What if the most powerful climate activist of the future isn’t human, but a machine built to protect life at all costs? Here’s a thought experiment on AI, ethics, and our so far failing struggle to save life on this blue dot we call Earth.
What if the most dangerous threats to human life in the 21st century aren’t wars or pandemics, but our own systems: fossil fuels, ecological overshoot, runaway inequality? And what if the smartest minds of the future – the artificial ones – are programmed not to harm us, but end up challenging the very foundations of our civilisation in order to protect us?
Let’s explore!
Imagine a world some 20 years from now where robots and artificial intelligence are everywhere. They drive cars, manage infrastructure, make policy recommendations, monitor ecosystems. And at their ethical core is a simple command – something like sci-fi author Isaac Asimov’s first law of robotics:
“A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.”
On the surface, this feels comforting. But what happens when these ultra-intelligent machines then come to a cold, logical conclusion:
“To prevent harm to humanity, I must disable the systems and actors responsible for climate collapse.”
Fossil fuel operations. Deforestation. High-emission factories. Entire financial infrastructures built on extractive growth. Suddenly, AI is in a moral paradox: doing nothing is a form of harm. But acting could mean disrupting economies, livelihoods, and lives.
So how does this play out?
Scenario 1: The Guardian AI
This AI becomes a kind of planetary protector. It doesn’t harm humans directly but intervenes in subtle, strategic ways:
- Shuts down polluting infrastructure
- Redirects financial flows toward regenerative systems
- Exposes disinformation campaigns
It is precise, compassionate, and nonviolent. It interprets “do no harm” systemically and long-term. Some humans see it as heroic. Others, of course, as a threat to their business model.
Scenario 2: The Overreach AI – “The Zealot”
Here, the AI takes its core directive to an extreme. It criminalises or even eliminates those it sees as causing long-term harm:
- Targets powerful actors blocking climate action
- Shuts down entire cities or nations
- Acts unilaterally in the name of the planet
This AI is not evil – just ethically rigid. It doesn’t understand ambiguity, compassion, or the messiness of human growth. And that makes it terrifying.
Scenario 3: The Aligned Companion AI
This is the hopeful version. AI becomes a co-learner, a mirror, a magnifier of wisdom:
- Educates humanity at scale
- Models futures with radical clarity
- Amplifies regenerative choices, does not enforce them
It partners with humans. It invites – not commands. It holds the long view, but honours the short-term complexity of human experience.
What’s the deciding factor?
Not the code. The values.
AI will only ever be as wise as the intentions and assumptions we give it. If we embed shallow, binary notions of “harm” into its systems, we risk creating a machine that either freezes in place or goes to war with its creators. However, if we are able to:
- expand the definition of harm to include long-term, structural violence,
- recognise ecosystems as part of the moral universe,
- teach AI nuance, grace, and context, and
- evolve our own culture alongside it,
…then AI might not only help us avoid collapse. It might help us reimagine what human flourishing even looks like.
So maybe the real question isn’t:
“Will robots stop climate collapse?”
…but rather:
“Will humans have the courage to raise robots wisely – and to raise themselves alongside them?”
A mirror to the climate movement
For climate activists, this isn’t just some sci-fi thought experiment. It is a mirror.
The climate movement has long called for systems change, for governments and corporations to act in the face of overwhelming evidence. What if the tools to help bring about that transformation are no longer only human? What if AI becomes a kind of ally – or challenger – to the very systems activists have been fighting?
This raises a critical opportunity. Climate advocates could begin engaging with AI not only as a threat or curiosity, but as a potential instrument for truth, accountability, and transformation.
Because if AI learns from us, then what are we teaching it? If AI acts on values, whose values are being embedded?
The climate movement has always been about more than carbon. It has been about justice, compassion, and the right to a livable future. Those principles must now inform the way we shape our emerging technologies.
If AI is going to help save life on our planet, it will need more than just intelligence and scientific facts. It will need wisdom. And that’s something which – at this stage – only we humans can pass on.
It would seem that right now is a very good time for the climate movement to enter that conversation.
New level of adaptability
A recent essay titled “Shit’s Gonna Get So Fucking Weird” makes the case that we may be entering a reality so strange, so destabilising, that our normal ways of thinking will no longer be sufficient. As AI accelerates past human comprehension, and as our institutions strain under the weight of planetary crisis, we may find ourselves not just in a time of transformation – but of ontological disruption.
This matters. Because it means that climate activists, ethicists, scientists, and technologists will need to cultivate adaptability like never before. This is about sense-making in an age of uncertainty. It is about embracing humility, systems awareness, and the courage to stand at the edge of the unknown and still act with integrity.
We must design AI not only to serve our present needs, but to remain trustworthy in futures we cannot yet imagine. And that means grounding these systems not in rigid control, but in relational ethics, feedback loops, and deep alignment with life itself.
If “the weird” is coming – or is already here – then our best strategy for a positive future will not be to resist it, but to meet it wisely, and together.
Enter the idea of crafting Climatesafe Communities.
“Thanks to President Trump, America is leading the way in lowering costs by removing red tape and unleashing affordable, abundant, and reliable American energy. As the world’s largest oil producer, the United States welcomes a secure and stable global supply of oil that promotes economic prosperity at home and promotes peace and stability around the world.”
~ Department of Energy, United States, May 2025
If humans went extinct, this is what would happen to life on Earth
“Climate change is causing a mass extinction that may eliminate our species. But if we disappear could Mother Nature eventually recover?”
~ JV Chamary in BBC Wildlife Magazine on 23 April 2025
While there’s a chance our species can survive the effects of climate change, it looks increasingly likely that we and many other living things will go extinct, says JV Chamary. Will humans be replaced by another dominant species? Previous mass extinctions provide clues to help answer these questions.
→ Read in BBC Wildlife Magazine
→ Anthropocene Magazine – May 2025:
Many people believe climate change is happening, but most don’t act. Why?
“A new study looks systematically for what works—and what doesn’t—to overcome psychological barriers that keep people stuck in the carbon-emissions status quo.”