THIS Christmas has unfortunately lifted climate change into the mainstream - the unprecedented extreme weather conditions around the globe have transitioned media and public commentary on these conditions from the margins to the mainstream.
It's no longer left to activists, scientists and lobbyists to discuss climate change - there's too much climate craziness to keep your head in the sand, even now the international negotiations in Paris are over. Summer temperatures in the United States during their winter; northern United Kingdom towns looking like Venice following record rainfall; more fires in Australia; and 2015 being the warmest year on record with El Nino amplifying events as we head into 2016.
Is every extreme storm or flood directly linked to climate change? Of course not - the world has always suffered storms. But monitoring shows these extremes are growing and there is a direct relationship with our carbon emissions.
The latest example of someone speaking out is actor Leonardo DiCaprio, who won a Golden Globe this week for his performance in the film The Revenant. He said they had to shift filming to the southernmost point of Argentina to find snow.
In an interview on www.charlierose.com, DiCaprio talked about conflict within the myth that humans are learning from the past. He said: "We're systemically destroying our planet on an unprecedented scale in human history." It was ironic, DiCaprio noted, that while his latest film was about a man surviving in harsh conditions and attempting to conquer nature, this was a flawed concept.
The planet will survive climate change - it is humans and our non-human neighbours who are under threat. Some parts of the world - and I don't just mean Hawke's Bay on a hot, still day - can't survive a further temperature increase and even less rain.
Parts of Africa, the Middle East and even Australia will become literally unbearable: there will be a new wave of refugees. We know our Pacific cousins will be driven out of their idyllic homes through sea-level rise, as well as our coastal settlements in New Zealand.
And the costs of increased storms, in both impact and frequency, is significant. We already know about that in Whanganui with the June floods. Some of this change is going to happen regardless of a stronger turn of the wheel to reduce carbon emissions, but we can better prepare for it. This is a serious and long-term issue and we need the commitment and thinking that understands that at all levels of government, business and community.
One thing I don't think will help our response to climate change is the TPPA, with reports this week that New Zealand is to sign up next month. I'm not against trade agreements - what I'm concerned about is the investor-state dispute settlement provisions included.
These clauses are in other international agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta), and its conditions are about to get tested by TransCanada Corp, which is suing the US for $15billion after US President Barack Obama declined its Keystone XL pipeline application.
Keystone would have pumped oil from Canada's tar sands to refineries on Texas' gulf coast for production. Many in the environmental world lobbied strongly against the project on the basis of both environmental impact and carbon emissions.
Could the same happen in New Zealand under the TPPA? That's been the thrust of many people concerned about the TPPA - global corporations influencing national decisions or tying governments in knots with legal threats.
Seems to me that we're taking a pretty big risk with our approach instead of looking at more sustainable solutions. Dependence on fossil fuels and putting big business on a pedestal is dinosaur thinking - a new way is coming and we need to get out in front.
Nicola Young has worked in the government and private sectors in Australia and New Zealand, and now works from home in Taranaki for a national charitable foundation. Educated at Wanganui Girls' College, she has a science degree and is the mother of two boys.