Dienstag, 2. September 2008

Field Notes from a Catastrophe, by Elizabeth Kolbert

Article

Field Notes from a Catastrophe
by Elizabeth Kolbert
Bloomsbury £7.99

The Inuit people of Banks Island have no word to describe what we know as a robin. After all, the islanders, 500 miles inside the Arctic Circle, deep in Canada's Northwest Territories, had never seen the creatures until they suddenly turned up in numbers a few years ago. 'We just thought, "Oh gee, it's warming up a little bit,"' islander John Keogak tells Elizabeth Kolbert. 'It was good at the start - warmer winters, you know - but now everything is going so fast.'
If you have any doubts about the potential devastation facing the planet as a result of global warming, Kolbert's book will eradicate them. She takes the reader on a terrifying journey from Canada, Alaska, Iceland and Greenland through Manhattan and Washington to the Netherlands and York. The effects of global warming, she argues, can already be felt on every continent, in every country, by plants and animals alike.
She describes butterfly populations edging northwards through the English countryside, mosquitoes that have mutated so that they go into diapause (or dormancy) later each year in the US and an extraordinary toad - 'a flaming shade of tangerine' - that has disappeared completely from the Monteverde cloud forest in Costa Rica. As for humans, families in the Netherlands have already moved into floating homes.
All these tiny signs, brought to life in remarkable detail, point to a coming catastrophe. And it is the scientists - not the campaigners - who are ringing the alarm bells. 'It is true that we've had higher CO2 levels before,' one expert at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tells Kolbert. 'But, then, of course, we also had dinosaurs.'
Kolbert presents the arguments in an utterly compelling and convincing manner and she does not shy away from the science. She goes into great detail about what can be done. As you reach the final chapters, you are left with some hope. 'I think we have a shot,' says one leading physicist.
But when Kolbert turns to the action taken by the US, she becomes pessimistic. I was left wanting to throw this exposé at those officials who are too selfish to consider what could happen to the planet their grandchildren inherit. They, like the rest of us, should heed the advice in Kolbert's remarkable book.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2007/aug/12/scienceandnature.features

Discussion

According to the Guardian book review, Kolbert’s book will eradicate any doubts one might have about the nature and effects of global climate destabilization. She elaborates on its effects by addressing different locations and different phenomenon independently, ranging from the migration of butterfly populations to the mutation of mosquitos and the extinction of rare toad species. She also touches upon the effects that humans feel. People in the Netherlands, for example have begun to move into amphibious homes to cope with rising sea levels. The Guardian deems the book “compelling and convincing” and praises the detail to which she has pursued the matter in her research. She is very objective in her account, according to this review, but her pessimism about the U.S. government and its handling of the situation has not gone unnoticed.

Asthana, Anushka. "Feeling the heat." The Observer 12 Aug 2007 7 Aug 2008 .

In Epoch of Man, Earth Takes a Beating

Article

Books of The Times 'Field Notes From a Catastrophe'
In Epoch of Man, Earth Takes a Beating

"The whole world is going too fast," an Inuit hunter from Banks Island in the Northwest Territories in Canada told the journalist Elizabeth Kolbert at a bar during a global-warming symposium. A few years before, he and his neighbors had started seeing robins, birds they had no name for. At first the milder weather that drew the robins north seemed a good thing — "warmer winters, you know," he said — but as other changes occurred that affected their traditional way of life, including hunting, it did not seem so good. "Our children may not have a future," the hunter concluded. "I mean, all young people, put it that way. It's not just happening in the Arctic. It's going to happen all over the world."
Skip to next paragraph
FIELD NOTES FROM A CATASTROPHEMan, Nature and Climate ChangeBy Elizabeth Kolbert210 pages. Bloomsbury. $22.95. BOOK EXCERPTFirst Chapter
Readers’ Opinions
Forum: Book News and Reviews
For "Field Notes From a Catastrophe," Ms. Kolbert went not exactly all over the world to find out what's happening with global warming but to a great many places in it, and she often heard the same elegiac expressions of foreboding, loss and fear for the next generation. In Shishmaref, Alaska, she met people who were abandoning their tiny island home because, with less sea ice around it as a buffer against storms, their houses and land were being carried away. ("It makes me feel lonely," one woman said of the forced move.) In Iceland, a man monitoring glacial advance and retreat passed on the prediction that by the end of the next century, his country, where glaciers have existed for more than two million years, will be essentially ice-free. On the Greenland ice cap, well away from the coast, researchers gathering meteorological data were surprised to see melt "in areas where liquid water had not been seen for hundreds, perhaps thousands, of years."
And so it went in Fairbanks; Yorkshire; Eugene, Ore. "Such is the impact of global warming," Ms. Kolbert points out, that she could have gone to countless other places, "from Siberia to the Austrian Alps to the Great Barrier Reef to the South African fynbos — to document its effects."
Ms. Kolbert, a former reporter for The New York Times, doesn't doubt that human-induced global warming is real and will likely have dire consequences; the title of her book includes the word "catastrophe." The pages are replete with bad news: perennial sea ice, which 25 years ago covered an area of the Arctic the size of the continental United States, has since lost an area "the size of New York, Georgia and Texas combined." Carbon dioxide levels, if emissions go unchecked, could reach three times pre-industrial levels by the end of the century.
Based on a series of articles that appeared in The New Yorker magazine, the book is organized around notes Ms. Kolbert took on "field trips," not only to places where climate change is affecting the natural world but also to ones — labs, offices, observatories — where humans are trying to understand the phenomenon of human-induced global warming. Hers is the latest in a large crop of books on the subject — she notes that "entire books have been written just on the history of efforts to draw attention to the problem" — and there are inevitably some places where other authors have trod before.
In language that is clear, if somewhat dry, she examines the major pieces of the story, shedding light on some insider concepts of climatologists, like "dangerous anthropogenic interference," as she goes. The book may make a good handbook; it is both comprehensive and succinct. (If you have ever wondered how a climate model is put together, that's in there, too.)
She visits the Netherlands, where rising sea levels caused by global warming are expected to swallow up large parts of the country. In areas where there are already periodic floods, a construction firm has started building amphibious homes (they resemble toasters, Ms. Kolbert says) as well as "buoyant roads." Another field trip took her to Washington, where she was treated to double-speak by an under secretary charged with explaining the administration's position on climate change. "Astonishingly," she comments in a rare show of heat, "standing in the way" of progress seems to be President Bush's goal. Not only did he reject the Kyoto Protocol, she notes, with its mandatory curbs on emissions, almost killing the treaty in the process, but he also continues to block meaningful follow-up changes to it.
The United States is the largest emitter of carbon in the world, accounting for a quarter of the world's total, with the average American putting out 12,000 pounds of carbon a year, or about 100 times what the average Bangladeshi does. In two decades, the Chinese will surpass Americans in this disheartening achievement, unless they can somehow be persuaded to build their many projected new coal plants using modern, low-emission — and expensive — technology.
Some of the most downbeat (or realistic) observers are climate scientists. "It may be that we're not going to solve global warming," Marty Hoffert, a physics professor at New York University, told Ms. Kolbert, "the earth is going to become an ecological disaster, and, you know, somebody will visit in a few hundred million years and find there were some intelligent beings who lived here for a while, but they just couldn't handle the transition from being hunter-gatherers to high technology."
Mr. Hoffert isn't giving up in despair, though, but turning to high technology for help. He's trying to find carbon-free sources of energy — away from earth. Satellites with photovoltaic arrays could be launched into space, he suggests. Solar collectors could be placed on the moon. Turbines suspended in the jet stream could generate wind power. At least in the long term, "I think we have a shot," he says.
In a final chapter on the "Anthropocene," a newly minted term meaning the geological epoch defined by man, Ms. Kolbert turns from her mostly unbiased field reporting to give her own opinion. She is not optimistic, in large part because it appears that Anthropocene man can't be counted on to do the right thing. "It may seem impossible to imagine that a technologically advanced society could choose, in essence, to destroy itself," she writes, "but that is what we are now in the process of doing."
Mariana Gosnell is the author of "Ice: The Nature, the History and the Uses of an Astonishing Substance," recently published by Knopf.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/16/books/16gosn.html

Discussion

Elizabeth Kolbert has travelled the globe to gather research for her book, Field Notes from a Catastrophe, and almost everywhere she went, she encountered different stories of the catastrophe that united them. She felt that it was truly a catastrophe, thus the title, and the content of her work reflects what the title indicates. This book review deems her language “somewhat dry”, but the content to be “comprehensive and succinct”. Most of her blame rests with the United States and China, today’s major emitters of greenhouse gases. According to Kolbert, China will soon surpass the United Stated in emissions, unless its government can be persuaded to incorporate low-emission-technology into the coal plants it plans to construct. Even though she is not optimistic about the future, she lists a series of carbon-free sources of energy that could be used in the stead of fossil fuels and urges people and governments alike to take action.

Gosnell, Mariana. "In Epoch of Man, Earth Takes a Beating ." New York Times Sunday Book Review 16 March 2006 7 Aug 2008 .

Issues: Global Warming

Article

Issues: Global Warming

An Interview with Elizabeth Kolbert
Elizabeth Kolbert, a staff writer for The New Yorker, tackles the topic of global warming in her newest book, Field Notes from a Catastrophe: Man, Nature, and Climate Change. Field Notes from a Catastrophe grew out a three-part series for The New Yorker published last year. Kolbert recently spoke about global warming with NRDC communications director Phil Gutis; the two know each another from their days working together at The New York Times.

Q: How did you decide to focus on the topic of global warming?
A: Like a lot of people, I am concerned about global warming. And as a journalist, I thought, if half of what I'm reading is true, then global warming is an unbelievably important issue. The real challenge is how to make global warming vivid to people, how to make it real. I could fill this building with reports that have been written on global warming, but they're not accessible, not readable. They're filled with jargon and statistics. So I thought: there's got to be some way to make the story grab people. That was really the task and it took me a really long time to find an avenue into it. I'd been thinking about it for years.

Q: And what was the avenue you discovered to tell the story?
A: I heard about this town, Shishmaref, on a little island off the Seward Peninsula. Someone told me that there was a vote in 2001 to move the village because the island's coast is eroding as sea ice retreats in that area. This is how my book opens. It seemed like a good way in to the story and the more I looked into it, the more I saw that people all around the Arctic were seeing this sort of effect. And this really shouldn't come as a surprise. The earliest climate models predicted that the first and most dramatic effects of global warming would be felt in the Arctic. The predictions are coming true. By talking about real people who live in the Arctic, people who are seeing their livelihoods and homes disappear, it makes global warming real.

Q: But the Arctic is fairly remote for most people. It doesn't affect them on a day-to-day basis. Why do you think Americans will care what is happening to an Arctic village? How is this affecting them?
A: I was born in 1961 and when I was growing up, we skated on our local salt-water pond when it froze over in winter. I'm sure this winter it hasn't been frozen over once. Now I live in western Massachusetts -- ski country. Its increasingly difficult for the ski resorts to make it because there isn't even enough time for them to make snow, much less get snow. People like me see that the world has changed in course of their lifetimes. We are thinking, "Well, something is going on." The danger is when you start to hear the argument, "Well, yes, something is going on, but the temperatures change and the world changes and we had an ice age 10,000 years ago so who knows what will happen 10,000 years from now." It's this argument that I really tried to deal with in the book because we do know what is causing this and we do know where it's heading. If we just sit twiddling our thumbs and saying, "Who knows?" then we are consigning our children and our children's children to a truly disastrous situation.

Q: For so many people, that disastrous situation seems so big and so impossible to solve. Sometimes even I have fleeting feelings of hopelessness. Do you think people can be persuaded that global warming is a problem that can be addressed?
A: With just a little effort, we can do a tremendous amount to curb global warming. With a little more effort, we can achieve an extraordinary amount. Just think, we were able to mobilize ourselves to invade Iraq and we spend hundreds of billions of dollars doing it. If we mobilized our nation and spent an equal amount on global warming, we could make a tremendous amount of progress. It's not easy. But it's doable if we start now.
People should understand that if we don't do something now, lots of other conservation efforts will be moot. All the hard work we put into conserving habitats will be lost because those habitats will be changed by global warming. There's a lot of evidence that in the past animals have migrated with the climate, but that's not really doable any more. So that's a way in which an issue like habitat fragmentation and global warming come together in this absolutely potentially devastating way.

Q: We've been talking on a scientific and practical level. Doesn't global warming also resonate on a moral level?
A: I definitely think that global warming is a moral issue and I think that you see a lot of religious groups increasingly getting involved, some of the evangelical groups, some of the more mainstream Protestant and Jewish groups. And I've definitely gotten letters and read about people preaching on this subject and I think it's absolutely going to become, if it isn't yet, the moral issue of our times. And there's two reasons for that. First of all, if you care about the future, which supposedly we do, and for those of us who have children, preserving a world for them, well, then, clearly global warming is an overwhelming issue. And it also ties in with all sorts of issues of equity and poverty because as devastating as global warming will be for this country, and I unfortunately believe it will be quite devastating, it will obviously be worse for people living on the edge. If you're living on the edge, then a slight change in rainfall patterns can push you over the edge.

Q: I've recently read suggestions that the next major world war will be fought over water. What are your thoughts about that?
A: I don't want to claim expertise that I don't have about geopolitics and water availability because it is a complicated thing to predict. But one of the things that we know about global warming is that as temperatures rise, we get more evaporation so certain places will almost inevitably suffer from drought. Where those places exactly are located is hard to anticipate. Different models predict different things.
But in those areas where water is already scarce, it's not inconceivable that the problems will intensify -- for example, in the American West where growing cities depending on snow pack for their water may not have that source available 30 or 40 years from now if temperatures continue to rise. It could become a tremendous problem.

Q: How quickly will we feel the impact of global warming?
A: Well, on one level the answer is: we already are feeling the impacts. On another, no one can answer that. There's a quote in my book from Tony Blair that pretty much says it all:
"What is now plain is that the emission of greenhouse gases . . . is causing global warming at a rate that began as significant, has become alarming and is simply unsustainable in the long-term. And by long-term I do not mean centuries ahead. I mean within the lifetime of my children certainly; and possibly within my own. And by unsustainable, I do not mean a phenomenon causing problems of adjustment. I mean a challenge so far-reaching in its impact and irreversible in its destructive power, that it alters radically human existence."
History shows that the climate doesn't always change slowly; it actually can change fairly rapidly. What seems pretty certain is that there will be very noticeable changes by 2050-and some changes are likely to be very dramatic.

Q: Is there anything that you'd like say to wrap up?
A: I want to stress that people have gotten an unfortunately weird view of global warming by listening to various people perhaps purposefully confuse the issue. What was really revelatory to me, as one of those people who was by no means an expert -- and I still don't consider myself a scientific expert -- is that we're not talking about a speculative thing. The notion that you put more CO2 up there and you get a warmer world is not debatable at all. This has been understood for a century now. Global warming is real. The only debatable issue is how warm it will get. That's really the only question. And, yes, it's complicated but everything that we've learned has tended to support the conclusion that the effects will be quite significant. What people ought to know is that there's nothing that's been learned that suggests, "Oh, don't worry about this."

http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/ikolbert.asp

Discussion

In an interview by NRDC, Elizabeth Kolbert emphasized her intention to make the problem of global climate destabilization accessible to the public. In the past, she argues, climate science has been written and communicated largely in scientific terminology, a fact that was grossly abused by industries and lobbies, who tried to stir up public resentment towards action against climate change. Kolbert tried, by writing Field Notes from a Catastrophe, to arouse people’s interest and concern for the subject, by talking about real people and events and bringing them closer to the reader. What concerns her most is how inactive people are despite widespread scientific consensus. Her book is an effort to mobilize the masses to take action and demand change. It is a moral issue, she argues, which requires an immediate response, because the accelerating pace of change.

"Issues: Global Warming." Natural Resources Defense Council. 15 March 2006. NRDC: An Interview with Elizabeth Kolbert. 7 Aug 2008 .

Audiobook Review

Article

Audiobook Review: Field Notes from a Catastrophe by Elizabeth Kolbert
20th Jul 2006, 12:51 GMT


Elizabeth Kolbert's book Field Notes From a Catastrophe: Man, Nature and Climate Change originated in a series of articles for The New Yorker magazine, for which she received the American Association for the Advancement of Science's magazine writing award. With a clear, personable style, it's as entertaining as possible given the deeply disturbing conclusion: "It may seem impossible to imagine that a technologically advanced society could choose, in essence, to destroy itself, but that is what we are now in the process of doing." That she comes to this conclusion through no specific predictions of catastrophe - she's not making The Day After Tomorrow claims - but rather with devastatingly convincing proof that is widely accepted in the scientific community, makes an even more powerful statement. The unabridged audiobook, read by Hope Davis (The Matador, American Splendor), is refreshingly non-alarmist in tone while still being alarming in message. Kolbert, who was a science reporter with the New York Times before becoming a staff writer at The New Yorker, presents facts calmly and rationally, acknowledging gaps in our knowledge about climate change, but also clearly demonstrating that those gaps do not challenge the basic principal that carbon dioxide levels are rising, man is a huge contributor to those levels, the climate is changing because of it, and those changes have detrimental effects to species who cannot adapt to them. In the introduction, read by the author, she talks about Hurricane Katrina, which had struck shortly before the book was published. There had been speculation in the media about whether Katrina and Rita, another Category 5 hurricane that hit immediately afterwards, could be linked to global warming. Kolbert writes that while increased intensity of hurricanes is a symptom of climate change, no one hurricane can be blamed on the phenomenon. That even-handedness, combined with the dire underlying message, sets the tone for the book. She gives practical examples of what global warming means, not just in abstract terms of the world we're leaving for our descendants, but changes that are affecting people, animals, and the earth today. Two scientists she interviewed were the first to present evidence of genetic changes occurring as an adaptation to global warming in a mosquito. More compelling is the social adaptation residents of Shishmaref, Alaska may be forced to make, to relocate their community because rising ocean levels threaten to engulf their island home, or people in Fairbanks, when permafrost started to melt and destroyed homes built on top of it. The greater fear is that we will reach a threshold where the gradual climate changes will give way to more sudden consequences. Kolbert attended a symposium gathering 300 scientists, and went into the field with researchers in Alaska, Greenland, Iceland, and many other points. She always puts a human face on the scientists she encounters, with charming physical descriptions and biographical details. Through it all, she found no significant dissent to the climate change theory, other than in details. She did find reports denying the impact of increased greenhouse gases on our environment funded by the petroleum industry, or utility companies, for example. She laments that the public is not aware that there is consensus on climate change, having been led by some media, by industries with an interest in avoiding emission controls, and even by their own governments to believe there is significant dissent in the scientific community. In opposition to this view, she cites a study of peer-reviewed journal articles on climate change - over 900 articles between 1993 and 2003. Of these, 75 percent supported the position that emissions caused by humans... were responsible for at least some of the observed warming of the past 50 years. The remaining 25 percent, which dealt with questions of methodology or climate history, took no position on current conditions. Not a single article disputed the premise. The book has a remarkably unbiased tone despite Kolbert's obvious point of view. The final chapter, where she talks about the Bush administration's response to the Kyoto Protocol, is the most she editorializes, and even then, it's hard to argue with her conclusions when she presents quotes to demonstrate the baffling lack of content in the Bush administration's arguments against Kyoto and similar efforts to curb carbon dioxide emissions, and for their own vague plans. She points out that while American scientists have been the major contributors to our knowledge that human activity is contributing to global warming, the American government has been the major stumbling block in achieving any meaningful action towards mitigating the harm. She highlights cases where the administration altered reports by their own scientists to downplay the dangers of climate change. Even in this chapter, she explores the limitations of Kyoto and other agreements, but she makes convincing arguments against the United States' objections. Unfortunately it's difficult not to come away with a sense of futility after listening to Field Notes. The hope must be that this book and other sources of knowledge about the issue will eventually provoke the public to spur governments into action. But there is no simple solution to reducing the levels of greenhouse gases, even if the political will existed. She profiles the town of Burlington, Vermont, which enacted several successful strategies but has still seen its levels of carbon dioxide emissions rise - though more slowly than they otherwise would have. She presents information by various scientists about the complex, multiple ways the problem must be addressed. She demonstrates that without the United States' and China's cooperation, the rest of the world has little hope of making much of a dent. Still, Kobler brings the voice of science to a broader audience, who at least can be armed with facts against some of the political spin surrounding the issue, and at best can be motivated to act. Field Notes From a Catastrophe: Man, Nature and Climate Change is available unabridged on five compact discs, including one enhanced CD with supplementary illustrations in an 8MB PDF, or as an eAudio download from Simon and Schuster's audiobook website, SimonSays, where you can also hear a clip and listen to a podcast about the book. Diane is a writer, editor, and web communications consultant with an unreasonable affection for the entertainment industry, which she tends to write about in her blog. She writes an awful lot about House . Plus an exchange on Blogcritics inspired her to create a site to promote Canadian television.

http://www.feedsfarm.com/article/a095dd68817db08c2a8903837065dd0a98fc1e04.html

Discussion

Field Notes from a Catastrophe originated from a series of articles that Elizabeth Kolbert wrote for the New Yorker magazine and for which she was awarded the Advancement of Science’s magazine writing award. The purpose of the book is to make it clear that the scientific community is in consent about the serious nature of the problem of human-induced global climate destabilization and that despite small uncertainties, action can be taken to prevent the a catastrophe from achieving its full potential. To illustrate her argument, she uses a wide array of examples and details the source of each piece of information that she gathered, in order to emphasize the credibility of the information itself. She does this also partly to disprove claims in the media of there not being a general scientific consensus on climate change and to inform the public of the forces, which spread such claims, such as the fossil fuel lobby and the Bush Administration. Despite this attitude, her work is largely unbiased and presents a multitude of viewpoints on the subject. Nevertheless, she encourages a spirit of action on the behalf of all.

"Audiobook Review: Field Notes from a Catastrophe by Elizabeth Kolbert." FeedsFarm.com. 20 July 2006. Audiobook Review: Field Notes from a Catastrophe by Elizabeth Kolbert. 7 Aug 2008 .

Links to Accessible Articles from Selected Articles on Field Notes from a Catastrophe

Here is a selection of links to articles related to Field Notes from a Catastrophe, by Elizabeth Kolbert. The selection below includes all articles that are accessible online. Futher articles, summarized in the "Selected Articles on Field Notes from a Catastrophe" post, are found either in printed format or they require a password for access.

http://www.feedsfarm.com/article/a095dd68817db08c2a8903837065dd0a98fc1e04.html

http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/ikolbert.asp

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/16/books/16gosn.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2007/aug/12/scienceandnature.features

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19131

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19131

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article676733.ece

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/19/ethicalliving.g2

One-Page Summary of Field Notes from a Catastrophe



Elizabeth Kolbert’s Field Notes from a Catastrophe is intended to be a device of communication between the scientific community and the public, explaining the nature of climate change, the possible options of mitigation, and the reasons why these measures have thus far not been effectively enforced. Kolbert argues that the scientific consensus on climate change is firm, long-present, and based on sound research. Current signs of warming are daunting and predictions are even worse. Yet, despite our knowledge on the subject and our options for mitigation, we remain largely inactive and that mostly because of a small group of elite fossil fuel-related businesses, which enjoy great power and influence over the government of the United States, the world’s greatest emitter of greenhouse gases. Climate change can only successfully be contained by international cooperation, which was made difficult by the withdrawal of the United States from the Kyoto Protocol. It was achieved through lobbying efforts by the Global Climate Coalition, among others, including Chevron, Chrysler, ExxonMobil, Ford, General Motors, Shell, and Texaco, which spent roughly $13 million on an anti-Kyoto advertising campaign. Its goal was to discredit the science behind the protocol, which would have subjected said companies to binding emissions reductions and thus harming their businesses. Ever since, the Bush administration, itself a staunch supporter of this attitude, has repeatedly tried to suppress notions to the contrary and to spread the point of views that there exists no consensus among scientists on the matter and that policy should therefore not be built on an unstable foundation. Scientific consensus, however, is firm and well-supported by organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and many others. Observations of the link between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change date as far back as the 1850s, with the work of John Tyndall and Svante Arrhenius. Global temperatures over past millennia have since been explored, for example, by analyzing ice records and precise future predictions have been made using sophisticated climate models such as the Goddard Institute’s ModelE. The forecasts look demoralizing and even contemporary signs of warming can no longer be denied. Glaciers across the globe and the polar ice caps are melting at accelerating rates. The latter is responsible for the rise in sea levels, which threatens many coastal areas with flooding, while oceans are warming up and becoming more acidic. This is likely to raise the frequency and intensity of hurricanes. Further, permafrost is melting, the severity of forest fires is increasing and species are forced to adapt by migrating by the threat of extinction. Changing precipitation patterns due to climate change have previously caused the collapse of entire civilizations before. The Akkadian Empire, the Classic Mayan Civilization, the Tiwanaku Civilization, and the Old Kingdom of Egypt have all met this fate. Today, however, we do not attribute global climate destabilization to moods of the gods. We are in a position, in which we are not only knowledgeable about the problem we are facing, but also able to act against it. Robert Socolow and Stephen Pacala, for example, argue that only 15 “stabilization wedges”, as they call them, are needed to prevent one billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from being emitted by 2054. These include the widespread harnessing of solar, wind, and nuclear energies, and reductions in the use of light and heating appliances as well as in the driving of automobiles. Further, carbon capture and storage methods should be introduced and carbon credit trading and carbon taxation should be encouraged. Combined, efforts like these can greatly alter the course of global temperatures, but only if internationally enforced. Kolbert stresses that there are no valid reasons, why the international community should not start countering climate change immediately. The only obstacle is the propaganda spread by influential lobbying groups, which does not outweigh the scientific evidence that predicts the formation of a global catastrophe.