0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
%
By Ahmetcan Uzlaşık
What if our climate strategies are dangerously outdated? Ellen Haaslahti, a climate strategist and co-founder of Operaatio Arktis, believes governments are still operating with a “1990s mindset” that assumes climate change will unfold linearly. But the science now shows Earth systems are full of feedback loops and tipping points that could drive irreversible change. Based in Helsinki, Ellen is part of a new wave of climate advocates calling for bold strategies that address risks head-on, including consideration on controversial tools like solar radiation modification.
In this conversation with journalist Ahmetcan Uzlaşık, she talks about her journey from Extinction Rebellion to founding Operaatio Arktis, why tipping points are still missing from mainstream policy, the urgent risks of Atlantic circulation collapse, and how to communicate climate realities without losing hope.
I’m originally from Pori, on the west coast of Finland. I became interested in climate and environmental issues in high school. At first, it was just biology classes and things I read on social media, but it struck me how little I knew about what was happening in the world. In a small city like Pori, social issues were not really discussed among young people.
I remember being very worried about climate change. That led me to study environmental sciences at the University of Helsinki. In the capital there was more discussion, more activism, more opportunities to take part. As I learned more about the severity of climate impacts and how slowly decarbonisation was moving, I felt a strong motivation to act.
I joined Extinction Rebellion and was very active for a couple of years, especially in 2021. After two major campaigns in Finland, our strategic action group began reflecting: what worked, what didn’t, what does Finland really need? That long process led us to found Operaatio Arktis in spring 2022. Since then, we’ve focused on climate science advocacy and communications, trying to accelerate action in Finland by bringing tipping points and risk management into the conversation.
Current strategies are based on the assumption that climate impacts will progress somewhat linearly. But the Earth system is full of complex feedbacks and points of no return that our models don’t capture well. We’re not prepared for non-linear changes that could cascade once certain thresholds are crossed.
For example, policies today put us on track for nearly 3°C of warming by 2100. Yet science tells us that already at 1.5°C we risk triggering irreversible tipping points: large ice sheets collapsing, ecosystems shifting into entirely new states. Once a system tips, you can’t simply reverse it by lowering emissions decades later.
This logic is deeply problematic. It assumes we can overshoot 1.5°C temporarily and then come back down. But we haven’t prepared for the consequences of even temporary overshoot. That’s why we argue climate strategy must broaden beyond incremental emission cuts. We need faster mitigation, carbon dioxide removal, and new ways of understanding risk.
Earth system tipping points are elements like the Greenland ice sheet or the Amazon rainforest that can shift into a new regime once a threshold of warming is reached. It’s not a single moment but a process. For example, if global warming goes beyond about 1.5°C, Greenland may begin melting irreversibly. Even if temperatures later fall, the process won’t stop. That’s what we mean by tipping.
Why haven’t governments included this in their strategies? Partly because of uncertainty. For a long time, the likelihood of tipping seemed low, and policymakers focused only on probabilities. But risk has two dimensions: probability and magnitude. Even if probability is small, the magnitude is enormous, so it should be taken seriously.
In other areas of risk management, like health, we prepare for low-likelihood but high-impact scenarios, such as pandemics. In climate policy, that logic is missing. That’s why tipping points are still neglected in many strategies.
Solar radiation modification, or SRM, refers to a set of technological approaches that aim to reflect more sunlight back into space. The idea comes from what we already observe in the atmosphere: aerosols like sulfates have a cooling effect by reflecting sunlight. For decades, burning fossil fuels has also emitted aerosols. They have for example made ship tracks more reflective. Now that policymakers have succeeded in removing sulfates from fuels for health reasons, those reflective clouds no longer form, and oceans are absorbing more heat.
SRM research explores whether adding reflective particles in a controlled way could temporarily cool the planet. There are different approaches, but the basic idea is to mimic natural processes we already see.
It is clear that the priority must remain rapid decarbonisation and carbon removal. But because we are already approaching very dangerous limits, it’s important to research and discuss climate intervention options like SRM. They may help us navigate near-term risks, even if they should never replace emission mitigation.
The AMOC is a huge ocean circulation system that transports warm and cold water across the Atlantic. Melting from the Greenland ice sheet and overall ocean warming are destabilising it. Many scientists now warn it may slow down or even collapse irreversibly.
Impacts would differ by region. In Northern Europe, we could see winters and summers up to 10°C colder than today, although global warming complicates the picture. Even so, the consequences for agriculture and food security could be devastating. A collapse would also accelerate sea level rise.
It’s still uncertain how fast and how far changes would go, but the risks are serious enough that they need to be part of climate risk management.
Yes, it can feel discouraging. But there’s another side. In Finland, hierarchy is low, and it’s relatively easy for young experts like us to reach high-level politicians. Nordic countries also have strong diplomatic positions and geographic importance in the Arctic. That gives us an opportunity to play a leading role in bringing tipping points and risk management into international climate discussions.
I think honesty is essential. Young people deserve to know the realistic scenarios, because that enables them to engage meaningfully and demand better futures. At the same time, these are global and complex issues that can feel distant or overwhelming.
That’s why examples matter. Showing that groups like Operaatio Arktis can come together and push for change helps young people see they are not powerless. Collective action is a way to transform fear into agency.
It’s very difficult. Some argue SRM is simply impossible to govern. But the reality is that research is happening, and some countries may pursue it. Without governance, the risks are even higher.
That’s why we need international collaboration and inclusive frameworks to regulate research, testing, or even bans. Even a decision not to use these technologies requires a fair and legitimate process. It will be complicated, but it’s better to work toward governance than to ignore the issue until it’s too late.
ATLAS25 will take place in October 2025. It’s the first science-to-policy gathering in the Nordics that focuses specifically on Earth system tipping point risk management and climate interventions. We’ll have high-level policymakers and researchers from across the region coming together. The goal is to foster productive dialogue on what the best approaches are for the next decade.
We need action at many levels. Individual choices matter, but they’re not enough. The bigger task is to put pressure on large actors, governments and corporations, who are responsible for the majority of emissions.
That said, social transitions take time. Changing how we live is not easy, but there are hopeful examples across Europe. Personally, my optimism shifts week by week. Some days I feel hopeful seeing the people and organizations working for deeper transformation. Other days the scale of change needed feels overwhelming.
Ultimately, what we need is ambition, and a willingness to give up some of the short-term benefits of our current system in order to build something more meaningful and sustainable.
© 2025 Scrolli. All Rights Reserved. Scrolli Media Inc
