We could begin to slow down the heating particularly in the subarctic and Arctic polar regions but it would take either sane people to dismantle and destroy some huge planet choking infrastructure or some crazy folks doing exactly the same thing with "socially unacceptable means" . The old guard, rather self appointed scientific gatekeepers, try to protect the consensus against any disrupting science despite clear, on the ground evidence to the contrary. Here is another piece of the puzzle that these self appointed old scientific farts are refusing to accept because they're permanently blind-sided by Co2 emissions
When It Comes To Climate Change Co2 Is Not The Whole Story, Here Is Why
Much more is at stake than Co2 removal! There are many other things pulling the chord of heating this planet. I'm concerned most about all the stuff folks remain unconvinced or totally ignorant of.
It appears that whatever we are doing to help mitigate the continuous warming problems certainly has shown no such signs of cooling our planet. If we focus on temperature maps of the northern most portions of our Hemisphere one notices that the largest heat gain and most rapid warming is occurring in the Northern-most latitudes of this hemisphere and all the way across it. Now there are many theories as to why the polar and subpolar regions are showing the greatest and fastest heating and several scientific studies have doubled down that state these regions are warming at least 2-4 times faster than anywhere else on our planet. I'm certain that there may be a few others that can point to the other theories out there. But my specialty lies in the hydrology, and natural cycles of rivers that used to exist throughout the upper latitudes and the delicate temperature balance that maintains Cryosphere(sea-Ice/glaciers)
Something happened up there and to this day it is still impacting our lives down here. In many ways, many of us still cannot or will not accept this Russian and Canadian subarctic hydro dams have forced a radical alteration to the fragile yet critical hydrologic engine regulating our planets water cycle. Since the 1950s both Canada and Russia dammed major rivers in the Arctic region for hydroelectric generation.
This area has the largest concentrations of freshwater in the Northern Hemisphere and is highly, highly climate sensitive to human or natural disruptions to existing historical river-flow conditions. For over 65 years the cumulative effects of mega dams with their inland sea-size impoundments and unnatural strict flow regimens have initiated Arctic Amplification. Impacts include winter humidity and heat pollution, altering weather patterns, warming coastal seas and the Gulf of Maine/ Pacific coasts, and include reducing dynamics of sea ice formation. Additionally, these impacts alter global thermohaline currents with global climate implications.
There's also major reductions in ,and also the timing of nutrients delivered to marine species . Thus major decreases in marine biospheres sequestration of CO2. Our research group is not discounting fossil fuels as a culprit however we have many years of discoveries from gathering onsite weather station data from the early 1900s to present. Much of our temperature and precipitation data show a remarkable correlation and a rapid warming of regions which occurred immediately after rivers, somewhat close to weather stations, were dammed out of existence forming thousands of square miles of inland Sea-size reservoirs and covering over permafrost too
Burying whole Boreal forest, Tundra, and permafrost earth. It should be mentioned that much of these x rivers flow is now permanently sitting stagnant in huge reservoirs for at least 6 months every summer since the 1950's and early 1960's. After stagnating for months, waters begin warming and raising regional humidity levels in an historically dry and cool region. Mostly Wintertime generation of hydroelectric is pulled from a water column well below the top of dams where the water is close to 40F. When finally discharged out the dam, waters hit severely cold temperatures guaranteeing condensation forming into huge clouds(heat), methane rich water vapor spilling into the atmosphere throughout the river valley below. This has been happening undeterred for 65 years. This is “Strict flow Regulation” which basically destroys the entire ecological integrity of the rivers. We will make the case that Arctic mega dams and strict flow regulations are driving up sea level rise and CO2 emissions. We suggest an immediate focus of scientific funding and pressure on Canada to take responsibility and immediately begin decommissioning Arctic dams letting the rivers flow again. Energy costs are cheap in Canada. How cheap? it may be costing all of us a live-able planet.
The only solution to preserve the biosphere, including a remnant human population in scattered remote refugia, is continued voluntary or stress disease driven population reduction and consequent natural resource consumption reduction. (Mother)Nature Bats Last.
The first article from the Guardian uses Rapa Nui as an example of analogous collapse. The commonly-held idea of how it fell is radically wrongheaded. The Clash of Civilisations podcast episode on it is a good introduction.
Insects per se I believe are more threatened by chemical pollution than climate. I can’t remember where I saw the claim that the attribution should be to that instead, though. I think light pollution and some other odd things also factor in. IIRC the only mass extinction that ever touched insects significantly was the Great Dying. This may mean that the Industrial Age, like the sea of lava that swallowed the Siberian coal beds spanning a Greenland-sized area 250M years of solar luminosity ago, heralded a new (Eschatozoic?) era. I think things aren’t expected to go fully Post-Phanerozoic until carbon dioxide is drawn down by solar luminosity increases increasing the rate of rock weathering to the point it outruns emissions, at which point photosynthetic life dependent on it esp. plants also falls. I don’t foresee humans hanging onto huge brains that cause massive maternal mortality for long once the more complex tools become impossible to produce, so hunter-gatherer existence won’t be survival in a reassuring form if even that is possible.
Thanks for the comment Nadia. I’ll have to check out that podcast about Rapa Nui, my understanding is that they simply overshot the carrying capacity and the inevitable happened.
As for insects, I agree, current decline is mainly about chemicals, and it’s practically impossible for all microbial life and insects to go extinct, which means birds probably have a decent chance too. There would always be some areas where they survive.
I would agree except for your point about the 400 or so nuclear power stations that, if as you said, had Chernobyl like meltdowns, would fill our atmosphere with ionizing radiation, destroying the ozone layer and any chance of life existing except in the deepest , darkest caves. Oceans and all water sources would evemtually become too contaminated to support any life. There is no escape.
I really enjoyed how concise and well researched this post was. I hope you don't mind me using it as a reference in the future. I too want to write about the human predicament, but writing about the end of the world doesn't appear to be very popular and doesn't attract a lot of attention.
Superficial nonsense sells. Seems everyone, (most) people would prefer to keep their heads in the sand. It makes me sympathize with the hopium peddlers. They know how to "butter their bread" if you will. I'm trying to think of ways I can attract those sleeping masses through slight of hand magic words, then wake them up when they are least expecting it. ;) Anyway, thank you for your time and fantastic work.
Thank you for this. I believe 2025 will be the year collapse hits the mainstream. Investing in community and well-being are paramount. It’s a lot to consider. And pretty intense for those of us paying attention. I wish those with resources would get it and invest properly— food security, community, health, etc.
Of course they will, unless we now undertake to do the one thing we are still able to do to reverse course, namely again reduce the number of deployed nuclear weapons (around 4000) by a factor of 10 or more, as we did since the 1980s, when 60,000 or more were deployed… and to do it again, if there is time.
—
I don’t deny a single word of this essay of forecast, but I need to point something out, too.
There is, I believe, a kind of denialism cloaked within most of the Climate Change discourse, particularly when it comes to discussing its perilous consequences. Seeing the reality of Climate Change and its longer-term threat is a way to mentally hide from the unthinkable: total thermonuclear war.
Climate Change, as bad as it’s likely to be, even with all of its extinctions and loss of biodiversity is not likely to end all but the most numerous and hardy of multicellular life larger than insects. That’s not true for thermonuclear war in a world where around 4000 nuclear weapons are actively deployed. As noted in _Nuclear War: A Scenario_ by Anne Jacobsen, wargaming exercises have shown that there is no option for what might be called “limited nuclear war.” All scenarios lead to totality. That is the sudden and immediate danger I suggest almost everyone involved in the Climate Change debate does not want to face, and purposefully hides from behind a belief that the nuclear war problem has somehow been solved.
Climate change, then, becomes the primary threat facing our species and our world.
[How I wish this were so. How I wish we did make it so, through radical disarmament, that our primary worry could only be the long-term consequences of Climate Change. We humans have been through an exercise of disarmament once before on a scale that we need now. In the 1980s, the world had under active deployment more than 50,000 nuclear weapons, mostly between the USA and the Soviet Union. Since then we have collectively reduced this arsenal by more than 90%. We could do likewise, again, leaving only 400 weapons deployed worldwide, and then, again, go down to 40. (Even that is too many.) This could be done if the will were there.]
I still remember “the pale blue dot,” and in so remembering, sometimes water comes to my eyes.
In my mind the power in nuclear material will be released whether it is released as mind no longer holds it together or by the narcissism of the individuals and their descendants who had the stupidity to make a weapon that could create outer space on the surface of earth following the Einstein's families theories.
I feel very sad about all of this. I agree with it. I was thinking we would see collapse in the next 5 to 10 years. This article says I have a bit more time--maybe 10-15 years. So many variables so not all that easy to predict. I have tried to find groups where people are preparing for the collapse, learning how to collect rainwater, grow food, forage the natural environment, etc but no such thing seems to pop up on Google for me. I will just keep a look-out and enjoy what moments are left before things get super bad. You can see the cracks everywhere. The mask is slipping.
Great post. There's a growing chorus of us posting on this topic, and that's a good thing. Mine tends to focus on how to prepare, prepping, as it does feel inevitable at this point. There's a lot we can do to extend our individual survival, at least for a while.
I grieve for those who are not me, both human and non-human animals.
This is a worst-case scenario, and though things will be bad, they need not become this bad. (For one thing, people need to stop behaving as if the powers that be are what determines everything.)
Consider this, too: in our explorations of other worlds, if such a thing were ever possible, if we found a planet with Earth-like conditions in a condition as bad as the worst of this worst-case scenario, we’d consider it a virtual paradise compared to the conditions of the nearby planets we do know (e.g. Mars and Venus).
Earth has seen this before in the P-T and K-T boundary events.
I’m not entirely convinced that human and natural ecological refugia won’t survive.
This is an extremely pertinent and informative article. Even though it would not immediately stop global warming, it would be very gratifying to put a permanent end to pollution, greed, corporations and the dirty politicians that continue to cause all the global world calamities. How unfortunate we probably don’t have time to organize, revolt and get rid of Capitalism, fascism, oligarchy, republics… And then create a free, clean, healthy, educated, sane, socialist world for all.
My brother- in -law sent me your article and l surely enjoyed it, even if the subject is not a cheery one. I always felt that globalization was a mediocre idea for the longevity of our human species. No, l don’t want to buy fruit from South America! Etc.
Thank you for the way you wrapped up your article at the end, as we are still on this planet and live our day to day lives and make the choices we do. Our planet is so beautiful and it is sad to see such complete disregard for Mother Nature. Our idea of stewardship is horribly out of balance. Our economic models of over consumption and endless expansion don’t jive with the health of our planet! But what about the theory that we could flip into an ice age? Somehow that feels comforting, to think of being able to save our permafrost.
Also, you might watch, ‘Buy Now’ on Netflix about the over consumption in the fashion industry, fast fashion, and fashion leaders stepping forward to raise this alarm.
Well, l could go on and on! But l won’t. Meanwhile, l will use pass your article on to some of my friends. Best regards! And thank you again.
Good article. It is who we are as the species Homo sapiens sapiens. The core problem is our relationship with other animals: confine, rape, torture, and kill. The next pandemic may be on the way, which will make COVID-19 look like a child’s play. Karma will be a real bitch.
I was inspired by your work! You put an incredible amount of time and energy into making sure the data and science are on point. That level of effort is astounding to me. It is admirable. I am a therapist so I work in emotions. This was my written response to your work. Thank you again for the education, not only for me, but others. You do good work. https://substack.com/home/post/p-154094906?source=queue&autoPlay=false
cliff Krolick
9:46 AM (0 minutes ago)
to Itsovershoot
We could begin to slow down the heating particularly in the subarctic and Arctic polar regions but it would take either sane people to dismantle and destroy some huge planet choking infrastructure or some crazy folks doing exactly the same thing with "socially unacceptable means" . The old guard, rather self appointed scientific gatekeepers, try to protect the consensus against any disrupting science despite clear, on the ground evidence to the contrary. Here is another piece of the puzzle that these self appointed old scientific farts are refusing to accept because they're permanently blind-sided by Co2 emissions
When It Comes To Climate Change Co2 Is Not The Whole Story, Here Is Why
Much more is at stake than Co2 removal! There are many other things pulling the chord of heating this planet. I'm concerned most about all the stuff folks remain unconvinced or totally ignorant of.
It appears that whatever we are doing to help mitigate the continuous warming problems certainly has shown no such signs of cooling our planet. If we focus on temperature maps of the northern most portions of our Hemisphere one notices that the largest heat gain and most rapid warming is occurring in the Northern-most latitudes of this hemisphere and all the way across it. Now there are many theories as to why the polar and subpolar regions are showing the greatest and fastest heating and several scientific studies have doubled down that state these regions are warming at least 2-4 times faster than anywhere else on our planet. I'm certain that there may be a few others that can point to the other theories out there. But my specialty lies in the hydrology, and natural cycles of rivers that used to exist throughout the upper latitudes and the delicate temperature balance that maintains Cryosphere(sea-Ice/glaciers)
Something happened up there and to this day it is still impacting our lives down here. In many ways, many of us still cannot or will not accept this Russian and Canadian subarctic hydro dams have forced a radical alteration to the fragile yet critical hydrologic engine regulating our planets water cycle. Since the 1950s both Canada and Russia dammed major rivers in the Arctic region for hydroelectric generation.
This area has the largest concentrations of freshwater in the Northern Hemisphere and is highly, highly climate sensitive to human or natural disruptions to existing historical river-flow conditions. For over 65 years the cumulative effects of mega dams with their inland sea-size impoundments and unnatural strict flow regimens have initiated Arctic Amplification. Impacts include winter humidity and heat pollution, altering weather patterns, warming coastal seas and the Gulf of Maine/ Pacific coasts, and include reducing dynamics of sea ice formation. Additionally, these impacts alter global thermohaline currents with global climate implications.
There's also major reductions in ,and also the timing of nutrients delivered to marine species . Thus major decreases in marine biospheres sequestration of CO2. Our research group is not discounting fossil fuels as a culprit however we have many years of discoveries from gathering onsite weather station data from the early 1900s to present. Much of our temperature and precipitation data show a remarkable correlation and a rapid warming of regions which occurred immediately after rivers, somewhat close to weather stations, were dammed out of existence forming thousands of square miles of inland Sea-size reservoirs and covering over permafrost too
Burying whole Boreal forest, Tundra, and permafrost earth. It should be mentioned that much of these x rivers flow is now permanently sitting stagnant in huge reservoirs for at least 6 months every summer since the 1950's and early 1960's. After stagnating for months, waters begin warming and raising regional humidity levels in an historically dry and cool region. Mostly Wintertime generation of hydroelectric is pulled from a water column well below the top of dams where the water is close to 40F. When finally discharged out the dam, waters hit severely cold temperatures guaranteeing condensation forming into huge clouds(heat), methane rich water vapor spilling into the atmosphere throughout the river valley below. This has been happening undeterred for 65 years. This is “Strict flow Regulation” which basically destroys the entire ecological integrity of the rivers. We will make the case that Arctic mega dams and strict flow regulations are driving up sea level rise and CO2 emissions. We suggest an immediate focus of scientific funding and pressure on Canada to take responsibility and immediately begin decommissioning Arctic dams letting the rivers flow again. Energy costs are cheap in Canada. How cheap? it may be costing all of us a live-able planet.
I was totally unaware of any of this. Thanks for pointing this out. Another nail in the coffin, probably one of the first.
The only solution to preserve the biosphere, including a remnant human population in scattered remote refugia, is continued voluntary or stress disease driven population reduction and consequent natural resource consumption reduction. (Mother)Nature Bats Last.
The first article from the Guardian uses Rapa Nui as an example of analogous collapse. The commonly-held idea of how it fell is radically wrongheaded. The Clash of Civilisations podcast episode on it is a good introduction.
Insects per se I believe are more threatened by chemical pollution than climate. I can’t remember where I saw the claim that the attribution should be to that instead, though. I think light pollution and some other odd things also factor in. IIRC the only mass extinction that ever touched insects significantly was the Great Dying. This may mean that the Industrial Age, like the sea of lava that swallowed the Siberian coal beds spanning a Greenland-sized area 250M years of solar luminosity ago, heralded a new (Eschatozoic?) era. I think things aren’t expected to go fully Post-Phanerozoic until carbon dioxide is drawn down by solar luminosity increases increasing the rate of rock weathering to the point it outruns emissions, at which point photosynthetic life dependent on it esp. plants also falls. I don’t foresee humans hanging onto huge brains that cause massive maternal mortality for long once the more complex tools become impossible to produce, so hunter-gatherer existence won’t be survival in a reassuring form if even that is possible.
Thanks for the comment Nadia. I’ll have to check out that podcast about Rapa Nui, my understanding is that they simply overshot the carrying capacity and the inevitable happened.
As for insects, I agree, current decline is mainly about chemicals, and it’s practically impossible for all microbial life and insects to go extinct, which means birds probably have a decent chance too. There would always be some areas where they survive.
I would agree except for your point about the 400 or so nuclear power stations that, if as you said, had Chernobyl like meltdowns, would fill our atmosphere with ionizing radiation, destroying the ozone layer and any chance of life existing except in the deepest , darkest caves. Oceans and all water sources would evemtually become too contaminated to support any life. There is no escape.
The history leans much more toward European colonisers having destroyed them. As an aside, the Rapa Nui appear to have independently invented writing.
Doesn't surprise me at all.
I really enjoyed how concise and well researched this post was. I hope you don't mind me using it as a reference in the future. I too want to write about the human predicament, but writing about the end of the world doesn't appear to be very popular and doesn't attract a lot of attention.
Superficial nonsense sells. Seems everyone, (most) people would prefer to keep their heads in the sand. It makes me sympathize with the hopium peddlers. They know how to "butter their bread" if you will. I'm trying to think of ways I can attract those sleeping masses through slight of hand magic words, then wake them up when they are least expecting it. ;) Anyway, thank you for your time and fantastic work.
Thank you for this. I believe 2025 will be the year collapse hits the mainstream. Investing in community and well-being are paramount. It’s a lot to consider. And pretty intense for those of us paying attention. I wish those with resources would get it and invest properly— food security, community, health, etc.
Brutally honest. Indeed, this was the most sobering, realistic look ahead I have read.
“Will nuclear weapons start flying? Who knows.”
Of course they will, unless we now undertake to do the one thing we are still able to do to reverse course, namely again reduce the number of deployed nuclear weapons (around 4000) by a factor of 10 or more, as we did since the 1980s, when 60,000 or more were deployed… and to do it again, if there is time.
—
I don’t deny a single word of this essay of forecast, but I need to point something out, too.
There is, I believe, a kind of denialism cloaked within most of the Climate Change discourse, particularly when it comes to discussing its perilous consequences. Seeing the reality of Climate Change and its longer-term threat is a way to mentally hide from the unthinkable: total thermonuclear war.
Climate Change, as bad as it’s likely to be, even with all of its extinctions and loss of biodiversity is not likely to end all but the most numerous and hardy of multicellular life larger than insects. That’s not true for thermonuclear war in a world where around 4000 nuclear weapons are actively deployed. As noted in _Nuclear War: A Scenario_ by Anne Jacobsen, wargaming exercises have shown that there is no option for what might be called “limited nuclear war.” All scenarios lead to totality. That is the sudden and immediate danger I suggest almost everyone involved in the Climate Change debate does not want to face, and purposefully hides from behind a belief that the nuclear war problem has somehow been solved.
Climate change, then, becomes the primary threat facing our species and our world.
[How I wish this were so. How I wish we did make it so, through radical disarmament, that our primary worry could only be the long-term consequences of Climate Change. We humans have been through an exercise of disarmament once before on a scale that we need now. In the 1980s, the world had under active deployment more than 50,000 nuclear weapons, mostly between the USA and the Soviet Union. Since then we have collectively reduced this arsenal by more than 90%. We could do likewise, again, leaving only 400 weapons deployed worldwide, and then, again, go down to 40. (Even that is too many.) This could be done if the will were there.]
I still remember “the pale blue dot,” and in so remembering, sometimes water comes to my eyes.
In my mind the power in nuclear material will be released whether it is released as mind no longer holds it together or by the narcissism of the individuals and their descendants who had the stupidity to make a weapon that could create outer space on the surface of earth following the Einstein's families theories.
I feel very sad about all of this. I agree with it. I was thinking we would see collapse in the next 5 to 10 years. This article says I have a bit more time--maybe 10-15 years. So many variables so not all that easy to predict. I have tried to find groups where people are preparing for the collapse, learning how to collect rainwater, grow food, forage the natural environment, etc but no such thing seems to pop up on Google for me. I will just keep a look-out and enjoy what moments are left before things get super bad. You can see the cracks everywhere. The mask is slipping.
Great post. There's a growing chorus of us posting on this topic, and that's a good thing. Mine tends to focus on how to prepare, prepping, as it does feel inevitable at this point. There's a lot we can do to extend our individual survival, at least for a while.
I grieve for those who are not me, both human and non-human animals.
This is a worst-case scenario, and though things will be bad, they need not become this bad. (For one thing, people need to stop behaving as if the powers that be are what determines everything.)
Consider this, too: in our explorations of other worlds, if such a thing were ever possible, if we found a planet with Earth-like conditions in a condition as bad as the worst of this worst-case scenario, we’d consider it a virtual paradise compared to the conditions of the nearby planets we do know (e.g. Mars and Venus).
Earth has seen this before in the P-T and K-T boundary events.
I’m not entirely convinced that human and natural ecological refugia won’t survive.
This is a well-researched, really excellent article! Thank you.
This is an extremely pertinent and informative article. Even though it would not immediately stop global warming, it would be very gratifying to put a permanent end to pollution, greed, corporations and the dirty politicians that continue to cause all the global world calamities. How unfortunate we probably don’t have time to organize, revolt and get rid of Capitalism, fascism, oligarchy, republics… And then create a free, clean, healthy, educated, sane, socialist world for all.
My brother- in -law sent me your article and l surely enjoyed it, even if the subject is not a cheery one. I always felt that globalization was a mediocre idea for the longevity of our human species. No, l don’t want to buy fruit from South America! Etc.
Thank you for the way you wrapped up your article at the end, as we are still on this planet and live our day to day lives and make the choices we do. Our planet is so beautiful and it is sad to see such complete disregard for Mother Nature. Our idea of stewardship is horribly out of balance. Our economic models of over consumption and endless expansion don’t jive with the health of our planet! But what about the theory that we could flip into an ice age? Somehow that feels comforting, to think of being able to save our permafrost.
Also, you might watch, ‘Buy Now’ on Netflix about the over consumption in the fashion industry, fast fashion, and fashion leaders stepping forward to raise this alarm.
Well, l could go on and on! But l won’t. Meanwhile, l will use pass your article on to some of my friends. Best regards! And thank you again.
Good article. It is who we are as the species Homo sapiens sapiens. The core problem is our relationship with other animals: confine, rape, torture, and kill. The next pandemic may be on the way, which will make COVID-19 look like a child’s play. Karma will be a real bitch.
I was inspired by your work! You put an incredible amount of time and energy into making sure the data and science are on point. That level of effort is astounding to me. It is admirable. I am a therapist so I work in emotions. This was my written response to your work. Thank you again for the education, not only for me, but others. You do good work. https://substack.com/home/post/p-154094906?source=queue&autoPlay=false
"At the root of it all is hubris, anthropocentrism and overshoot,"
Um......none of which would have been possible without fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels are the SOLE facilitator of our demise.
FULL STOP