Boiling-Point: The Hidden Mental Health Cost of Climate Change

Navigating mental health amidst rising tides, rising mercury, and rising distress  

By Jess Wight | July 21, 2026 

"Climate change is an underappreciated mental health emergency. This is a technical, social, and emotional issue.”  

Professor Sir David Nabarro KCMG, FRCP, global health leader who held senior roles at the UN and WHO, emphasizing the scale of climate change’s impact on mental health

Headline patterns are becoming instantly familiar: another temperature record shattered, another costal community facing historic flooding. Air quality alerts and extreme weather warnings which were once few and far between, are swiftly becoming regular, everyday notifications throughout the summer months.  

This week, news reports surrounding Canadas wildfires are flooding feeds, with cities like Toronto experiencing apocalyptic scenes filling lungs with harmful smoke and minds with existential dread.

However, we aren’t just watching the planet under pressure; we are feeling it too. In a 2025 survey 25 nations, more than two-thirds of adults felt that climate change is a major threat to their country. Climate change is no longer something we only read about in the news from distant countries.

Around the world, communities are experiencing more frequent heat waves, heavier rainfall, more destructive floods, longer wildfire seasons, and stronger tropical cyclones. These are no longer isolated events occurring somewhere else - they are increasingly affecting places once considered relatively safe, demonstrating that climate change has become a reality we witness in our own communities. 

As temperatures and sea-levels rise, so does something far less discussed: our collective stress. This is what scientists are calling eco-distress – the rational, deeply human response to living though rapid planetary change. But while the physical impacts of climate change are widely documented, the psychological toll often remains invisible, quietly reshaping our plans for the future, and our day-to-day wellbeing.  

Mental health and climate change are no longer separate conversations. It may feel isolating to experience heightened anxiety and fear when surrounded by negative media warning of human extinction, but this distress is far from unique. In fact, more than 95% of young Canadians aged 13-34 report feeling worried when thinking about climate change according to a 2025 national survey. This survey found those in urban regions to exhibit the strongest emotional responses, strongly suggesting that increased exposure to the human impact on our environment increased the distress.

Eco-distress encompasses a range of ecological emotions – these are feelings which scientists have found to be associated with climate change, including eco-anxiety, eco-fear, eco-depression, eco-hopelessness and eco-guilt. Canadian author and scientist at Stanford University, Britt Wray, describes it as a ‘natural reaction’, rather than an anomaly. These feelings can have a profound impact on individuals, with many fearing for their futures: one study found Canadians with higher levels of eco-distress were less likely to have children, indicating a bleak outlook shadowed by uncertainty.   

Although eco-distress and associated terms such as eco-anxiety are not yet officially recognised diagnoses, healthcare professionals emphasise the effects must not be underestimated. Swelen Andari, Director of strategy for climate resilience and youth mental health at CAMH, expresses that without support, “it can lead to sleep disturbances, panic attacks and a constant, chronic sense of grief and anxiety”.

Every summer is simultaneously the hottest we’ve known, and the coolest we’re likely to know from here on. This trajectory appears to disproportionally affect the younger generation, which researchers theorize is due to several reasons. Firstly, young people are expected to live with the consequences for much longer, with their future life decisions such as careers and family plans dependent on climate risks. Furthermore, they are exposed to constant negative news following the progression of global warming and its devastating effects, potentially more so than older generations due to greater use of modern technology; 78% of young Canadians report social media as their main news source.  

Climate change affects mental health through both direct and indirect pathways. Direct effects result from exposure to climate-related hazards, such as extreme weather events, which can cause psychological distress and trauma. Indirect effects arise through wider consequences, including physical health impacts, displacement, and socioeconomic disruption, which can undermine mental well-being.  

Evidence of psychological impact following direct effects of climate change is abundant – for example, one study in 2024 assessed a group of over 38,000 students to find that exposure to climate disaster events increased levels of mental distress. A scoping review revealed that more than 90% of current literature focusses on the direct effects, meaning the indirect effects are far less understood.  

Greater education of the impact of climate change on our health is needed for healthcare workers, as indicated by a recent study looking at the attitudes of medical students on the matter. Although students expressed insight into the health implications of climate change, researchers identified a key disconnect between this knowledge and students' recognition of their personal responsibility as healthcare providers. Researchers partially attributed this lack of professional commitment to the absence of climate-health content in their curriculum. The International Federation of Medical Students Associations (IFMSA) reports that only 15% of medical schools worldwide incorporate climate change into their program.

The intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) highlights the urgency to change this, warning that "the severity of climate-related health risks is highly dependent on how well health systems can protect people”. Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health proposed a solution to directly address this in 2017; The Global Consortium on Climate and Health Education (GCCHE) was formed to fill the gap, providing its members with a framework to integrate five key domains into their education programs: Knowledge and analytic skills, collaboration and communication, policy, public heath practice, and clinical practice. Now spanning 52 countries and over 450 institutions, they supply extensive learning materials, courses and support to better equip students to combat the ever-growing crisis.

Similarly to current literature, these resources have a heavy focus on the physical health implications associated with climate change, from navigating extreme heat and drought to recognizing the effects of poor air quality and the rise in infectious diseases. Encouragingly, researchers have acknowledged in a recent review the reciprocal relationship between physical and mental health, with authors suggesting the widely documented threats to physical health can precipitate subsequent psychological consequences too. 

There is extensive evidence detailing the bi-directional relationship between physical and mental health, with the Mental Health Foundation reporting people with physical health conditions have more than double the rate of mental health conditions than those without. However, climate-related physical health impacts may contribute to worsening mental health outcomes, they are unlikely to fully account for the substantial psychological burden associated with the climate crisis.

Researchers estimate hundreds of thousands of young people across Canada aged 13 to 34 are facing debilitating climate change anxiety leading to functional and cognitive impairment, and rumination. The way climate change is discussed may well heavily impact the prevalence of eco-distress in young people. The term “climate catastrophe” was found to have doubled in American news reports and tripled in British media coverage between 2020 and 2021 according to the Media and Climate Change Observatory. A similar trend was discovered by Oxford Languages who found a 100% increase in use of the term “climate emergency” between 2018 and 2019. This ‘doomerism’ is not limited to the media either; scientists are using apocalyptic language too, with one signed statement discussing the “catastrophic threat” acquiring more than 11,000 signatures from researchers across the globe. 

There is no doubt that we are experiencing a climate crisis, however scientists have identified two viewpoints people can adopt: Climate ‘doomers’ are those who see catastrophe as both imminent and inescapable, whereas climate ‘realists’ still recognize the catastrophe but view it as something we can act to avoid. 

Environmental scientist Kady Cowan suggests a doomer outlook to some extent is necessary to fuel action, however the feelings of hopelessness from eco-distress can indeed be paralyzing for some. 

Combatting eco-distress may appear to be a monumental task, but researchers advise that a combination of psychological support and climate action can reduce the intensity of emotional responses to the climate crisis. Groups like the Climate Sanctuary, a peer-to-peer group founded by Cowan, are a good place to start – these provide a safe space to discuss anxiety and other confusing emotions with others experiencing the same eco-distress, providing comfort and closeness. This kind of peer support can be acquired simply by opening up to people around us such as friends and family members too, not just through organized channels. We are all in this together, and the more we share our emotions the less alone and hopeless we will feel.  

Implementing small changes into our everyday routines can also significantly improve our mental wellbeing. Researchers have recently found that incorporating pro-environmental behaviors can create a ‘warm glow’ by increasing happiness and creating more meaning and purpose. Another study found similar results, noting that active and social behaviors had even more positive effects than passive individual ones.

"People may not have to choose between improving their own well-being and helping the environment – they may be able to do both at the same time."

Psychologist and philosopher, Dr Michael Prinzing, discussing the impact of pro-environmental behaviors, as reported in his 2024 study

Climate action doesn't have to begin with sweeping policy changes. Research increasingly suggests that the small choices we make each day – walking instead of driving, reducing waste, choosing sustainable products, spending time in nature – can benefit not only the environment but our own psychological wellbeing. These actions create a sense of agency at a time when many people feel powerless, replacing helplessness with purpose.

Eco-distress is a rational response to an uncertain future. But acknowledging that distress doesn't mean surrendering to it. While no individual can solve climate change alone, we can support one another, advocate for meaningful action, and remember that hope is something we actively cultivate – not something we passively wait for.