Then, over the final day, players tried to find a way to respond to reports that a significant aerosol plume had been detected. In the game, this had been caused by a joint US-Saudi test of Stardust’s technology, although not everyone knew this. Finally, scientific advice was a rare commodity. Countries needed to know how to establish a satellite tracking network and other observation tools to prevent tests like this from being carried out in secret. A player representing an NGO called Climate Futures Cooperative approached Golja and offered him money to finance such a plan.
“Cool. Fabulous. Why wouldn’t I do that?” remember thinking.
But it soon emerged that the Climate Futures Cooperative was actually backed by the fossil fuel industry. Organizers had recognized that fossil fuel companies and major producing countries such as the United States and Saudi Arabia would have a clear interest in removing barriers to the development of technology that could combat climate change without having to immediately stop burning coal, oil and gas. The shadowy NGO spent the game subtly ruining the vibe and complaining about the process, though they mostly just sat back and let it burn. Some players (Russia, the United States, SpaceX and Stardust) discovered that the CFC was not what it seemed, Young says. “But they felt it was beneficial to them and didn’t draw attention to it.” So the CFC chose the moment to offer money to Golja, only to ruin its credibility, isolating and fragmenting the voice of science in the room.
“It was a complete disaster,” says Golja.
That last lesson in the realpolitik of fossil fuels was all Golja could bear. By the end of the last day, I was crying.
At no time did the countries involved reach an agreement, despite multiple proposals being presented. European countries and Canada attempted to rally support for safeguards and open scientific research, but talks were consistently stalled by delaying tactics and led to tense clashes over competing strategic interests. In their final report, the researchers who ran the simulation (whose work was sponsored by the UK government-funded Agency for Inventions and Advanced Research) concluded that “strategic competition and state sovereignty drove the simulations, not climate concerns.”
