Suchergebnisse

The fabric of a city represents a transformation of raw geological materials into a complex assemblage of new, human-made minerals and rocks such as steel, glass, plastics, concrete, brick, and ceramics. This activity has been considered in terms of an "urban metabolism," with day-to-day inflows and outflows of people, food, water, and waste materials. Here we adopt a longer time-scale spanning years to millennia, related to geological time-scales but still meaningful for present and future generations of humans, and consider cities as sedimentary systems. In natural sedimentary systems, flows of materials are governed by natural forces such as climate and gravity, and leave physical records in, for instance, river-strata. In cities, the flows of geological materials needed for construction and reconstruction are directed by humans, and are largely powered by the fossil energy stored in hydrocarbons rather than by gravity or the sun. The resultant assemblages of anthropogenic rocks and minerals may be thought of as sedimentary (and/or trace-fossil) systems that can undergo fossilization and now exist on a planetary scale. Far more diverse than natural geological strata, they are also evolving much more rapidly, not least in terms of their growing waste products. Considering cities through such a perspective may become increasingly useful as they come to be influenced by, and need to adapt to, the changing conditions of the emerging Anthropocene epoch.

RésuméLe tissu d'une ville correspond à une transformation de matériaux géologiques bruts en un assemblage complexe de nouveaux minéraux, fabriqués par des humains, et de roches, telles que l'acier, le verre, le plastique, le béton, la brique et la céramique. Cette activité est considérée en termes de « métabolisme urbain », avec des afflux et des flux quotidiens de personnes, de nourriture, d'eau et de déchets. Empruntée aux temps géologiques, une échelle de temps plus longue, de quelques années au millénaire, est adoptée ; elle reste pertinente pour le présent et les générations humaines futures. Dans les systèmes sédimentaires naturels, les flux de matériaux sont gouvernés par des forces naturelles, comme le climat et la gravité, et ils laissent des traces physiques dans les strates des rivières. Dans les villes, les flux de matériaux géologiques nécessaires à les construire et à les reconstruire sont réalisés par les humains et sont largement produits par les énergies fossiles stockées dans les hydrocarbures. Les assemblages de roches anthropogéniques et de minéraux qui en résultent peuvent être pensés comme des systèmes sédimentaires (et/ou des traces fossiles), fossilisables, à l'échelle de la planète. Extrêmement plus diversifiés que les strates géologiques naturelles, ils évoluent aussi bien plus rapidement, notamment en ce qui concerne les déchets. Considérer les villes par le biais d'une telle perspective peut devenir de plus en plus utile, compte tenu de leur nécessaire adaptation aux conditions changeantes de l'époque émergente, l'Anthropocène.

This title explores the abundance and complexity of life on Earth, which-as we discover more of other planets-appears as a true oasis in the cosmos. Despite its diversity, life forms little more than a veneer on the planet, albeit one that has hugely influenced its climate and environment. Earth and its biosphere have profoundly changed through more than four billion years of time, undergoing a succession of transformations. Now, we are living through the latest of these, in which humans have become extraordinarily numerous at the expense of other living creatures, not least our kindred ape species that are in severe decline. A critical development is the technology upon which advanced human societies utterly depend, from which has emerged a technosphere that now rivals the biosphere in scale and power, and that is evolving with terrific speed. Among its unwanted side-effects are enormous and ongoing changes to the atmosphere, climate, land, and cycling of key elements for life. The biosphere is on the cusp of another transformation, and this book concludes by exploring ways in which we can influence this process for the better.

"The Anthropocene, a term launched into public debate by Nobel Prize winner Paul Crutzen, has been used informally to describe the time period during which human actions have had a drastic effect on the Earth and its ecosystems."--

"Atlas, dans la mythologie, représente un géant capable de tenir la Terre sur ses épaules sans en être écrasé. Mais quand Gérard Mercator publie en 1538 ce qu'il décide d'appeler un Atlas, le rapport des forces s'est complètement inversé : un "Atlas" est un ensemble de planches, imprimées sur du papier, quelque chose que l'on feuillette et que le cartographe tient dans sa main ; ce n'est plus la Terre que l'on a sur le dos et qui nous écrase, mais la Terre que l'on domine, que l'on possède et que l'on maîtrise totalement. Près de cinq siècles après, voilà que la situation s'inverse à nouveau : paraît un "Atlas" qui permet aux lecteurs de comprendre pourquoi il est tout à fait vain de prétendre dominer, maîtriser, posséder la Terre, et que le seul résultat de cette idée folle, c'est de risquer de se trouver écrasé par Celle que personne ne peut porter sur ses épaules", Bruno Latour. Changement climatique, érosion de la biodiversité, évolution démographique, urbanisation, pollution atmosphérique, détérioration des sols, catastrophes naturelles, accidents industriels, crises sanitaires, mobilisations sociales, sommets internationaux... Voici le premier atlas réunissant l'ensemble des données sur la crise écologique de notre temps."--Page 4 de la couverture

Frontmatter -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS -- 1. Nature and Value -- 2. The Human Shadow -- 3. The Anthropocene and Global Warming: A Brief Update -- 4. The Extraordinary Strata of the Anthropocene -- 5. The Anthropocene Dating Problem: Disciplinary Misalignments, Paradigm Shifts, and the Possibility for New Foundations in Science -- 6. Disciplinary Variations on the Anthropocene: Temporality and Epistemic Authority. Response to Kyle Nichols and Bina Gogineni -- 7. Value and Alienation: A Revisionist Essay on Our Political Ideals -- 8. Equality and Liberty: Beyond a Boundary. Response to Akeel Bilgrami -- 9. Experimenting with Other People -- 10. The Green Growth Path to Climate Stabilization -- 11. All Too Human: Orienting Environmental Law in a Remade World -- 12. Life Sustains Life 1: Value, Social and Ecological -- 13. Life Sustains Life 2: The Ways of Reengagement with the Living Earth -- 14. The Value of Sustainability and the Sustainability of Value -- 15. Varieties of Agency: Comment on Anthony Laden -- 16. Nonhuman Agency and Human Normativity -- 17. Natural Piety and Human Responsibility -- CONTRIBUTORS -- INDEX

A range of published arguments against formalizing the Anthropocene as a geological time unit have variously suggested that it is a misleading term of non-stratigraphic origin and usage, is based on insignificant temporal and material stratigraphic content unlike that used to define older geological time units, is focused on observation of human history or speculation about the future rather than geologically significant events, and is driven more by politics than science. In response, we contend that the Anthropocene is a functional term that has firm geological grounding in a well-characterized stratigraphic record. This record, although often lithologically thin, is laterally extensive, rich in detail and already reflects substantial elapsed (and in part irreversible) change to the Earth System that is comparable to or greater in magnitude than that of previous epoch-scale transitions. The Anthropocene differs from previously defined epochs in reflecting contemporary geological change, which in turn also leads to the term's use over a wide range of social and political discourse. Nevertheless, that use remains entirely distinct from its demonstrable stratigraphic underpinning. Here we respond to the arguments opposing the geological validity and utility of the Anthropocene, and submit that a strong case may be made for the Anthropocene to be treated as a formal chronostratigraphic unit and added to the Geological Time Scale.

A range of published arguments against formalizing the Anthropocene as a geological time unit have variously suggested that it is a misleading term of non-stratigraphic origin and usage, is based on insignificant temporal and material stratigraphic content unlike that used to define older geological time units, is focused on observation of human history or speculation about the future rather than geologically significant events, and is driven more by politics than science. In response, we contend that the Anthropocene is a functional term that has firm geological grounding in a well-characterized stratigraphic record. This record, although often lithologically thin, is laterally extensive, rich in detail and already reflects substantial elapsed (and in part irreversible) change to the Earth System that is comparable to or greater in magnitude than that of previous epoch-scale transitions. The Anthropocene differs from previously defined epochs in reflecting contemporary geological change, which in turn also leads to the term's use over a wide range of social and political discourse. Nevertheless, that use remains entirely distinct from its demonstrable stratigraphic underpinning. Here we respond to the arguments opposing the geological validity and utility of the Anthropocene, and submit that a strong case may be made for the Anthropocene to be treated as a formal chronostratigraphic unit and added to the Geological Time Scale.