"Humans have changed the Earth in a number of fundamental ways (Syvitski and Kettner 2011), many of which are far less known than global warming. (…) Particularly striking is the extent and rate at which we have modified Earth’s surface. Deforestation for wood and land clearing for cultivation is an obvious example; the direct effects include soil erosion, hill slope failure and downstream sedimentation. But infrastructure – dams, cities, transportation networks and coastal-management measures – has led to lasting and profound impacts. Prior to human interference, the world’s rivers collectively delivered 15 gigatons (Gt) of sediment per year to the coastal ocean. "
This is what IGBP Chair James Syvitksi writes in an article in the IGBP magazine Global Change.
Syvitski was in Bergen last week during the annual meeting of the Scientific Committee of the International IGBP, which this year was held in Bergen. Thursday, the IGBP, the Research Council and the BCCR invited Bergen scientists to an open seminar on biogeochemical cycles and sustainable development in the oceans, atmosphere and on land.
During Thursday's open seminar it was also highlighted that Bergen and the Institute of Marine Research will now be hosting IMBER (Integrated marine biogeochemistry and ecosystem response). The IMBER office was previously located in France, but has now been moved to Bergen with the directors Lisa Maddison and Bernard Avril following. In the picture, starting from left: Jon Bone Ørbæk, RCN; Einar Svendsen, IMR; Eileen Hofmann, President IMBERT; Wolfgang Fennel, International Council for Science; James Syvitski, Chairman IGBP; Bernard Avril and Lisa Maddison, leaders of the Bergen IMBERT office. Photo: Gudrun Sylte
The idea of "Anthropocene" as a new epoch is not a new term. The term was coined and popularized by the ecologist Eugene Stoermer and the Nobel winning Dutch chemist Paul Crutzen, the first time in print in 2000 in an article in IGBP's magazine Global Change.
Arguments for a new epoch includes:
• In the last 150 years humankind has exhausted 40% of the known oil reserves that took several hundred million years to generate
• Nearly 50% of the land surface has been transformed by direct human action, with significant consequences for biodiversity, nutrient cycling, soil structure, soil biology, and climate
• More nitrogen is now fixed synthetically for fertilisers and through fossil fuel combustion than is fixed naturally in all terrestrial ecosystems
• More than half of all accessible freshwater is appropriated for human purposes, and underground water resources are being depleted rapidly in many areas .
"The second half of the 20th Century is unique in the entire history of human existence on Earth. Many human activites reached take-off points sometime in the 20th Century and sharply accelerated towards the end of the century," the IGBP writes on their concept of the Great Acceleration. Chekc out their collection: "the Great Acceleration Graphs"
For James Syvitski the term Anthropocene is also a shift of paradigm, from the term "global warming" when we talk about climate change.
”A gallup poll from 2009 shows that two out of three people in the world have heard about global warming. But the concept of global warming comes with baggage; one has, for example, politicians and powerful forces that are against this concept. The concept of the"Anthropocene" does two things, it puts global warming as one aspect of the human footprint on Earth. Secondly, it is getting into sustainability, it allows us to see the big picture”, says James Syvitski and continues,
“The concept of concept of "Anthropocene" means a change in how one looks at the human influence on Earth. It has political impacts. “
It is twelve years ago since the concept of the Anthropocene was used by Eugene Stoermer and Paul Crutzen. Previously, several other researchers used similar concepts. Syvitksi believes the time is now mature to make this concept widely accepted in the scientific world.
- We had a large conference "Planet under pressure" in London in March this year in which this concept was discussed scientifically. Many agrees that one can call it a new geological epoch but others don’t agree. This is an interesting and lively debate, says Syvitksi.