What do you think?
Rate this book
Overshoot: How the World Surrendered to Climate Breakdown
A scathing critique of proposals to geoengineer our way out of climate disaster by the bestselling author of How to Blow Up a PipelineIt might soon be far too hot on this planet. What do we do then? In the era of "overshoot," schemes abound for turning down the heat–not now, but a few decades down the road. We’re being told that we can return to liveable temperatures by means of technologies for removing CO2 from the air or blocking incoming sunlight.If they even exist, such technologies are not safe.They come with immense uncertainties and risks. Worse, like magical promises of future redemption, they might provide reasons for continuing to emit in the present. But do they also hold some potentials? In Overshoot two leading climate scholars subject the plans for saving the planet after it’s been wrecked to critical study. Carbon dioxide removal is already having effects, as an excuse for continuing business as usual, while geoengineering promises to bail out humanity if the heat reaches critical levels.Both distract from the one urgent to slash emissions now. There can be no further delay. The climate revolution is long overdue, and in the end, no technology can absolve us of its tasks.
416 pages, Hardcover
Published October 1, 2024
58 people are currently reading
858 people want to read
About the author
Andreas Malm
27 books398 followersAndreas Malm teaches Human Ecology at Lund University, Sweden. He is the author, with Shora Esmailian, of Iran on the Brink: Rising Workers and Threats of War and of Fossil Capital, which won the Isaac and Tamara Deutscher Memorial Prize.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
November 4, 2024
Another masterpiece from Andreas Malm and Wim Calton. I am hosting a book launch for this at bookhaus this evening, which is why I read Fossil Capital and White Skin, Black Fuel over the past few months in preparation.
Fossil Capital is a work of materialist history that showed how interlinked the roots of Capitalism, manufacturing and fossil fuels are, and how they became inextricably linked through imperialism and class war. White Skin, Black Fuel is an explortion of the deep connections between far right and racist ideology and fossil fuels. A work of history exploring the recent past, it showed how and why politicians and companies have shifted from accepting the reality of climate change and offering greenwashed capitalist solutions to it a few years ago, to returning towards climate denial, because there really isn't any way of squaring the circle of maintaining Racial Capitalism and addressing the climate crisis. The book explores the psychology of the far right and climate denial, and has given me a lot of food for thought.
This book feels like a natural successor to the previous two books. It shows that the ruling class have decided that they would prefer to maintain business as usual and allow the temperature of the climate to rise by 3 degrees, or maybe more, and allow global devastation and a genocide of the poor to take place. This is so that profits can continue to flow into the pockets of the ruling elite. They are banking everything on the projected development, at some point in the decades to come, of carbon capture and storage technology which will be able to reverse the consequences of this temperature rise. By adopting an economic model from classical, bourgeois economics, they have decided that it is too expensive to address the climate crisis now, but that as the global economy will continue to grow exponentially in the future, it will be much cheaper for our descendants to deal with the problem with all the extra money at their disposal. This is absolute lunacy, and it is literally what the global elite have decided. As I read this book the Labour Party announced that, after abandoning the Green New Deal pledge in favour of investing £28 billion a year in climate mitigation during their five year term, then reducing that to £28 billion across the entire five years, they have now announced that the core of their climate policy would be investing £22 billion into carbon capture technology. Every climate commentator was furious about this, explaining that this is nothing more than a licence for fossil fuel companies to be able to continue business as usual without doing any of the work necessary to keep the world at a rise of 1.5 degrees or less. Instead of throwing money at insulating our housing, rolling out a first rate public transport network, a massive increase in renewable energy sources, and investment in developing new green technologies that could address the problem and enrich the public purse, they are giving billions of pounds of public money to the richest private corporations in the world. A month ago Eric Schmidt, the ex-CEO of Google, said in an interview that our climate goals will not be met and we should abandon them and let rip to develop AI technology, in the expectation that AI would find a way to solve the problem in the future.
Like White Skin, Black Fuel, this book explores the psychology of our insane status quo. I now feel like I need to dive into reading a lot more psychoanalytic works, because I am persuaded that our situation is so irrational. The authors conclude by showing that the only way out of this is a revolutionary solution. Green Capitalism is not going to work. Reformism isn't going to work. It is revolution or nothing.
Fossil Capital is a work of materialist history that showed how interlinked the roots of Capitalism, manufacturing and fossil fuels are, and how they became inextricably linked through imperialism and class war. White Skin, Black Fuel is an explortion of the deep connections between far right and racist ideology and fossil fuels. A work of history exploring the recent past, it showed how and why politicians and companies have shifted from accepting the reality of climate change and offering greenwashed capitalist solutions to it a few years ago, to returning towards climate denial, because there really isn't any way of squaring the circle of maintaining Racial Capitalism and addressing the climate crisis. The book explores the psychology of the far right and climate denial, and has given me a lot of food for thought.
This book feels like a natural successor to the previous two books. It shows that the ruling class have decided that they would prefer to maintain business as usual and allow the temperature of the climate to rise by 3 degrees, or maybe more, and allow global devastation and a genocide of the poor to take place. This is so that profits can continue to flow into the pockets of the ruling elite. They are banking everything on the projected development, at some point in the decades to come, of carbon capture and storage technology which will be able to reverse the consequences of this temperature rise. By adopting an economic model from classical, bourgeois economics, they have decided that it is too expensive to address the climate crisis now, but that as the global economy will continue to grow exponentially in the future, it will be much cheaper for our descendants to deal with the problem with all the extra money at their disposal. This is absolute lunacy, and it is literally what the global elite have decided. As I read this book the Labour Party announced that, after abandoning the Green New Deal pledge in favour of investing £28 billion a year in climate mitigation during their five year term, then reducing that to £28 billion across the entire five years, they have now announced that the core of their climate policy would be investing £22 billion into carbon capture technology. Every climate commentator was furious about this, explaining that this is nothing more than a licence for fossil fuel companies to be able to continue business as usual without doing any of the work necessary to keep the world at a rise of 1.5 degrees or less. Instead of throwing money at insulating our housing, rolling out a first rate public transport network, a massive increase in renewable energy sources, and investment in developing new green technologies that could address the problem and enrich the public purse, they are giving billions of pounds of public money to the richest private corporations in the world. A month ago Eric Schmidt, the ex-CEO of Google, said in an interview that our climate goals will not be met and we should abandon them and let rip to develop AI technology, in the expectation that AI would find a way to solve the problem in the future.
Like White Skin, Black Fuel, this book explores the psychology of our insane status quo. I now feel like I need to dive into reading a lot more psychoanalytic works, because I am persuaded that our situation is so irrational. The authors conclude by showing that the only way out of this is a revolutionary solution. Green Capitalism is not going to work. Reformism isn't going to work. It is revolution or nothing.
October 20, 2024
Essential reading.
December 5, 2024
Disillusioned with stagnant COP negotiations, I was taken initially by Malm and Carton's criticisms of the somewhat arbitrary targets set by the Paris Agreement. Particularly, the scrutiny on IAMs and Nordhaus' perceived errors was comprehensive and articulated more than I could on my own personal grievances with these climate/economic models (and the very ones I work with). This reaffirms my view that the emphasis on distant emission reduction targets central to these international agreements enables an approach in which the ends justify the means. Much of what
Overshoot: How the World Surrendered to Climate Breakdown
explores are those very means and the global conversations around their feasibility, and how disagreements around them tend to create postponement of action, thereby fostering the "overshoot conjecture". Overshoot is defined as "the period when officially declared limits to global warming are exceeded", driven by the resignation of being able to address the climate crisis from the dominant classes responsible for the excess.
On the surface, Malm and Carton appear staunchly against technical solutions to address the climate crisis, such as through their lambasting of carbon removal technologies and initiatives. However, they offer that the technical and ethical debates distract from addressing the crux of the issues, which stem from upstream sources. The crux of their criticism lies in how climate politics has evolved akin to the growth of capitalistic structures that have rooted themselves in our global economic systems, rather than disparaging the solutions themselves. The authors "blame" politics as a driver for mainstreaming the overshoot logic that prevents global leaders from implementing effective action. A common element in the discourse, which is also given significant space in this book, is that the technology and solutions for addressing the climate crisis already exist, but there is a lack of political willingness to scale them up. "The overshoot conjecture emerged for reasons unrelated to technological feasibility." Malm and Carton argue that this is because political forces are geared toward protecting existing capital and future value, and this notion is central to perpetuating "overshoot". "The sum of viable mitigation should not be equated to that of the existing productive forces. The latter would rather grow with the former." In this view, the nature of a capitalist economy views all capital as having limited durability. More efficient and productive technologies replace existing ones, but once new innovations no longer serve their intended purpose, they lose their value and become waste. The generation of value comes with the assumption that it will eventually have to be destroyed, thereby facilitating an economy that "endogenously generates a financial structure which is susceptible to a financial crisis." This somewhat ignores the potential of a circular economy, though similarly, recycling has its drawbacks as well.
The authors also make a poignant point about stranded assets not being market-driven as much of the development research has implied but coming as an abrupt policy shock (i.e., framing asset stranding as political destruction of fossil capital), which has disastrous implications for global economies that are embedded in fossil fuels not only as an energy source but as a trading commodity. This idea also helps explain the reluctance of many countries to make radical shifts away from fossil fuels. On the other hand, the development of renewables and electric vehicles can be seen as just more capitalist processes of creating industry and value that will eventually be replaced with new capital, as the design of such innovations is limited to their intended purpose. Electric vehicles somewhat bypass this by featuring batteries that not only power the vehicle but also can act as electric supply to the grid.
Though I have not read much of either author's other work, I know that Malm has a reputation for relatively radical leftist views on climate. Reviews of his previous books and interviews with him showcasing his seemingly blind faith in Marxism had originally put me off to How to Blow Up a Pipeline . And though his political leanings are drenched in his takes on climate politics in this book, I did resonate with much of what was presented. Yet Overshoot appears to cater to readers who are already familiar with Malm and Canton's work and agree wholeheartedly with the authors' views. This is evident by the frequent use of Marxist terminology (e.g., base and superstructure) to describe capital structures and explain the lock-in politics of fossil fuels but are presented without definition or clarification, thereby assuming the potential reader is already aware of them.
In contrast, the authors add definitions or explanations of certain economic terms, such as Schumpeterian growth, which may be ideas outside their target audience's presumed tacit knowledge. Though I personally should probably be aware of the Marxist / political jargon integrated into this book, selective defining implies non-objectivity that sets a dangerous precedent for ignoring certain variables to craft a perfect narrative while also perpetuating cognitive dissonance and echo chambers in the discourse. Moreover, theory-based arguments assign the identity of ideas to a school of thought, which can be much more easily dismissed ad hominem than would concrete, empirical evidence. Theory tends to be contradiction-free, but reality is much more nuanced and filled with chaotic contradictions that make theoretical explanations appear limited.
The authors leave much of the responsibility and effort to make sense of the claims to the reader, evident by a heavy reliance on endnotes and references that make up about a quarter of the overall text. The dependence on more on theoretical academic papers than empirical evidence (i.e., real-world data and trends), which makes several claims in the book appear weak with seemingly leaping conclusions. One glaring example is this sentence: "It is the absence of reason, the denial of reality that pushes the world towards [a disorderly transition]." (p. 163), in which the citation is a Tooze (2019) paper on Central Banks. I would have to find and read this separate document to comprehend why not only was this the reference piece to the claim, but even to understand why the claim is being made in the first place.
I also feel that some aspects of the discussion that could have been worthwhile additions were missing (though the authors do mention a sequel is in the works). In line with Scott Barrett's research, the non-binding legal nature of the Paris Agreement is a piece that is often not discussed (and potentially a crucial aspect of surrender to a climate breakdown). Though it is mentioned several times in this book, it is not a significant part. While I appreciate that the authors take a more world view on climate-related events, citing more developments from "the South" than I'd seen in other recent (Western-published) climate-related books (though not other media), the arguments do not decipher the regional differences in capitalistic trends. Do all countries, regardless of developed or developing status, succumb to the overshoot conjecture? What of countries that do not inherently adopt capitalistic cultures, such as China, Russia, and Vietnam? Or do the authors suggest that capitalism is so deeply embedded in our global economic systems that the overshoot conjecture cannot be escaped?
Overall, the content of this book could have been way tighter, really honing in on making the arguments clear and without many of the seemingly irrelevant anecdotes and analogies. While I was able to glean the authors' intent and main arguments, this was only achieved through more careful and effortful reading, as much of the writing was incoherent and tended to shift into long, repetitive tangents. That said, I still found it to be an engaging read, one that made me want to scrutinize the text more deeply. I was open to many of the ideas presented by Malm and Carton - for the most part, they articulate a lot of my grievances with climate development - but I did not find the method of presentation to be very effective.
TL;DR: Malm and Carton present some insightful views behind the obstacles of effective climate action that deserve to be conveyed more coherently.
On the surface, Malm and Carton appear staunchly against technical solutions to address the climate crisis, such as through their lambasting of carbon removal technologies and initiatives. However, they offer that the technical and ethical debates distract from addressing the crux of the issues, which stem from upstream sources. The crux of their criticism lies in how climate politics has evolved akin to the growth of capitalistic structures that have rooted themselves in our global economic systems, rather than disparaging the solutions themselves. The authors "blame" politics as a driver for mainstreaming the overshoot logic that prevents global leaders from implementing effective action. A common element in the discourse, which is also given significant space in this book, is that the technology and solutions for addressing the climate crisis already exist, but there is a lack of political willingness to scale them up. "The overshoot conjecture emerged for reasons unrelated to technological feasibility." Malm and Carton argue that this is because political forces are geared toward protecting existing capital and future value, and this notion is central to perpetuating "overshoot". "The sum of viable mitigation should not be equated to that of the existing productive forces. The latter would rather grow with the former." In this view, the nature of a capitalist economy views all capital as having limited durability. More efficient and productive technologies replace existing ones, but once new innovations no longer serve their intended purpose, they lose their value and become waste. The generation of value comes with the assumption that it will eventually have to be destroyed, thereby facilitating an economy that "endogenously generates a financial structure which is susceptible to a financial crisis." This somewhat ignores the potential of a circular economy, though similarly, recycling has its drawbacks as well.
The authors also make a poignant point about stranded assets not being market-driven as much of the development research has implied but coming as an abrupt policy shock (i.e., framing asset stranding as political destruction of fossil capital), which has disastrous implications for global economies that are embedded in fossil fuels not only as an energy source but as a trading commodity. This idea also helps explain the reluctance of many countries to make radical shifts away from fossil fuels. On the other hand, the development of renewables and electric vehicles can be seen as just more capitalist processes of creating industry and value that will eventually be replaced with new capital, as the design of such innovations is limited to their intended purpose. Electric vehicles somewhat bypass this by featuring batteries that not only power the vehicle but also can act as electric supply to the grid.
Though I have not read much of either author's other work, I know that Malm has a reputation for relatively radical leftist views on climate. Reviews of his previous books and interviews with him showcasing his seemingly blind faith in Marxism had originally put me off to How to Blow Up a Pipeline . And though his political leanings are drenched in his takes on climate politics in this book, I did resonate with much of what was presented. Yet Overshoot appears to cater to readers who are already familiar with Malm and Canton's work and agree wholeheartedly with the authors' views. This is evident by the frequent use of Marxist terminology (e.g., base and superstructure) to describe capital structures and explain the lock-in politics of fossil fuels but are presented without definition or clarification, thereby assuming the potential reader is already aware of them.
In contrast, the authors add definitions or explanations of certain economic terms, such as Schumpeterian growth, which may be ideas outside their target audience's presumed tacit knowledge. Though I personally should probably be aware of the Marxist / political jargon integrated into this book, selective defining implies non-objectivity that sets a dangerous precedent for ignoring certain variables to craft a perfect narrative while also perpetuating cognitive dissonance and echo chambers in the discourse. Moreover, theory-based arguments assign the identity of ideas to a school of thought, which can be much more easily dismissed ad hominem than would concrete, empirical evidence. Theory tends to be contradiction-free, but reality is much more nuanced and filled with chaotic contradictions that make theoretical explanations appear limited.
The authors leave much of the responsibility and effort to make sense of the claims to the reader, evident by a heavy reliance on endnotes and references that make up about a quarter of the overall text. The dependence on more on theoretical academic papers than empirical evidence (i.e., real-world data and trends), which makes several claims in the book appear weak with seemingly leaping conclusions. One glaring example is this sentence: "It is the absence of reason, the denial of reality that pushes the world towards [a disorderly transition]." (p. 163), in which the citation is a Tooze (2019) paper on Central Banks. I would have to find and read this separate document to comprehend why not only was this the reference piece to the claim, but even to understand why the claim is being made in the first place.
I also feel that some aspects of the discussion that could have been worthwhile additions were missing (though the authors do mention a sequel is in the works). In line with Scott Barrett's research, the non-binding legal nature of the Paris Agreement is a piece that is often not discussed (and potentially a crucial aspect of surrender to a climate breakdown). Though it is mentioned several times in this book, it is not a significant part. While I appreciate that the authors take a more world view on climate-related events, citing more developments from "the South" than I'd seen in other recent (Western-published) climate-related books (though not other media), the arguments do not decipher the regional differences in capitalistic trends. Do all countries, regardless of developed or developing status, succumb to the overshoot conjecture? What of countries that do not inherently adopt capitalistic cultures, such as China, Russia, and Vietnam? Or do the authors suggest that capitalism is so deeply embedded in our global economic systems that the overshoot conjecture cannot be escaped?
Overall, the content of this book could have been way tighter, really honing in on making the arguments clear and without many of the seemingly irrelevant anecdotes and analogies. While I was able to glean the authors' intent and main arguments, this was only achieved through more careful and effortful reading, as much of the writing was incoherent and tended to shift into long, repetitive tangents. That said, I still found it to be an engaging read, one that made me want to scrutinize the text more deeply. I was open to many of the ideas presented by Malm and Carton - for the most part, they articulate a lot of my grievances with climate development - but I did not find the method of presentation to be very effective.
TL;DR: Malm and Carton present some insightful views behind the obstacles of effective climate action that deserve to be conveyed more coherently.
February 19, 2025
I didn't love LOVE this book overall, but some of the sections were great. Most of the book is just covering how "Overshoot" was baked into our climate models because they took bourgeois or neo-classical economics as a given (i.e., the transition has to be slow, and profitable for oil and gas companies). So our modelling essentially allowed us to get to a point where we can surpass 1.5C of warming under the assumption that carbon capture etc. will save us at some later date.
In one chapter/section, the authors use Marx's labour theory of value to demonstrate why the rollout of renewable energy infrastructure hasn't proceeded as quickly as we expect (especially since it now produces significantly cheaper energy than fossil fuels). That's because once the fixed capital (i.e., infrastructure) for renewables has been built, there's no way to squeeze additional surplus labour out of workers in the energy production supply chain. Which means that the rate of profit falls dramatically with renewables (compared to fossil fuels). Renewables aren't being developed for the sole reason that they are not profitable to the owners of capital.
In one chapter/section, the authors use Marx's labour theory of value to demonstrate why the rollout of renewable energy infrastructure hasn't proceeded as quickly as we expect (especially since it now produces significantly cheaper energy than fossil fuels). That's because once the fixed capital (i.e., infrastructure) for renewables has been built, there's no way to squeeze additional surplus labour out of workers in the energy production supply chain. Which means that the rate of profit falls dramatically with renewables (compared to fossil fuels). Renewables aren't being developed for the sole reason that they are not profitable to the owners of capital.
November 3, 2024
Malm and Carton deliver a searing critique of the fossil fuel industry’s stranglehold on climate solutions, exposing the dangerous complacency that allows global warming to spiral out of control.
In Overshoot: How the World Surrendered to Climate Breakdown , Andreas Malm and Wim Carton offer a sharp critique of the current trajectory of global climate policy, focusing on the dangerous ideology of "overshoot"—the idea that humanity can temporarily exceed critical temperature thresholds and later reverse the damage through technological interventions. The authors argue that this approach is not only reckless but also a reflection of deeper systemic issues tied to capitalism and fossil fuel dependency.
The concept of "overshoot" is central to Malm and Carton's argument. They define it as a period when officially declared limits to global warming are exceeded, with policymakers essentially resigning themselves to future technological fixes. As they write:
This passage encapsulates their critique of global elites who, rather than taking immediate action to reduce emissions, have embraced a fatalistic approach. The overshoot conjecture allows policymakers to justify continued emissions under the assumption that future technologies—such as carbon capture or solar geoengineering—will eventually reverse climate damage. This approach, they argue, reflects an unwillingness to confront the economic structures that perpetuate fossil fuel consumption. Global elites would rather engage in an economic structure, with the knowledge that it will lead to devastating consequences, mass humanitarian crises and migration from the most affected countries, risk potential pandemics due to the migration of animals from the affected ecosystems, and so on than relinquish their hold on power.
As someone involved in technology development, this idea resonated deeply with me. It made me reflect on how technological advancements are often used as justifications for maintaining entrenched institutions, rather than challenging them. While technological revolutions like those in agriculture or industry brought about social changes, Malm and Carton argue that today's innovations are being co-opted by those who wish to preserve the status quo.
Malm and Carton link the persistence of fossil fuel use directly to capitalism’s insatiable drive for profit. They argue that fossil fuels have been central to industrial capitalism in much the same way grain was essential for early agricultural societies:
This analogy highlights how deeply embedded fossil energy is in modern economic systems. Just as grain sustained early civilizations, fossil fuels have become indispensable to industrial capitalism. The authors argue that this dependency explains why efforts to decarbonize have been so slow and why capitalist interests continue to resist meaningful climate action.
Another key argument in Overshoot revolves around what Malm and Carton describe as a fundamental contradiction between profit-driven economic systems and human survival. They write:
This passage underscores one of the book’s most radical propositions: addressing climate change requires not just technological solutions but a complete reorganization of economic power. The authors argue that as long as energy production remains in private hands, driven by profit motives, it will be impossible to transition fully to renewable energy ("the flow"). Instead, they advocate for public control over energy systems—a revolutionary shift that prioritizes human needs over corporate profits. Therefore, not surprisingly, a major focus of Overshoot is its critique of geoengineering solutions like carbon capture and solar radiation management. Malm and Carton argue that these technologies are not only unproven but also serve as convenient excuses for delaying immediate emissions cuts. The authors are deeply skeptical about relying on speculative technologies to solve a problem that requires urgent action today. They argue that geoengineering distracts from more effective solutions—such as rapidly phasing out fossil fuels—and ultimately serves those who wish to maintain business as usual.
Malm and Carton call for nothing less than a revolutionary transformation of society. They argue incremental reforms will not be enough to avert climate disaster; instead, what is needed is a "mercilessly confrontational" approach aimed at dismantling fossil capital altogether. This was a highly informative, educational read on where we currently stand in terms of climate politics. As someone in my mid-20s, writing this in 2024, it is a very frightening place to be standing at.
In Overshoot: How the World Surrendered to Climate Breakdown , Andreas Malm and Wim Carton offer a sharp critique of the current trajectory of global climate policy, focusing on the dangerous ideology of "overshoot"—the idea that humanity can temporarily exceed critical temperature thresholds and later reverse the damage through technological interventions. The authors argue that this approach is not only reckless but also a reflection of deeper systemic issues tied to capitalism and fossil fuel dependency.
The concept of "overshoot" is central to Malm and Carton's argument. They define it as a period when officially declared limits to global warming are exceeded, with policymakers essentially resigning themselves to future technological fixes. As they write:
“What follows is a history of what we shall call the overshoot conjecture, or the period when officially declared limits to global warming are exceeded [...] and the dominant classes responsible for the excess throw up their hands in resignation and accept that intolerable heat is coming [...] It is an actively championed programme for how to deal with the rush into catastrophe: let it continue for the time being and then we shall sort things out towards the end of this century” (ix).
This passage encapsulates their critique of global elites who, rather than taking immediate action to reduce emissions, have embraced a fatalistic approach. The overshoot conjecture allows policymakers to justify continued emissions under the assumption that future technologies—such as carbon capture or solar geoengineering—will eventually reverse climate damage. This approach, they argue, reflects an unwillingness to confront the economic structures that perpetuate fossil fuel consumption. Global elites would rather engage in an economic structure, with the knowledge that it will lead to devastating consequences, mass humanitarian crises and migration from the most affected countries, risk potential pandemics due to the migration of animals from the affected ecosystems, and so on than relinquish their hold on power.
As someone involved in technology development, this idea resonated deeply with me. It made me reflect on how technological advancements are often used as justifications for maintaining entrenched institutions, rather than challenging them. While technological revolutions like those in agriculture or industry brought about social changes, Malm and Carton argue that today's innovations are being co-opted by those who wish to preserve the status quo.
Malm and Carton link the persistence of fossil fuel use directly to capitalism’s insatiable drive for profit. They argue that fossil fuels have been central to industrial capitalism in much the same way grain was essential for early agricultural societies:
“There is a specificity to fossil fuels, in that they have for two centuries been the general energetic lever for surplus-value production and drawn capital of unparalleled magnitude into exploration. Their place in the metabolic processes of the capitalist mode of production has become rather like that of grain for the early agricultural civilizations” (119).
This analogy highlights how deeply embedded fossil energy is in modern economic systems. Just as grain sustained early civilizations, fossil fuels have become indispensable to industrial capitalism. The authors argue that this dependency explains why efforts to decarbonize have been so slow and why capitalist interests continue to resist meaningful climate action.
Another key argument in Overshoot revolves around what Malm and Carton describe as a fundamental contradiction between profit-driven economic systems and human survival. They write:
“In this version of the contradiction between forces and relations, an amalgam of profits and stock is pitted against one of needs and flow. The property relations that compel owners of the means of production to always and ever strive for maximum profit have come to be one with fossil fuels. To make room for an economy running to 100 per cent on the flow, these fetters would need to be burst asunder and energy production transferred to public control, a rule of the associated producers, that gives priority to the satisfaction of needs – the need for survival, first and foremost” (232).
This passage underscores one of the book’s most radical propositions: addressing climate change requires not just technological solutions but a complete reorganization of economic power. The authors argue that as long as energy production remains in private hands, driven by profit motives, it will be impossible to transition fully to renewable energy ("the flow"). Instead, they advocate for public control over energy systems—a revolutionary shift that prioritizes human needs over corporate profits. Therefore, not surprisingly, a major focus of Overshoot is its critique of geoengineering solutions like carbon capture and solar radiation management. Malm and Carton argue that these technologies are not only unproven but also serve as convenient excuses for delaying immediate emissions cuts. The authors are deeply skeptical about relying on speculative technologies to solve a problem that requires urgent action today. They argue that geoengineering distracts from more effective solutions—such as rapidly phasing out fossil fuels—and ultimately serves those who wish to maintain business as usual.
Malm and Carton call for nothing less than a revolutionary transformation of society. They argue incremental reforms will not be enough to avert climate disaster; instead, what is needed is a "mercilessly confrontational" approach aimed at dismantling fossil capital altogether. This was a highly informative, educational read on where we currently stand in terms of climate politics. As someone in my mid-20s, writing this in 2024, it is a very frightening place to be standing at.
December 17, 2024
A couple months since I finished this book and like mostly all of Malm's work, it has burrowed itself into my brain. Writing history as it passes is always a difficult task but Malm and Carton are able to describe this moment as it relates to climate and fossil capital with immense clarity. Halting the extraction and burning of fossil fuels will require a challenge to business-as-usual and longer we wait, the larger the confrontation will have to be. Can't wait for the second volume, The Long Heat.
December 16, 2024
"Under capitalist property relations, the [renewable energy] flow hits a glass ceiling of sorts. It can grow to some extent, as an addition in the margins, but a transition propelled by agents seeking to maximise profit would be a self-defeating enterprise. The more developed the productive forces of the flow, the more proficient their capture of a kind of energy in which no labour can be objectified, the closer the price and the value and the profit all come to zero. Then investors will have to lose interest ... It follows, furthermore, that on this downward trajectory, the flow cannot offer anything like the three sources of super-profits in hydrocarbons."
A timely and radical intervention into climate politics. Its use of Marxist concepts to explain the hyper-resilience of fossil fuels, and the inability of far cheaper renewable energy alternatives to outcompete, is persuasive. The key difference is that the sun and wind contain no social labour, hence produce no surplus value for capital, and thus result in much less profit compared with fossil fuels. Despite appearances, Overshoot is similar to Climate Denial in that both are forms of capital protection. Emission reductions that can sustain life on Earth are equivalent to the political destruction of fossil capital and the wiping out of trillions of dollars of capitalist value. Hardly an easy ask, but a realistic line of march compared with the alternatives, which all inexorably lead to capital consuming the biosphere in an unquenchable drive for higher returns. I will look forward to the coming sequel with interest.
Poverty alleviation was not a concomitant or cause of overshoot and could be accomplished without it. It was not the masses of the global South that, suicidally, tipped the world into 1.5°C. In fact, not even the working classes of the North were party to the process: between 1990 and 2019, per capita emissions of the poorest half of the populations of the US and Europe dropped by nearly one third , due to ‘compressed wages and consumption’. The overshoot conjuncture was the creation of the rich, with which they capped their victory in the class struggle."
March 20, 2025
Today I finished the book and today I also took part in a campaign action to persuade the All Wales Pension fund to divest from fossil fuels. The book shows that this is just not going to happen. There is no investment that will produce greater returns than fossil fuels. Local councils would be failing in their fiduciary duty to their employees if they divest. I now understand the horrible truth of why share holders in oil companies don’t want them to transition to renewables. There is so little profit in it. Capitalism itself is the problem.
The book did leave me with some unanswered questions. Why is it that governments and all of us have allowed FF to be so profitable? Why can’t we hold them to account for the true cost of what they have done and continue to do? As the authors tell us, air pollution is the second biggest killer worldwide. the destruction of natural environments - particularly in rain forests and poor countries; the true cost of adaptation to flooding, drought, heat waves, hurricanes etc we are all facing. If we did their profits would plummet and share holders would call for different investments. Why don’t we hold these companies to account? Have they gained so much power in the world that it is impossible to make them pay for the damage they are causing?
I recently read the biography of Nenquimo Nemonte, leader of the fight to save Ecuador’s Amazonian rainforest and was delighted that this book flagged up this landmark victory over oil companies. “We Will Not be Saved” gave me hope that resistance can win. However, having just finished “Overshoot” I feel overwhelming anger, despair and sadness. 4.6 billion years of evolution of our planet and it ends like this. All my hope that things could change has vanished.
Nevertheless, I am grateful to the authors for their scholarship and insight. I realise it is a Marxist polemic, and seethat perhaps I am a closet Marxist without realising it. After 40 Years of activism against global capitalism and its extractiviist practices I now don’t know what to do. What is the best use of my voice in climate activism - I just don’t know.
What I found missing from the book was the absence of focus on the nature and ecological crisis, to me the outcome of our extractivist culture will mean there isn’t a planet on which we can survive as global capitalism drives irreversible ecological breakdown. Maybe they will address this in their second volume. If they don’t I feel they are only addressing half the picture. Our soils, our water, our biodiversity is the foundation of life. The corporations are driving the sixth mass extinction as Nemonte’s book shows - for those of you feeling as hopeless as me at this moment do read her book.
The book did leave me with some unanswered questions. Why is it that governments and all of us have allowed FF to be so profitable? Why can’t we hold them to account for the true cost of what they have done and continue to do? As the authors tell us, air pollution is the second biggest killer worldwide. the destruction of natural environments - particularly in rain forests and poor countries; the true cost of adaptation to flooding, drought, heat waves, hurricanes etc we are all facing. If we did their profits would plummet and share holders would call for different investments. Why don’t we hold these companies to account? Have they gained so much power in the world that it is impossible to make them pay for the damage they are causing?
I recently read the biography of Nenquimo Nemonte, leader of the fight to save Ecuador’s Amazonian rainforest and was delighted that this book flagged up this landmark victory over oil companies. “We Will Not be Saved” gave me hope that resistance can win. However, having just finished “Overshoot” I feel overwhelming anger, despair and sadness. 4.6 billion years of evolution of our planet and it ends like this. All my hope that things could change has vanished.
Nevertheless, I am grateful to the authors for their scholarship and insight. I realise it is a Marxist polemic, and seethat perhaps I am a closet Marxist without realising it. After 40 Years of activism against global capitalism and its extractiviist practices I now don’t know what to do. What is the best use of my voice in climate activism - I just don’t know.
What I found missing from the book was the absence of focus on the nature and ecological crisis, to me the outcome of our extractivist culture will mean there isn’t a planet on which we can survive as global capitalism drives irreversible ecological breakdown. Maybe they will address this in their second volume. If they don’t I feel they are only addressing half the picture. Our soils, our water, our biodiversity is the foundation of life. The corporations are driving the sixth mass extinction as Nemonte’s book shows - for those of you feeling as hopeless as me at this moment do read her book.
February 5, 2025
This is a long article spanning a range of concepts sucking the content out of the climate debates. The authors tidy up the political-economic meaning of words like "1.5ºC warming with limited overshoot scenario", "emissions offsetting", "stranded assets" and "carbon bubbles". Widely used in technical jargon as well as in press releases (by corporations, governments and/or NGOs), these terms exist to fulfill a specific historical political function at the specific conjecture in which they were introduced.
This is not an introductory book. So if you are not somehow engaged in the climate discussions, you might not grasp the necessity of this intellectual intervention. But if you have been involved in climate stuff in any form, the book also does *not* assume any prior knowledge of any of the concepts or facts, and avoids technical language.
This is not an introductory book. So if you are not somehow engaged in the climate discussions, you might not grasp the necessity of this intellectual intervention. But if you have been involved in climate stuff in any form, the book also does *not* assume any prior knowledge of any of the concepts or facts, and avoids technical language.
December 23, 2024
4.5/5
-learned a lot about the economics behind fossil fuels
-i don’t like reading about climate change but I like reading malm bc I think he’s amazing
-slightly rebought into the idea of 100% renewable energy globally
-frustrated at the dismissal of the inhumane conditions that give us solar panel tech, as well as the lack of investigation into mitigation via reduced consumption (which malm has discussed previously so I guess was outside the scope of this book?)
-forget the lib concept that Western Europe is a beacon of the future… seems like the resilience and compassion of south/central America should be our model
-learned a lot about the economics behind fossil fuels
-i don’t like reading about climate change but I like reading malm bc I think he’s amazing
-slightly rebought into the idea of 100% renewable energy globally
-frustrated at the dismissal of the inhumane conditions that give us solar panel tech, as well as the lack of investigation into mitigation via reduced consumption (which malm has discussed previously so I guess was outside the scope of this book?)
-forget the lib concept that Western Europe is a beacon of the future… seems like the resilience and compassion of south/central America should be our model
March 9, 2025
Documents the rebound in fossil fuels use / emissions after the COVID recession and concludes that reducing fossil fuel use to avoid 1.5 C rise in global temperature is now infeasible. Failure of international negotiations to lower fossil fuels use / emissions is now conclusive. The only hope is carbon capture technology and/or geoengineering to partially block sunshine. These will be examined more fully in an upcoming sequel. Each of these has major problems, to be discussed in the succeeding volume.
November 27, 2024
Climate crisis from a “Marxist” perspective. I found this book optimistic even though it has no happy ending. Even though it’s criticising the “business as usual”, the solution it offers is to change everything to renewable and carry on business as usual.
I think marxism today is mostly just an intellectual game, or virtue signalling like wokeness. It’s a strategy of the credentialist elite to mask their class clueless and their conformism.
I think marxism today is mostly just an intellectual game, or virtue signalling like wokeness. It’s a strategy of the credentialist elite to mask their class clueless and their conformism.
January 21, 2025
Sad but necessary read if you’d like to pierce the false optimism and/or ostrich in the sand attitude about climate change. Malm and Carton take a plain argument—avoiding climate change catastrophe requires limiting fossil emissions—and illustrate how leading nations and international groups (eg the IPCC) have instead given into an “irreal turn”, favoriting hypothetical technologies and placating oil executives over ecological reality.
January 30, 2025
Overshoot effectively disabused me of what little hope I had remaining as far as our planet is concerned. Every impulse of our society is to run headlong in the wrong direction. Meticulously researched - fully two thirds of the page count consists of end notes. Despite the grim picture painted by the authors, I’m looking forward to the promised sequel. Glutton for punishment, I guess.
November 7, 2024
Already would've been a hard, depressing read as this book details exactly the ways that capitalism at large has decided to throw humanity at large under the bus of global warming in favor of more profits. However, finishing this the night of the '24 election was a hell of an experience, and one I wouldn't necessary recommend recreating.
December 7, 2024
Finished. Masterful explanation of how ‘Fossil Capital,’ pursuing profits and fearful of stranded assets, uses adaptation, technical pseudo-solutions like BECCS, and conceptually flawed Integrated Assessment Models to prevent real mitigation. A very useful assessment.
January 3, 2025
everyone should read this book right this very second
January 17, 2025
Incisive, illuminating, important all the superlatives ! I will be sending this to just about everyone and anyone I know.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews