The Dilemma of Rapid Change

For those aged 34 and above, the environmental damage incurred during their lifetime surpasses all that occurred prior. Since 1990 — the year the Hubble Space Telescope launched and the year after Seinfeld debuted — humanity has emitted more carbon than in all recorded history before that point. For individuals over 34, this time frame seems remarkably short.

The majority of carbon emissions in these years stem from fossil fuel combustion, which are remnants of ancient organic matter.

During the Carboniferous Period, roughly 300 million years ago, vast swampy forests thrived in what is now Europe and North America. When these plants died, they often didn't decompose fully; instead, their carbon became trapped in sediment layers. Over eons, this organic material transformed into peat and eventually compressed into coal. Similarly, oil, formed from minute organisms like algae that sank in warm oceans, underwent analogous processes. While coal is around 300 million years old, oil is slightly younger, aged between 100 to 200 million years.

Each year, humanity burns approximately 8 billion tons of coal and 4 billion tons of oil, releasing carbon that was sequestered over millions of years in mere moments. This stark contrast between the slow formation of fossil fuels and the rapid consumption of that carbon has disrupted Earth's ecological balance.

The speed of these processes is crucial in devising climate solutions, not just for weathering rocks but in broader contexts. While human ingenuity strives to cut carbon emissions and extract carbon from the atmosphere, the pressing question remains: will these efforts occur swiftly enough?

Many capitalists assert that market forces will resolve our dilemmas, with self-interested entrepreneurs expanding our electric grids and renewable energy sources. On the flip side, numerous environmental advocates call for government intervention to hasten these market dynamics through incentives or regulations. Yet both markets and governments are often sluggish and inefficient; can they act quickly enough to prevent severe climate consequences?

Simultaneously, the repercussions of climate change are unfolding at a rapid pace, contrary to our desire for them to slow down. The Earth's climate has historically undergone shifts, and while gradual changes allow life to adapt, the current pace of warming is unprecedented—ten times faster than would occur following an ice age. This accelerated change leaves species and human societies struggling to cope, whether it's entire communities vanishing in a few years or habitats evolving so quickly that species face extinction before they can adapt.

The Challenge of Comprehending Slow Change

A significant hurdle in addressing climate change is humanity's inability to grasp the lengthy time scales involved. Concepts like 300 million years are beyond our cognitive reach. Our minds are wired to comprehend days, weeks, and years, rather than centuries or millennia.

Ultimately, the Earth will endure. It has rebounded from past mass extinctions and extreme temperature fluctuations, and it will do so again. In a hundred million years, humans may no longer exist, alongside many current species, but life will likely flourish in new and familiar forms—bacteria, for example, will thrive regardless.

However, few of us think in terms of such extended time horizons.

When discussing climate change impacts, we often reference dates that seem distant yet are alarmingly close. Many projections look toward 2100, with warnings that global temperatures could rise by 2 to 3 degrees Celsius by the century's end.

Yet, many people reading this will not be alive in 2100. My hypothetical grandchildren may be, but the challenge lies in our ability to care about such future generations. It's inherently difficult for our minds to prioritize gradual, long-term issues over immediate crises that demand urgent attention.

We tend to prioritize rapid developments over slow-moving ones. While climate change is accelerating on a geological scale, it progresses relatively slowly on a human timeline—perhaps too slowly to capture our attention.

Our success in confronting climate change depends on our ability to navigate the dynamics of speed. Can we accelerate the slow processes essential for addressing this crisis? Can we decelerate the alarming pace of climate change? And can we train our minds, attuned to short-term thinking, to expand our perspective toward the slower timelines that matter?

Thank you for reading! If you'd like to receive updates when I publish new articles, click here. I also write a newsletter called Looking Through the Past, which delves into historical artifacts and images—check it out! You can also support my work by "buying me a cup of coffee" here.