Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Can We Survive the 'Anthropocene' Period?
For the past three centuries, humans’ effects on the global environment have escalated. Most importantly, our emissions of carbon dioxide may cause global climate patterns to depart significantly from their natural course for many millennia to come.
It seems appropriate to assign the term “Anthropocene” to the current, in many ways human-dominated, geological epoch, supplementing the Holocene – the warm period of the past 10–12 millennia. The Anthropocene Period could be said to have started in the latter part of the eighteenth century, when analyses of air trapped in polar ice showed the beginning of growing global concentrations of CO2 and methane. This date also happens to coincide with James Watt’s design of the steam engine in 1784.
Mankind’s growing influence on the environment was recognized as long ago as 1873, when the Italian geologist Antonio Stoppani referred to the “anthropozoic era,” defined by a “new telluric force, which in power and universality may be compared to the greater forces of earth.”
In 1926, V. I. Vernadsky similarly acknowledged the increasing impact of mankind on “[t]he direction in which the processes of evolution must proceed, namely towards increasing consciousness and thought, and forms having greater and greater influence on their surroundings.” Vernadsky and Teilhard de Chardin used the term “noösphere” – the world of thought – to mark the growing role of human brain-power in shaping its own future and environment.
Humans’ rapid expansion in terms of population and per capita use of Earth’s resources has continued apace. During the past three centuries, the human population has increased ten-fold, to more than six billion, and is expected to reach 10 billion in this century. As a result, 30–50% of the planet’s land surface is now exploited by humans.
At the same time, the methane-producing cattle population has risen to 1.4 billion, contributing to the increasing rate of destruction of tropical rainforests, which releases carbon dioxide and contributes to faster species extinction. Land conversion for grazing (and construction), together with crop tillage, has also caused soil erosion at 15 times its natural rate. Indeed, at its current pace, anthropogenic soil erosion would fill the Grand Canyon in 50 years.
Similarly, dam building and river diversion have become commonplace, as humans’ water consumption has risen nine-fold over the past century, to the point that mankind now uses more than half of all accessible fresh water – roughly two-thirds of it for agriculture. Fisheries remove more than 25% of the primary production in upwelling ocean regions and 35% in the temperate continental shelf.
Moreover, energy use has grown 16-fold during the twentieth century, causing 160 million tons of atmospheric sulfur-dioxide emissions per year – more than twice the total of natural emissions. Likewise, more nitrogen fertilizer is applied in agriculture than is fixed naturally in all terrestrial ecosystems, and nitric-oxide production from the burning of fossil fuels and biomass also surpasses natural emissions.
At the same time, of course, human consumption of fossil fuels, together with our agricultural activities, have caused substantial increases in concentrations of “greenhouse” gases – CO2 by 30% and methane by more than 100%. Indeed, these concentrations are higher than at any point in the past 400 millennia, with more growth to follow, because so far these effects have largely been caused by only 25% of the world population.
The consequences are numerous and profound: acid precipitation, photochemical “smog” and global warming, among others. Hence, according to the latest estimates by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Earth will warm by 1.4–5.8 °C during this century. Many toxic substances are released into the environment, even some that are not toxic but nonetheless are highly damaging – for example, the chlorofluorocarbons that caused the Antarctic ozone hole (and which are now regulated).
Things could have become much worse: the ozone-destroying properties of halogens have been studied since the mid-1970’s. If it had turned out that chlorine behaved chemically like bromine, the ozone hole would by then have been a global, year-round phenomenon, not just an event of the Antarctic spring. More by luck than by wisdom, this catastrophic situation did not develop.
Unless there is a global catastrophe – a meteorite impact, a world war, or a pandemic – mankind will remain a major environmental force for many millennia. As a result, scientists and engineers face a daunting task during the Anthropocene era: to guide us towards environmentally sustainable management. This will require appropriate human behavior at all levels, and may well involve internationally accepted, large-scale geo-engineering projects to “optimize” climate. At this stage, however, we are still largely treading on terra incognita .
- Posted in

24 Comments so far
Show AllO no we aren't overpopulating the planet. The planet just isn't big enough.
the outcome of a massive program to improve female literacy would cause a huge drop in human population growth - which would end war and famine - which would force a change in resource allocation - which is why we dont have a massive program to improve female literacy -
"This will require appropriate human behavior at all levels . . ."
I don't know what Mr. Crutzen is smoking, but I want some. The only human behavior that is actually going to happen is the maximization of short term profits. This is not the Anthropocene Period, it is the period of unregulated free market capitalism.
" internationally accepted large-scale geo-engineering projects to “optimize” climate."
Whoa. Solving the problem of technology with more technology.
This reminds me of the dipshit owner of Virgin airlines a few years back. He offered millions of dollars as a reward to the person(s) who could invent the technology that would turn carbon-dioxide into oxygen. Author Derrick Jensen responded by saying that that technology already exists. They're called trees.
I love the use of the term "internationally accepted". As though this somehow makes it all legitimate. As though there aren't a million "internationally accepted" practices that are completely terrible, murderous, and on going. That, my friends is called an "argument by consensus", or more commonly, "bandwagon fallacy".
Hey everyone agrees that......so it must be true.
Plus he's a nobel prize winner in chemistry. In other words, he's an expert...
Bollocks!
You *have* to solve atleast part of the problem with technology and massive human efforts. Dr. Crutzen didn't touch upon Holocene mass-extinction, which is the domain of paleobiology.
We altered the ecosystem/environment so much that it will take nature about 5-10 million years to correct the damage. We are talking a period of time that's on par with a planetary era, as in the Holocene or Jurassic Era..um no.
Science is getting to the point where we may be able to undo some of the cluster-fucks we created, greatly enhancing/accelerating the Earth's ability to heal itself.
Of course doing so would be the most monumental human effort ever attempted, bigger than all the other efforts combined.
Alex, the problem with technology is that someone owns it. Naturally that someone is going to want to get paid for cleaning up the mess. I bet that the creators of the "miracle pill" will be today's polluters. Can you imagine Shell as a benefactor? Or Exxon wanting to clean up their mess out of altruism? I can't. They will charge us an arm an a leg to undo the damage that they and others have done. We need to live with less, have only one or two children, and make laws that allow nature to recover. Any man made solution will not be as efficient as the systems that mother nature has taken millions of years to perfect. I belief a partnership with nature, witch was in place till the industrial revolution, is the only way to go.
we are causing changes we cannot fathom...even if we, globally, change our behavior as I would hope, going agrarian and acoustic, perhaps on Global Start Date: September 22, 2012, for example, our past has placed luck at the forefront of our future planning, and we're pushing luck, at that...how bad will the environmental damage be, and which, if any, conventional life forms may survive? Pretty damn bad, and God only knows...whether human needs are met individually or as a species seems, at this point, a rather indolent request...
yup, we're treading on terra incognita, alright. if and when as a species we reach a tipping point of caring TO 'know'(which includes admitting how much we don't and can't know) this earth and humbly accept our part in the web of life.... really understand and appreciate and respect (as opposed to dominate/ignore/mine voraciously) it's soils, waters, mycelial network, climate, beauty, flora, fauna & geology, maybe we'll stand a chance of turning this deluded 'ownership society' behemoth around and extending our stunted kindness beyond just the fellow humans who enable our addictions to continue unabated.
*sigh* is intellectual honest that much to ask Dr.Crutzen? It's rather hypocritical of professors to be constantly pound it into my psyche, only to turn around and spew gibberish at the unlearned masses for fear they will I dunno riot? Engage in genocide and ethnic cleansing? It's not going to be pretty that's for sure.
Dr. Crutzen knows as well as I do that the scientific community has no spine. We know how incredibly screwed the planet is, even if we all became subsistence farmers the planet is over populated by 500%,as we have been borrowing from the future for so long it's going to take nature decades, if not centuries to replenish her reserves.
Factoring in what it takes to sustain modern life, the overpopulation percentage jumps to something between 800% to 1200%.
Can anyone with credibility tell me how it's even rational to advocate salvaging the impossible? I am by no means the greatest mathematician ever born, but can not help but laugh when I look at the current and future projection models, they amount to wishing that the laws of reality will change so that we get an outcome we can live with.
Reality doesn't give a crap what we want, we adopt to her rules or 'Mother'(nature) takes us out, it really is that simple
It is as if we are in the early chapters of a dystopian science fiction graphic novel that is devolving into a horror movie.
There are few environmental problems that cannot be solved with population control. What with the Abramic religions in general control..that is not 'on the table', or even a subject one can put forward without a bunch of nut-jobs starting a shouting match.
I'm sure when Jesus or hybrids come along, we'll all be saved.
The bible has had a major impact on the environment.
Hey, do I know you? Do you live in Seattle?
Gimme more stuff, man! I'm hungry!
It's like the shear weight of humanity is causing the continents to sink. It only appears that sea level is rising.
We're just a bunch of fat pigs, burping, farting and eating over the sink. And shitting in the only available fresh water.
Oh yeah, proud to be human.
People!!! Wake Up!!! The weight of the world is not on your shoulders or Mr Crutzen's. He may be a smart man but I feel very sorry for him because he is so so worried about everything. The sky is not falling. Go sit in a field and get some sunshine fella none of this is about LUCK. Why are all of you so superstitious? No one could have predicted AIDS or the current pandemic...it may wipe out 1/3 of our population this Fall. Stop worrying. Man is not as powerful as you give him credit for being. Let those egos have a rest. Mr Crutzen had not one single positive thing to say in that entire article. A shrink would diagnose him as clinically depressed based on all that worry if what he was saying wasn't "politically correct" at this moment in time. We are doing the best we can with the planet....and we are learning more & more everyday. My mother remembers coal smoke being so thick that the street lights came on during the daytime frequently. I've never seen anything like that in my lifetime and neither have my children or grandchildren. We recycle here and this is flyover country. Everything comes here last. We use better pesticides, fertilizer, nature friendly things here now. We recycle Christmas trees and have a metrolink train for riding to work. I've lived in the same house for over 30 years. My little cul de sac is now multi-cultured and we do just fine. One black family, one Arab family, one Mexican family, one Baptist family, one Catholic family, one guy & wife in cowboy boots, one single lady from a mental institution, my husband (italian/german American)former Catholic gone JP Christian (just plain) and me a MOM American -Educated but never wanted to work outside the home even though I knew I could raised 4 kids, all functional, 2 step-kids, 4 grandkids, 3 1/2 step-grandkids, guardian of my paranoid-schizophrenic brother, help to widowed mother. That is right I chose to stay home. Chosing to be a mother & housewife when I grew up and not a hippy was radical. It's what I WANTED. No, I wasn't stupid in college....got all A's & B's cause I wasn't out dropping acid. Anyway, I'm a Lutheran type Christian German Jew...with a Democrat dad and Republican mother.....guess I should have killed myself at birth. By the way, not all Republican's are RICH! Some people vote for the good of the country and not what is best for themselves. I personally have never voted a straight ticket. I've also always read both sides...which right & left could stand some more of...it seems to me both sides only read their own points of view for the most part. For the most part people out here do not HATE Obama either...they HATE what he is doing with their country.
Exhibit A - Hoppinmommy, a living, breathing manifestation of the problem.
All she had to do to qualify for "responsible human being" was to curtail her breeding, limiting herself to *A*, as in one child, and teach that child to follow her example.
Instead the waste of DNA boasts of doing accomplishing nothing of value with her existence, opting instead to become a breeding sow. 4 children who have produced 4 more children of their own to date, no doubt each and every one of them demanding to have some (globally) obscenely high standard of living.
I don't have the luxury of doing what Dr. Crutzen(who's 76 btw) or my parent's generation did - kick the problem down to the next generation and let them figure it out I/we are the last generation, we will be forced to make some really ugly decisions and devote most of our lives/resources to find solutions to the messes those before us left behind, or those messes will destroy us.
Fuck you very much "mommy", whatever would we have done if you wastes of life hadn't trashed the planet in your quest for a better life.
She should have taken that acid, then she'd be smarter.
Whoa.
Meanwhile... back in the real world... 200 species go extinct everyday. But hey, go sit in a field and get some sunshine. I'm sure the soon to be extinct are stoked yer getting a tan.
Jaysis.
And you turned the yer whole post into a post about you. I guess that's one way to sleep soundly. Turn an article about the planet into one about your culdesac and how lovely it is. I'm sure the kids in Gaza can relate to that.
Go back to sleep america. All is well...
'unless there is a global catasrophe - a meteorite impact, a world war or a pandemic - mankind will remain a major environmental force for many millennia'
well there are lots of those 'noe's' drifting around; south/north korea - iran/israel; and the 'who' has just raised the swine flu to a pandemic level.
take your pick............but i think 'many millennia' is pushing it a bit.
Crutzen's Geo-engineering project "unit" doesn't have to be large-scale, nor would it necessarily need international approval.
All that would be required is that it be of a minimum size that is yet to be determined, and that its numbers be repeated often enough in suitable arrays, so as to increase humidity at ground level.
Actually, an "artificial tree" has already been invented by an Earthling from a place that is called Ontario, Canada. However, the tree is not one that extracts carbon dioxide from the atmosphere itself, but rather, one that can create the micro-climatic conditions at the earth's surface conducive to the growth of natural biomass that can be harvested and converted into bio-char (terra prieta) for burial. Alternatively the biomass can simply be allowed to grow until entirely new ecosystems are created.
This "artificial tree" is presented for your inspection at http://vortexengine.ca
May the AVE-Force be with you!
(From a concerned Extra-Terrestrial)
These scientists.... Always looking for grant money for the next "big thing".
The elephant in the room is this: 1% or less of the world's population has a LARGER carbon footprint than the other 99%. The learned scientist belongs to that 1%. I don't. I used to. So here's the solution. You reduce your carbon footprint or you volunteer to be fertilizer for my cabbage patch. I know it sounds wacky but keep in mind that 1% of 6 billion is 60 million people who want the rest of us to stop living so they can continue their attitude problem. I say if they want to reduce the population, they should go first.
100% agreed.
AGG says, "these scientists... always looking for money." Don't read AGG's own obsessions about money into the situation with science. The fact is that people, when they were subsistence dwellers planting cabbages, had short, ignorant, brutish, nasty lives for the most part. Even the cabbage planters.
Hobbes settled this centuries ago, and so did Jared Diamond more recently. Certainly not everyone had shorter lives, but most did. Just look at the subsistence dwellers of Africa, even today. Not paradise in my book. And the Africans know how to subsist. Even so, war there is endemic, poverty endemic, disease endemic, ignorance endemic, and life expectancy there TODAY is age 35 in many places. No decent human in the developed world would wish those conditions on their children, nor tolerate it.
But that is why the human population remained relatively stable for millennia. Because, for example, 'Nature' killed 75% of children before the age of 5, even in such advanced places as London as late as the Eighteenth Century. That is why we have a 'crisis' today, because most children now survive and because the AVERAGE life expectancy has gone UP, so that instead of people dying at an average age of 45 at the end of the Nineteenth Century, people go on living to 80 or 90, and that takes resources, or, as they used to say, there is just another mouth to feed. Yet there remains the human animal's natural drive to get procreating, because the natural world used to kill most people prematurely, and so did tribal wars over thousands of years unto today. So population is in disconnect because science and socialism allowed people to live longer. What mean old things science and socialism are.
For the Twentieth Century, the rise of sciences found a way to feed those billions of mouths, and benign socialist systems found a way to keep them alive - the same sciences and systems the Republicans denigrate and are trying to kill. Of course, we can always go back to the days of no science, technology or medical care, but then most people over 45 you see will be dead, and half the children you see won't make it past age 5. Can't wait for that dystopia?
So if we return to the cabbage patch days, maybe AGG will need you as fertilizer, and will 'volunteer' you to 'go first'. No, in fact science has led to the 'predicament' of allowing billions to be alive at the same time, and for a greater number to live better than anyone before. And Socialism has allowed people to be alive simply because they are alive, not because they are 'useful.' I think Pol Pot tried the 'back to the land' movement in Cambodia a couple of decades back. How'd that work out?
AGG presents fundamentalist right-wing views. "Damn scientists, how dare they speak the truth, they must want to be rich. Damn people who are concerned with population pressure, I volunteer them to be shit on my shoes. Why don't they kill themselves if they are so concerned with over-population." AGG is part of the problem- extreme individualism- not part of the solution.
No, it isn't science or socialism that is the cause of problems but what people DO with science and socialism. James Lovelock, who saved Earth from the supercatastrophe of ozone depletion (and DID NOT CHARGE a penny for it- and by the way Tim Berners-Lee, scientist, GAVE AWAY FREE the metalanguage we are now using online as the World Wide Web), says that with technology, maybe two or three billion can survive the coming crises, maybe more; without it, maybe a couple of hundred million. And without science, we would not even perceive global warming. So much for science being the problem.
It is the current political and economic capitalist system that is not working for people, not science or socialism or urbanity. Reform and progress, these are the hopes for the future, not regression and feudalism and cheap people, steps away from slaves. Let's get capitalism OUT of science and socialism. Let's live with appreciation and respect and knowledge of the natural world and art and beauty and civilization. Let's not go back to the dirt. Humanity's been there, done that.
What a dreamer you are...the Garden of Eden is gone forever on this planet. By the way, I am not a SOW, I am a COW. Member of the Moose Lodge you know, the females are called COWS, not SOWS. About being a breeder...I am allowed to replace the dead husbands am I not? Vietnam War Veteran was my first husband and he died in 1976. Multiple brain tumors and was gone in six months with home Hospice care on the second one named John. I divorced one husband for trying to molest my oldest daughter but not before having two sons. So on the fourth husband I didn't have any children. So, that adds up to four husbands and four children. So you see, I actually kept things even. It was not a wasted life. THe children ended up with issues: 2 Dyslexia, 2 Tourette's Syndrome, 2 Asthma, 2 ADHD, 1 crippled legs, 1 mild Cerebral Palsy, 1 unmatched pupils, 2 writing disabilities, 1 language delayed, 1 with extremely poor vision. Since we are all into Science here and facts...the facts are that IF I had not stayed home with these special needs children the odds were real good they not only would not have grown up to be functioning human beings but probably would have ended up in jail. Look up the statistics, I'm not joking. The School System didn't figure out what was going on with my second grade daughter and neither did a psychiatrist, it was this dumb hick mom watching a Phil Donahue Show that figured out she was Dyslexic. I paid for testing and found a Research Program on Saturdays to teach her to read properly. I tutored in that program for five years because my second child was also Dyslexic. By this time I was driving my son out of district and paying for him to go to Language Development Preschool in another district while my district was battling me about it. My district didn't have anything to offer but 15 minutes of Speech twice a week and we took it, but that was not enough. The baby was getting toe to hip casts on his legs every two weeks for his crippled legs & feet to straighten them out over a period of 16 months, then he wore backwards shoes with straps and a bar at night. I did eye excercises with the one girl who didn't have eyes working together and leg excercises with the toe walker girl who had cerebral palsy. Asthma, of course, hits whenever it wants to hit and requires frequent trips to the ER at night usually with one child or another.
Now my daughter does have two children but she also runs half of a large state's mentally retarded group homes as their Administrator. My other daughter also does have two children and is into Nursing and as a sideline or second language does sign language for the deaf. My oldest son is working on an air force base in a contract job doing displays and is working on his Associates Degree at the local junior college. My youngest son has signed up for the military. He graduated high school and has also taken some college classes at the local junior college. He also works part-time stocking shelves nights. None of my children ever needed to be in Special Education because they attended a private Lutheran grade school were tutored on Saturdays, I paid for summer schools and enrichment programs. I also worked with them alot. I was also a very sickly person myself and my goal was to raise my children....I made it without dying even though I take 30 kinds of pills a day, not pills-KINDS of pills. (See I'm grateful for Science) There was no way on this planet I could have worked & had a family. I didn't have the energy for both. So I chose and I don't regret that choice at all. You people were apparently blessed with good health from childhood and just assume everyone is also blessed as you have been.....we make the very best with what we have been given. And Thank God for it. I DID! I could not be prouder of my children or grandchildren. Take advantage of that field of grass & sunshine before it's too late....you may have a bad heart yourself before you know it and can't make it out of the chair anymore either. The world will not stop with your passing. Take some time to stop and smell the roses. I'm not anti-science, just don't let it totally consume your whole life....there is alot of positive things going on and progress is being made, but just not from our puny lifespans perspective. It just sounds like you want 500 years worth of progress jammed into your 74 year life and that probably isn't going to happen....so take a breath & relax. Let God be God....and don't worry so much. It really is bad for your health...that's Science too ya know.