of Europe this weekend. Which city can cope the best?

This is compounded by the urban heat island effect – a phenomenon that can make cities up to 10 degrees hotter than surrounding green spaces on a warm day.

Trees, Ürge-Vorsatz says, are the most powerful tool available to combat this: they actively cool their surroundings through transpiration in a way nothing else can replicate outdoors. Combined with better architecture and insulation, greening cities could substantially reduce dependence on energy-intensive air conditioning – and buy time against worsening heatwaves.

But adaptation has hard limits. No amount of adjustment will keep pace with warming if emissions continue to rise.

"For a while we can try this and that – plant different crops, irrigate more – but we can already see what serious problems are being caused not only by climate change itself, but also by the way we have managed our water resources, our soils and our forests," says Ürge-Vorsatz.

Adaptation will only work, she warns, alongside serious emissions reductions. "We are not only able to slow them down, we are able to halt them – and we must. If we do not bring emissions down to zero, warming will continue."

Leading change 'requires bravery'

The fossil fuel sector's political influence makes transformation difficult, Ürge-Vorsatz acknowledges. It employs large numbers of people, generates significant tax revenues, and forms a central pillar of many national economies.

"Governments do not easily say that they are going to part ways with this and turn in a completely different direction. That requires a very brave decision."

A gradual transition would be manageable, she says – but political and business cycles work against it. Governments plan over four to five year horizons; companies even shorter. What voters and shareholders want are visible results within a year or two.

"Unless we can square this circle, it will be very difficult not only to protect the environment, but also to carry out the crucial transitions in the energy sector – not because of the climate alone, but because of energy dependence, energy poverty, and economic productivity and competitiveness."

Related

• Round-the-clock renewables: New report says clean energy now challenges fossil fuels on price
• Worst-case global warming projection cut by 1°C as cheap solar and wind slash emissions

How changing behaviour can drive policy change

Individual behaviour change also matters – not because one person giving up a plastic straw saves the planet, but because collective action sends a signal, Ürge-Vorsatz argues. When enough people change their habits, they communicate to governments, businesses and local authorities that it matters to them.

Despite billionaires jetting around in private planes, sailing on yachts and "holidaying in space", the actions of everyday individuals stack up. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), comprehensive shifts in human behaviour – such as adopting plant-based diets, using public transit, and reducing air travel – could theoretically reduce global emissions by up to 70 per cent by 2050.

Getting there would take reevaluation of rising trends. Digital consumption is an under-appreciated driver of energy demand, Ürge-Vorsatz argues – from streaming video to AI-generated content, the energy and water costs of the internet are largely invisible to users and borne collectively.

"We have artificial intelligence generate meaningless, pointless content that consumes enormous amounts of energy and is then stored in the cloud, which also requires huge amounts of energy and water – all this has to be paid for by someone. At the moment it is the average person who pays, but perhaps the bill should instead go to those who choose to express their creativity in this way."

Could El Niño make temperatures even higher?

On top of the long-term warming driven by human emissions, a natural climate pattern could add further pressure in the near term. Scientists are monitoring the possibility of a Super El Niño developing this year – though there is no consensus that it will occur, and the WMO has cautioned that predictive models are less reliable in spring.

A recurring natural phenomenon caused by periodic warming of the Pacific Ocean, El Niño can amplify extreme weather in the short term – bringing stronger heatwaves, worsening droughts and more intense flooding in affected regions – but it is distinct from, and dwarfed in long-term significance by, human-caused climate change.

For Europe, its direct effects are limited. Its most severe impacts fall on monsoon-dependent regions. But the knock-on effects would be felt here too, Ürge-Vorsatz warns – particularly through global food systems. "It may once again push up food inflation and cause supply problems – that is how it could show up in Europe," she says.

Related

• Powerful El Niño, projected to be 2C warmer than normal, puts 2026 on track for second-warmest year

The distinction matters. As Dr Friederike Otto, Professor in Climate Science at Imperial College London and co-founder of World Weather Attribution, puts it: "El Niño is a natural phenomenon. It comes and goes. Climate change on the contrary gets worse as long as we do not stop burning fossil fuels. So climate change is the reason to freak out."

University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann echoes this framing: while El Niño can boost global temperatures for a year or two, it is ultimately a short-term oscillation – the planet swings back toward La Niña, which temporarily cools things down again. The longer-term, steady warming trend driven by fossil fuel combustion is what matters, and it continues regardless.

In other words, El Niño could make an already difficult summer harder to manage. But it would not cause Europe's warming – and it will not fix it when it passes. The underlying trajectory is set by emissions, and that is where the real decisions lie.

Go to accessibility shortcuts Share Comments

Read more

Climate

Hungary’s water guardians fight drought using waste from thermal spas