The Earth is changing. It always has. Ice ages, floods, extreme heat, and cold cycles have defined our planet’s history long before humans walked its surface. Does it matter whether the warming we experience today is driven by human activity, natural planetary cycles, or even the methane emissions from cows? The fact remains: the planet is heating up. The real question isn’t who or what caused it—the question is, what are we going to do about it?
We, as humans, have evolved. We are no longer just hunters and gatherers reacting to nature’s forces. We understand science. We understand how the Earth works. And more importantly, we have the tools to shape its future. We can sit back and debate the causes of global warming or use the knowledge we have gained to build the solutions that will sustain life on this planet for generations to come.
We need to get places. We need to grow food. We need to transport goods. We need to drink clean water. We need to play, explore, and innovate. All of these activities produce emissions. But why can’t we curb them? We know what carbon dioxide does. We know what methane does. If we allow massive amounts of methane to escape from the Arctic, it could have catastrophic consequences. So why aren’t we capturing it? Why aren’t we using it?
Methane capture is not just an environmental necessity—it’s an economic opportunity. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, far more damaging than carbon dioxide in the short term. But if we can trap it before it enters the atmosphere, we can repurpose it for productive uses.
There are companies already working on this. Some are using methane-consuming microbes to convert it into nitrogen-rich fertilizers, providing an alternative to costly imports. The United States heavily relies on fertilizer imports, bringing in nearly $9.97 billion worth of fertilizers annually, with Canada, Russia, and Saudi Arabia being the top suppliers. Investing in domestic methane capture and conversion can not only mitigate climate change but also strengthen national food security by reducing dependence on foreign fertilizers.
California is the agricultural powerhouse of the United States. The state produces over a third of the nation’s vegetables and three-quarters of its fruits and nuts, generating $59.4 billion in farm revenue. However, California also suffers from frequent and severe droughts, threatening not just U.S. food supplies but exports as well.
At the same time, other parts of the country experience extreme flooding, which results in massive water loss and property destruction. If we can transport oil and gas across thousands of miles through pipelines, why not water? A national water pipeline system could redirect excess water from flood-prone regions to areas like California, ensuring consistent water availability for agriculture and reducing the economic impact of droughts and natural disasters.
One of the most alarming climate threats is the thawing of permafrost, which stores massive amounts of methane and carbon. As it melts, these gases are released, accelerating global warming at an exponential rate. There isn’t much research yet on how to stop this process, but that shouldn’t stop us from imagining solutions.
If we can drill for oil and gas, if we can mine for minerals, if we can manipulate the Earth’s crust in pursuit of resources—why can’t we use similar techniques to preserve or even restore permafrost? What if we could inject cooling agents deep into the ground, creating artificial cold pockets to slow or reverse the thawing? It may sound ambitious today, but so did the idea of harnessing nuclear energy, sequencing the human genome, or putting a man on the moon. Every great solution starts with an idea.
The terms conservation and conservatism share the Latin root conservare, meaning to preserve or to keep intact. Conservatism traditionally emphasizes prudent resource management, limited government intervention, and the preservation of established institutions and practices. Similarly, conservation focuses on responsible stewardship of natural resources to ensure their availability for future generations.
This linguistic and philosophical connection suggests that conservation aligns with conservative values. Both ideologies advocate for thoughtful, sustainable practices that prevent waste and promote long-term stability. Conservatives often believe in reducing government overreach, cutting excess spending, and ensuring efficiency—conservation is about using fewer resources, reducing waste, and managing natural assets responsibly. The alignment is striking, yet many conservatives view conservation efforts as a push for big government control.
But what if conservation wasn’t about government at all? What if it was about us—private enterprise, local communities, and individuals working together to protect what we have? Isn’t protecting our land, water, and air a form of fiscal responsibility? Isn’t making smarter choices about energy and resources in line with conservative ideals?
None of this happens without investment. Science and ideas alone won’t save the planet—capital is the bridge between theory and reality. Private enterprises, not just governments, must take the lead in funding and executing these solutions. PEAK Global Capital exists to connect money with the science that can make a difference. Whether it's methane capture, sustainable agriculture, water redistribution, or permafrost preservation, we believe that the intersection of conservation, science, and capitalism is the key to solving our greatest climate challenges.
Governments can participate, but they aren’t the sole solution. This is everyone’s planet. Every person, every company, and every investor has a stake in its future.
Ideas drive progress. Someone had to first envision electricity lighting up the world. Someone had to imagine connecting every human through a global internet. Someone had to believe that humans could land on the moon. Climate solutions require the same vision. If we challenge the status quo, if we push the boundaries of what is possible, we can create a future where economic growth and environmental sustainability coexist.
This isn’t about politics. It’s about progress. We don’t need to wait for government mandates. We don’t need to be divided over who is responsible. The only question that matters is: How do we use what we know to create a better future?
I don’t believe that humans caused global warming. I believe the Earth is doing what the Earth does. But I also believe that humans—uniquely and undeniably—are the only ones who can fix it.
And I believe we will.
What ideas do you have to protect our planet? How can conservation and capitalism work together? How do we ensure that environmental sustainability isn’t a partisan issue but a shared responsibility? Let’s start the conversation and shape the future together.