The Experts below are selected from a list of 21315 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jan Zalasiewicz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Anthropocene: Comparing Its Meaning in Geology (Chronostratigraphy) with Conceptual Approaches Arising in Other Disciplines
2021Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Erle C Ellis, Colin N Waters, Colin Summerhayes, Will Steffen, Martin J Head, Davor Vidas, Julia Adeney Thomas, Eva Horn, Reinhold LeinfelderAbstract:The term Anthropocene initially emerged from the Earth System science community in the early 2000s, denoting a concept that the Holocene Epoch has terminated as a consequence of human activities. First associated with the onset of the Industrial Revolution, it was then more closely linked with the Great Acceleration in industrialization and globalization from the 1950s that fundamentally modified physical, chemical, and biological signals in geological archives. Since 2009, the Anthropocene has been evaluated by the Anthropocene Working Group, tasked with examining it for potential inclusion in the Geological Time Scale. Such inclusion requires a precisely defined chronostratigraphic and geochronological unit with a globally synchronous base and inception, with the mid-twentieth century being geologically optimal. This reflects an Earth System state in which human activities have become predominant drivers of modifications to the stratigraphic record, making it clearly distinct from the Holocene. However, more recently, the term Anthropocene has also become used for different conceptual interpretations in diverse scholarly fields, including the environmental and social sciences and humanities. These are often flexibly interpreted, commonly without reference to the geological record, and diachronous in time; they often extend much further back in time than the mid-twentieth century. These broader conceptualizations encompass wide ranges and levels of human impacts and interactions with the environment. Here, we clarify what the Anthropocene is in geological terms and compare the proposed geological (chronostratigraphic) definition with some of these broader interpretations and applications of the term “Anthropocene,” showing both their overlaps and differences.Plain Language SummaryThe Anthropocene concept, that modern human impacts on Earth have been sufficient to bring in a new geological epoch, is only two decades old. In that short time, its use has grown explosively, not only in the Earth sciences but also far more widely to spread through the sciences generally, to spill over into the social sciences, arts, and humanities. This has led to welcome discussions between diverse scholarly communities, though also to some very different interpretations of the Anthropocene, when interpreted through different disciplinary lenses. Notably, the geological interpretation used as basis for a potential unit of the Geological Time Scale, of a time unit starting planet-wide and synchronously in the mid-twentieth century with the massive changes triggered by industrialization and globalization, jars with interpretations of an Anthropocene that ranges back many millennia to encompass early human environmental impacts. We analyze and compare these diverse standpoints and their effect upon evolving disciplinary practices, and discuss approaches that could make communication clearer and enhance cross-disciplinary exchanges.
-
Extraordinary human energy consumption and resultant geological impacts beginning around 1950 CE initiated the proposed Anthropocene Epoch
Communications Earth & Environment, 2020Co-Authors: Jaia Syvitski, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N Waters, Alejandro Cearreta, Agnieszka Gałuszka, Colin Summerhayes, John Day, John D. Milliman, Will Steffen, Irka HajdasAbstract:Human energy consumption and productivity have steeply risen around 1950 CE, leading to a departure from the Earth’s Holocene state into the Anthropocene, suggests a quantitative analysis of humanity’s influence on the Earth system. Growth in fundamental drivers—energy use, economic productivity and population—can provide quantitative indications of the proposed boundary between the Holocene Epoch and the Anthropocene. Human energy expenditure in the Anthropocene, ~22 zetajoules (ZJ), exceeds that across the prior 11,700 years of the Holocene (~14.6 ZJ), largely through combustion of fossil fuels. The global warming effect during the Anthropocene is more than an order of magnitude greater still. Global human population, their productivity and energy consumption, and most changes impacting the global environment, are highly correlated. This extraordinary outburst of consumption and productivity demonstrates how the Earth System has departed from its Holocene state since ~1950 CE, forcing abrupt physical, chemical and biological changes to the Earth’s stratigraphic record that can be used to justify the proposal for naming a new epoch—the Anthropocene.
-
the Anthropocene as a geological time unit a guide to the scientific evidence and current debate
2019Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Mark Williams, C N Waters, Colin SummerhayesAbstract:1. History and development of the Anthropocene as a stratigraphical concept Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters, Mark Williams, Colin Summerhayes, Martin Head, Reinhold Leinfelder, Jacques Grinevald, John McNeill, Naomi Oreskes, Will Steffen, Scott Wing, Phil Gibbard, Davor Vidas, Trevor Hancock and Anthony Barnosky 2. Stratigraphic signatures of the Anthropocene Bob Hazen, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters, Andy Smith, Neil Rose, Agnieszka Galuszka, An Zhisheng, Simon Price, Daniel deB. Richter, Sharon A Billings, James Syvitski and Colin Summerhayes 3. The biostratigraphical signature of the Anthropocene Mark Williams, Anthony Barnosky, Jan Zalasiewicz, Martin Head, Ian Wilkinson, David Aldridge, Colin Waters, Valentin Bault and Reinhold Leinfelder 4. The tectonosphere and its physical stratigraphical record Peter Haff, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters, Mark Williams, Anthony Barnosky, Reinhold Leinfelder and Juliana Ivar do Sul 5. Anthropocene chemostratigraphy Ian Fairchild, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Summerhayes, Colin Waters, Reinhold Leinfelder, Agnieszka Galuszka, Michael Wagreich, Neil Rose, Irka Hajdas and Catherine Jeandel 6. Climate change and the Anthropocene Colin Summerhayes and Alejandro Cearreta 7. The stratigraphical boundary of the Anthropocene Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters, Mark Williams, Colin Summerhayes, Eric Odada, Michael Wagreich, Erich Draganits, Matt Edgeworth, J. R. McNeill, Will Steffen and Martin Head References Index.
-
the working group on the Anthropocene summary of evidence and interim recommendations
Anthropocene, 2017Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N Waters, Anthony D Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Colin Summerhayes, Paul J Crutzen, Alexander P Wolfe, Ian J FairchildAbstract:Abstract Since 2009, the Working Group on the ‘Anthropocene’ (or, commonly, AWG for Anthropocene Working Group), has been critically analysing the case for formalization of this proposed but still informal geological time unit. The study to date has mainly involved establishing the overall nature of the Anthropocene as a potential chronostratigraphic/geochronologic unit, and exploring the stratigraphic proxies, including several that are novel in geology, that might be applied to its characterization and definition. A preliminary summary of evidence and interim recommendations was presented by the Working Group at the 35th International Geological Congress in Cape Town, South Africa, in August 2016, together with results of voting by members of the AWG indicating the current balance of opinion on major questions surrounding the Anthropocene. The majority opinion within the AWG holds the Anthropocene to be stratigraphically real, and recommends formalization at epoch/series rank based on a mid-20th century boundary. Work is proceeding towards a formal proposal based upon selection of an appropriate Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP), as well as auxiliary stratotypes. Among the array of proxies that might be used as a primary marker, anthropogenic radionuclides associated with nuclear arms testing are the most promising; potential secondary markers include plastic, carbon isotope patterns and industrial fly ash. All these proxies have excellent global or near-global correlation potential in a wide variety of sedimentary bodies, both marine and non-marine.
-
the Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the holocene
Science, 2016Co-Authors: C N Waters, Jan Zalasiewicz, Anthony D Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Matt Edgeworth, Colin Summerhayes, Clement Poirier, Agnieszka Galuszka, Michael A EllisAbstract:Humans are undoubtedly altering many geological processes on Earth—and have been for some time. But what is the stratigraphic evidence for officially distinguishing this new human-dominated time period, termed the “Anthropocene,” from the preceding Holocene epoch? Waters et al. review climatic, biological, and geochemical signatures of human activity in sediments and ice cores. Combined with deposits of new materials and radionuclides, as well as human-caused modification of sedimentary processes, the Anthropocene stands alone stratigraphically as a new epoch beginning sometime in the mid–20th century.
Devereaux P Jennings - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
conceptualizing archetypal Anthropocene societies an institutional framework
Social Science Research Network, 2017Co-Authors: Andrew J Hoffman, Devereaux P JenningsAbstract:Natural scientists have proposed that humankind has entered a new geologic epoch. Termed the “Anthropocene,” this new reality revolves around the central role of human activity in multiple Earth ecosystems. That challenge requires a rethinking of social science explanations of organization and environment relationships. In this article, we discuss the need to politicize institutional theory as a means understanding “Anthropocene Society,” and in turn what that resultant society means for the Anthropocene in the natural environment. We modify the constitutive elements of institutional orders and a set of main change mechanisms to explore three scenarios around which future Anthropocene Societies might be built – Collapsing Systems, Market Rules, and Cultural Re-Enlightenment. Simultaneously, we use observations from the Anthropocene to expose limitations in present institutional theory and propose extensions to remedy them. Overall, this article challenges organizational scholars to consider a new paradigm under which research in environmental sustainability and social sustainability takes place.
-
institutional theory and the natural environment research in and on the Anthropocene
Organization & Environment, 2015Co-Authors: Andrew J Hoffman, Devereaux P JenningsAbstract:This review article summarizes the main tenets of institutional theory as they apply to the topic of the Anthropocene in the domain of organization and the natural environment. But our review is distinctive for two reasons: First, it is focused on providing avenues researching the Anthropocene Era. Second, while based on the trajectory of current, accumulated theory and research, our review is forward-looking in its orientation and thus aimed at guiding future work to explore the emergence of a new social reality in Anthropocene Society. We begin by summarizing the scientific research on the Anthropocene Era, then move to its implications for grand and midrange institutional theory principles, and of institutional principles for the study of it. We end with a call to reenergize and reradicalize the organization and the natural environment field to properly address the magnitude and scope of this shift to the Anthropocene.
-
institutional theory and the natural environment research in and on the Anthropocene
2015Co-Authors: Andrew J Hoffman, Devereaux P JenningsAbstract:This review article summarizes the main tenets of institutional theory as they apply to the topic of the Anthropocene in the domain of organization and the natural environment (O&NE). But our review is distinctive for two reasons: first, it is focused on providing avenues researching the Anthropocene Era. Second, while based on the trajectory of current, accumulated theory and research, our review is forward-looking in its orientation and thus aimed at guiding future work to explore the emergence of a new social reality in Anthropocene Society. We begin by summarizing the scientific research on the Anthropocene Era, then move to its implications for grand and mid-range institutional theory principles, and, of institutional principles for the study of it. We end with a call to reenergize and re-radicalize the O&NE field to properly address the magnitude and scope of this shift to the Anthropocene.
Mark Williams - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Anthropocene as a geological time unit a guide to the scientific evidence and current debate
2019Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Mark Williams, C N Waters, Colin SummerhayesAbstract:1. History and development of the Anthropocene as a stratigraphical concept Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters, Mark Williams, Colin Summerhayes, Martin Head, Reinhold Leinfelder, Jacques Grinevald, John McNeill, Naomi Oreskes, Will Steffen, Scott Wing, Phil Gibbard, Davor Vidas, Trevor Hancock and Anthony Barnosky 2. Stratigraphic signatures of the Anthropocene Bob Hazen, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters, Andy Smith, Neil Rose, Agnieszka Galuszka, An Zhisheng, Simon Price, Daniel deB. Richter, Sharon A Billings, James Syvitski and Colin Summerhayes 3. The biostratigraphical signature of the Anthropocene Mark Williams, Anthony Barnosky, Jan Zalasiewicz, Martin Head, Ian Wilkinson, David Aldridge, Colin Waters, Valentin Bault and Reinhold Leinfelder 4. The tectonosphere and its physical stratigraphical record Peter Haff, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters, Mark Williams, Anthony Barnosky, Reinhold Leinfelder and Juliana Ivar do Sul 5. Anthropocene chemostratigraphy Ian Fairchild, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Summerhayes, Colin Waters, Reinhold Leinfelder, Agnieszka Galuszka, Michael Wagreich, Neil Rose, Irka Hajdas and Catherine Jeandel 6. Climate change and the Anthropocene Colin Summerhayes and Alejandro Cearreta 7. The stratigraphical boundary of the Anthropocene Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin Waters, Mark Williams, Colin Summerhayes, Eric Odada, Michael Wagreich, Erich Draganits, Matt Edgeworth, J. R. McNeill, Will Steffen and Martin Head References Index.
-
When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal
Quaternary International, 2015Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N Waters, Anthony D Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Mark Williams, Michael A Ellis, Paul J Crutzen, E Ellis, Ian J Fairchild, Jacques GrinevaldAbstract:We evaluate the boundary of the Anthropocene geological time interval as an epoch, since it is useful to have a consistent temporal definition for this increasingly used unit, whether the presently informal term is eventually formalized or not. Of the three main levels suggested - an ‘early Anthropocene’ level some thousands of years ago; the beginning of the Industrial Revolution at ~1800 CE (Common Era); and the ‘Great Acceleration’ of the mid-twentieth century - current evidence suggests that the last of these has the most pronounced and globally synchronous signal. A boundary at this time need not have a Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP or ‘golden spike’) but can be defined by a Global Standard Stratigraphic Age (GSSA), i.e. a point in time of the human calendar.We propose an appropriate boundary level here to be the time of the world's first nuclear bomb explosion, on July 16th 1945 at Alamogordo, New Mexico; additional bombs were detonated at the average rate of one every 9.6 days until 1988 with attendant worldwide fallout easily identifiable in the chemostratigraphic record. Hence, Anthropocene deposits would be those that may include the globally distributed primary artificial radionuclide signal, while also being recognized using a wide range of other stratigraphic criteria. This suggestion for the HoloceneeAnthropocene boundary may ultimately be superseded, as the Anthropocene is only in its early phases, but it should remain practical and effective for use by at least the current generation of scientists.
-
When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal
2015Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Anthony D Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Mark Williams, C N Waters, Paul J Crutzen, E Ellis, Ma Ellis, Ij Fairchild, Jacques GrinevaldAbstract:We evaluate the boundary of the Anthropocene geological time interval as an epoch, since it is useful to have a consistent temporal definition for this increasingly used unit, whether the presently informal term is eventually formalized or not. Of the three main levels suggested – an ‘early Anthropocene’ level some thousands of years ago; the beginning of the Industrial Revolution at ∼1800 CE (Common Era); and the ‘Great Acceleration’ of the mid-twentieth century – current evidence suggests that the last of these has the most pronounced and globally synchronous signal. A boundary at this time need not have a Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP or ‘golden spike’) but can be defined by a Global Standard Stratigraphic Age (GSSA), i.e. a point in time of the human calendar. We propose an appropriate boundary level here to be the time of the world's first nuclear bomb explosion, on July 16th 1945 at Alamogordo, New Mexico; additional bombs were detonated at the average rate of one every 9.6 days until 1988 with attendant worldwide fallout easily identifiable in the chemostratigraphic record. Hence, Anthropocene deposits would be those that may include the globally distributed primary artificial radionuclide signal, while also being recognized using a wide range of other stratigraphic criteria. This suggestion for the Holocene–Anthropocene boundary may ultimately be superseded, as the Anthropocene is only in its early phases, but it should remain practical and effective for use by at least the current generation of scientists
-
a stratigraphical basis for the Anthropocene
Geological Society London Special Publications, 2014Co-Authors: Colin N Waters, Jan Zalasiewicz, Mark Williams, Michael A Ellis, Andrea M SnellingAbstract:Recognition of intimate feedback mechanisms linking changes across the atmosphere, biosphere, geosphere and hydrosphere demonstrates the pervasive nature of humankind's influence, perhaps to the point that we have fashioned a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene. To what extent will these changes be evident as long-lasting signatures in the geological record? To establish the Anthropocene as a formal chronostratigraphical unit it is necessary to consider a spectrum of indicators of anthropogenically induced environmental change, and to determine how these show as stratigraphic signals that can be used to characterize an Anthropocene unit and to recognize its base. It is important to consider these signals against a context of Holocene and earlier stratigraphic patterns. Here we review the parameters used by stratigraphers to identify chronostratigraphical units and how these could apply to the definition of the Anthropocene. The onset of the range of signatures is diachronous, although many show maximum signatures which post-date1945, leading to the suggestion that this date may be a suitable age for the start of the Anthropocene.
-
the Anthropocene a new epoch of geological time
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 2011Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Mark Williams, Alan M Haywood, Michael A EllisAbstract:Anthropogenic changes to the Earth’s climate, land, oceans and biosphere are now so great and so rapid that the concept of a new geological epoch defined by the action of humans, the Anthropocene, is widely and seriously debated. Questions of the scale, magnitude and significance of this environmental change, particularly in the context of the Earth’s geological history, provide the basis for this Theme Issue. The Anthropocene, on current evidence, seems to show global change consistent with the suggestion that an epoch-scale boundary has been crossed within the last two centuries.
Michael A Ellis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the holocene
Science, 2016Co-Authors: C N Waters, Jan Zalasiewicz, Anthony D Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Matt Edgeworth, Colin Summerhayes, Clement Poirier, Agnieszka Galuszka, Michael A EllisAbstract:Humans are undoubtedly altering many geological processes on Earth—and have been for some time. But what is the stratigraphic evidence for officially distinguishing this new human-dominated time period, termed the “Anthropocene,” from the preceding Holocene epoch? Waters et al. review climatic, biological, and geochemical signatures of human activity in sediments and ice cores. Combined with deposits of new materials and radionuclides, as well as human-caused modification of sedimentary processes, the Anthropocene stands alone stratigraphically as a new epoch beginning sometime in the mid–20th century.
-
When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal
Quaternary International, 2015Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N Waters, Anthony D Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Mark Williams, Michael A Ellis, Paul J Crutzen, E Ellis, Ian J Fairchild, Jacques GrinevaldAbstract:We evaluate the boundary of the Anthropocene geological time interval as an epoch, since it is useful to have a consistent temporal definition for this increasingly used unit, whether the presently informal term is eventually formalized or not. Of the three main levels suggested - an ‘early Anthropocene’ level some thousands of years ago; the beginning of the Industrial Revolution at ~1800 CE (Common Era); and the ‘Great Acceleration’ of the mid-twentieth century - current evidence suggests that the last of these has the most pronounced and globally synchronous signal. A boundary at this time need not have a Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP or ‘golden spike’) but can be defined by a Global Standard Stratigraphic Age (GSSA), i.e. a point in time of the human calendar.We propose an appropriate boundary level here to be the time of the world's first nuclear bomb explosion, on July 16th 1945 at Alamogordo, New Mexico; additional bombs were detonated at the average rate of one every 9.6 days until 1988 with attendant worldwide fallout easily identifiable in the chemostratigraphic record. Hence, Anthropocene deposits would be those that may include the globally distributed primary artificial radionuclide signal, while also being recognized using a wide range of other stratigraphic criteria. This suggestion for the HoloceneeAnthropocene boundary may ultimately be superseded, as the Anthropocene is only in its early phases, but it should remain practical and effective for use by at least the current generation of scientists.
-
a stratigraphical basis for the Anthropocene
Geological Society London Special Publications, 2014Co-Authors: Colin N Waters, Jan Zalasiewicz, Mark Williams, Michael A Ellis, Andrea M SnellingAbstract:Recognition of intimate feedback mechanisms linking changes across the atmosphere, biosphere, geosphere and hydrosphere demonstrates the pervasive nature of humankind's influence, perhaps to the point that we have fashioned a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene. To what extent will these changes be evident as long-lasting signatures in the geological record? To establish the Anthropocene as a formal chronostratigraphical unit it is necessary to consider a spectrum of indicators of anthropogenically induced environmental change, and to determine how these show as stratigraphic signals that can be used to characterize an Anthropocene unit and to recognize its base. It is important to consider these signals against a context of Holocene and earlier stratigraphic patterns. Here we review the parameters used by stratigraphers to identify chronostratigraphical units and how these could apply to the definition of the Anthropocene. The onset of the range of signatures is diachronous, although many show maximum signatures which post-date1945, leading to the suggestion that this date may be a suitable age for the start of the Anthropocene.
-
the Anthropocene a new epoch of geological time
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 2011Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Mark Williams, Alan M Haywood, Michael A EllisAbstract:Anthropogenic changes to the Earth’s climate, land, oceans and biosphere are now so great and so rapid that the concept of a new geological epoch defined by the action of humans, the Anthropocene, is widely and seriously debated. Questions of the scale, magnitude and significance of this environmental change, particularly in the context of the Earth’s geological history, provide the basis for this Theme Issue. The Anthropocene, on current evidence, seems to show global change consistent with the suggestion that an epoch-scale boundary has been crossed within the last two centuries.
Colin N Waters - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Anthropocene: Comparing Its Meaning in Geology (Chronostratigraphy) with Conceptual Approaches Arising in Other Disciplines
2021Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Erle C Ellis, Colin N Waters, Colin Summerhayes, Will Steffen, Martin J Head, Davor Vidas, Julia Adeney Thomas, Eva Horn, Reinhold LeinfelderAbstract:The term Anthropocene initially emerged from the Earth System science community in the early 2000s, denoting a concept that the Holocene Epoch has terminated as a consequence of human activities. First associated with the onset of the Industrial Revolution, it was then more closely linked with the Great Acceleration in industrialization and globalization from the 1950s that fundamentally modified physical, chemical, and biological signals in geological archives. Since 2009, the Anthropocene has been evaluated by the Anthropocene Working Group, tasked with examining it for potential inclusion in the Geological Time Scale. Such inclusion requires a precisely defined chronostratigraphic and geochronological unit with a globally synchronous base and inception, with the mid-twentieth century being geologically optimal. This reflects an Earth System state in which human activities have become predominant drivers of modifications to the stratigraphic record, making it clearly distinct from the Holocene. However, more recently, the term Anthropocene has also become used for different conceptual interpretations in diverse scholarly fields, including the environmental and social sciences and humanities. These are often flexibly interpreted, commonly without reference to the geological record, and diachronous in time; they often extend much further back in time than the mid-twentieth century. These broader conceptualizations encompass wide ranges and levels of human impacts and interactions with the environment. Here, we clarify what the Anthropocene is in geological terms and compare the proposed geological (chronostratigraphic) definition with some of these broader interpretations and applications of the term “Anthropocene,” showing both their overlaps and differences.Plain Language SummaryThe Anthropocene concept, that modern human impacts on Earth have been sufficient to bring in a new geological epoch, is only two decades old. In that short time, its use has grown explosively, not only in the Earth sciences but also far more widely to spread through the sciences generally, to spill over into the social sciences, arts, and humanities. This has led to welcome discussions between diverse scholarly communities, though also to some very different interpretations of the Anthropocene, when interpreted through different disciplinary lenses. Notably, the geological interpretation used as basis for a potential unit of the Geological Time Scale, of a time unit starting planet-wide and synchronously in the mid-twentieth century with the massive changes triggered by industrialization and globalization, jars with interpretations of an Anthropocene that ranges back many millennia to encompass early human environmental impacts. We analyze and compare these diverse standpoints and their effect upon evolving disciplinary practices, and discuss approaches that could make communication clearer and enhance cross-disciplinary exchanges.
-
Extraordinary human energy consumption and resultant geological impacts beginning around 1950 CE initiated the proposed Anthropocene Epoch
Communications Earth & Environment, 2020Co-Authors: Jaia Syvitski, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N Waters, Alejandro Cearreta, Agnieszka Gałuszka, Colin Summerhayes, John Day, John D. Milliman, Will Steffen, Irka HajdasAbstract:Human energy consumption and productivity have steeply risen around 1950 CE, leading to a departure from the Earth’s Holocene state into the Anthropocene, suggests a quantitative analysis of humanity’s influence on the Earth system. Growth in fundamental drivers—energy use, economic productivity and population—can provide quantitative indications of the proposed boundary between the Holocene Epoch and the Anthropocene. Human energy expenditure in the Anthropocene, ~22 zetajoules (ZJ), exceeds that across the prior 11,700 years of the Holocene (~14.6 ZJ), largely through combustion of fossil fuels. The global warming effect during the Anthropocene is more than an order of magnitude greater still. Global human population, their productivity and energy consumption, and most changes impacting the global environment, are highly correlated. This extraordinary outburst of consumption and productivity demonstrates how the Earth System has departed from its Holocene state since ~1950 CE, forcing abrupt physical, chemical and biological changes to the Earth’s stratigraphic record that can be used to justify the proposal for naming a new epoch—the Anthropocene.
-
the working group on the Anthropocene summary of evidence and interim recommendations
Anthropocene, 2017Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N Waters, Anthony D Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Colin Summerhayes, Paul J Crutzen, Alexander P Wolfe, Ian J FairchildAbstract:Abstract Since 2009, the Working Group on the ‘Anthropocene’ (or, commonly, AWG for Anthropocene Working Group), has been critically analysing the case for formalization of this proposed but still informal geological time unit. The study to date has mainly involved establishing the overall nature of the Anthropocene as a potential chronostratigraphic/geochronologic unit, and exploring the stratigraphic proxies, including several that are novel in geology, that might be applied to its characterization and definition. A preliminary summary of evidence and interim recommendations was presented by the Working Group at the 35th International Geological Congress in Cape Town, South Africa, in August 2016, together with results of voting by members of the AWG indicating the current balance of opinion on major questions surrounding the Anthropocene. The majority opinion within the AWG holds the Anthropocene to be stratigraphically real, and recommends formalization at epoch/series rank based on a mid-20th century boundary. Work is proceeding towards a formal proposal based upon selection of an appropriate Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP), as well as auxiliary stratotypes. Among the array of proxies that might be used as a primary marker, anthropogenic radionuclides associated with nuclear arms testing are the most promising; potential secondary markers include plastic, carbon isotope patterns and industrial fly ash. All these proxies have excellent global or near-global correlation potential in a wide variety of sedimentary bodies, both marine and non-marine.
-
When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal
Quaternary International, 2015Co-Authors: Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N Waters, Anthony D Barnosky, Alejandro Cearreta, Mark Williams, Michael A Ellis, Paul J Crutzen, E Ellis, Ian J Fairchild, Jacques GrinevaldAbstract:We evaluate the boundary of the Anthropocene geological time interval as an epoch, since it is useful to have a consistent temporal definition for this increasingly used unit, whether the presently informal term is eventually formalized or not. Of the three main levels suggested - an ‘early Anthropocene’ level some thousands of years ago; the beginning of the Industrial Revolution at ~1800 CE (Common Era); and the ‘Great Acceleration’ of the mid-twentieth century - current evidence suggests that the last of these has the most pronounced and globally synchronous signal. A boundary at this time need not have a Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP or ‘golden spike’) but can be defined by a Global Standard Stratigraphic Age (GSSA), i.e. a point in time of the human calendar.We propose an appropriate boundary level here to be the time of the world's first nuclear bomb explosion, on July 16th 1945 at Alamogordo, New Mexico; additional bombs were detonated at the average rate of one every 9.6 days until 1988 with attendant worldwide fallout easily identifiable in the chemostratigraphic record. Hence, Anthropocene deposits would be those that may include the globally distributed primary artificial radionuclide signal, while also being recognized using a wide range of other stratigraphic criteria. This suggestion for the HoloceneeAnthropocene boundary may ultimately be superseded, as the Anthropocene is only in its early phases, but it should remain practical and effective for use by at least the current generation of scientists.
-
a stratigraphical basis for the Anthropocene
Geological Society London Special Publications, 2014Co-Authors: Colin N Waters, Jan Zalasiewicz, Mark Williams, Michael A Ellis, Andrea M SnellingAbstract:Recognition of intimate feedback mechanisms linking changes across the atmosphere, biosphere, geosphere and hydrosphere demonstrates the pervasive nature of humankind's influence, perhaps to the point that we have fashioned a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene. To what extent will these changes be evident as long-lasting signatures in the geological record? To establish the Anthropocene as a formal chronostratigraphical unit it is necessary to consider a spectrum of indicators of anthropogenically induced environmental change, and to determine how these show as stratigraphic signals that can be used to characterize an Anthropocene unit and to recognize its base. It is important to consider these signals against a context of Holocene and earlier stratigraphic patterns. Here we review the parameters used by stratigraphers to identify chronostratigraphical units and how these could apply to the definition of the Anthropocene. The onset of the range of signatures is diachronous, although many show maximum signatures which post-date1945, leading to the suggestion that this date may be a suitable age for the start of the Anthropocene.
