Search Climate Insights Directory

The report outlines risks associated with AI and robotics, including lethal autonomous weapons, accidental nuclear war, and economic disruption. It highlights a survey of scientists and technologists where over 80% believe there is a medium to high chance of AI outcomes going badly wrong and 96% advocate for increased regulation.

Scientists for Global Responsibility and other campaign organisations condemn the sponsorship of 'New Scientist Live' by Shell and BAE Systems, arguing that such partnerships provide unethical companies with unmerited social legitimacy and allow them to deflect from their environmental and human rights impacts.

Scientists for Global Responsibility urges UK political leaders to prioritize climate action through home energy conservation, renewable energy, and energy storage, while ending subsidies for fossil fuels and new nuclear power commitments.

Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) supports the March for Science, advocating for science that serves the common good rather than those in power. The organization criticizes the US government for suppressing climate science and ignoring evidence, while also warning against the power of large corporations and the fossil fuel industry to shape research agendas and undermine scientific evidence.

Scientists for Global Responsibility argues against the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant, citing unproven EPR technology, high costs, and the precarious financial state of EDF. The letter suggests that energy conservation, infrastructure improvements, and renewable energy are more cost-effective and secure alternatives to nuclear baseload power.

An open letter from a group of British scientists and engineers calling for the cancellation of the Trident successor programme and the adoption of nuclear disarmament policies to mitigate global security and climate risks.

The report contends that the UK's Trident nuclear weapons system poses an unacceptable risk to human civilisation, arguing that its use would be 'both genocidal and suicidal'. It highlights that a single Trident submarine carries enough firepower to cause over 10 million civilian casualties and trigger a 'nuclear winter' that could threaten 2 billion people with starvation. The authors argue that the probability of unintentional use is 'not negligible' and that the system's cost—estimated up to £100bn over its lifetime—diverts essential funds from health, welfare, and climate change mitigation. The document concludes that the UK should cancel Trident replacement, remove weapons from continuous patrol, and support an international treaty to ban nuclear weapons.

The report assesses the risks of the UK's nuclear weapons deployment, noting that a single Trident submarine carries firepower equivalent to 320 Hiroshima bombs, capable of causing over 10 million civilian casualties and global climatic disruption leading to mass starvation. It further argues that the constant patrol of these weapons creates an unacceptable risk of unintended use with catastrophic consequences.

A collection of brief policy proposals from UK university scientists advocating for deep emission reductions, the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, and a transition to renewable energy infrastructure to meet global climate targets.

The report finds that the vast majority of UK universities have links to military interests, with funding provided by the UK government, arms companies, and overseas organisations. While public military R&D spending as a percentage of total R&D has fallen since the Cold War, the author warns of recent trends toward increasing military-university collaborations and a rise in government military R&D spending between 2011 and 2012.

The report identifies significant risks associated with shale gas extraction, including regulatory failures, threats to climate goals, and water scarcity. It specifically challenges claims that fracking will lower energy bills in the UK and warns of potential negative impacts on energy security.

A letter from a coalition of NGOs to Prime Minister David Cameron advocating for a comprehensive, transparent, and non-military-centric approach to the 2015 National Security Strategy (NSS) and Defence and Security Review (DSR). The authors argue that the UK should shift away from prioritizing force projection and instead address the root causes of insecurity, suggesting that resources be reallocated from military procurement, such as nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers, toward renewable energy and flood risk mitigation.

A group of scientists, including representatives from Scientists for Global Responsibility, argues that the appointment of Richard Goodman as Associate Editor for Biotechnology at the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology introduces a pro-GM bias. They cite Dr. Goodman's former employment at Monsanto and his involvement with the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) as evidence of a conflict of interest. The authors claim that Monsanto has a history of using litigation and intimidation to suppress anti-GM views in media and government, and they argue that this appointment violates the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines regarding the disclosure of editorial interests.

The briefing argues that the use of nuclear weapons from one UK Trident submarine would cause massive smoke generation and sharp climate cooling, resulting in global crop failure and threatening 1 billion lives, alongside over 10 million immediate deaths from explosions.

The briefing argues that the use of nuclear weapons from one UK Trident submarine would cause massive smoke generation, leading to sharp global climate cooling and crop failures threatening 1 billion people, alongside over 10 million direct deaths.

An open letter from Scientists for Global Responsibility to the UK Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change arguing that the Draft Energy Bill and current energy policies are unambitious and biased toward the nuclear industry at the expense of renewables and energy efficiency.

The document reports that global military spending levelled off in real terms from 2010, the first such occurrence since before the 9/11 attacks. While the US remains the dominant spender, China and Russia have increased spending to modernise equipment, with Russian spending surpassing that of the UK and France in 2011. The UK's spending is described as falling back, while regional arms races are developing, particularly in Asia, as a result of US spending increases.

Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) supports a call to President Barack Obama and President Dmitry Medvedev to halt NATO missile defense deployments in Europe, arguing that such systems are likely ineffective and risk provoking a new nuclear arms race or nuclear disaster.

Scientists for Global Responsibility criticizes the disproportionate influence of military funding on science and technology, arguing that the Pentagon's R&D spending fuels arms races and diverts essential resources from addressing global crises such as climate change and poverty.

SGR warns that the lack of government support for wave and tidal power is a strategic error that risks the UK's position as a world leader in the sector. Citing Carbon Trust analysis, the letter argues that marine power could provide 20% of the UK's electricity demand and create 68,000 jobs by 2050, but notes that the marine renewable deployment fund currently has no funding.