essay on the climate crisis

List: 15 essential reads for the climate crisis

Share this idea.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

We — Ayana Elizabeth Johnson and Katharine Wilkinson — are climate experts who focus on solutions, leadership and building community.

We are a natural and a social scientist, a Northerner and a Southerner. We’re also both lifelong interdisciplinarians in love with words and the cofounders of The All We Can Save Project , in support of women climate leaders.

Our collaboration has led us to read widely and deeply about the climate crisis that’s facing humanity. Here are 15 of our favorite writings on climate — this eclectic list contains books, essays, a newsletter, a scientific paper, even legislation and they’re all ones we wholeheartedly recommend.

All We Can Save: Truth, Courage, and Solutions for the Climate Crisis coedited by Ayana Elizabeth Johnson and Katharine Wilkinson

We had the honor of editing this collection of 41 essays, 17 poems, quotes and original illustrations — so naturally we love it! But you don’t have to take our word for it. As Rolling Stone said : “Taken together, the breadth of their voices forms a mosaic that honors the complexity of the climate crisis like few, if any, books on the topic have done yet. … The book is a feast of ideas and perspectives, setting a big table for the climate movement, declaring all are welcome.” All We Can Save nourished, educated and transformed us as we shaped its pages, and we can’t wait for it to do the same for you.

Ghost Fishing: An Eco-justice Poetry Anthology edited by Melissa Tuckey

We count ourselves among those who can’t make sense of the climate crisis without the aid of poets, who help us to see more clearly, feel our feelings, catch our breath, and know we’re not alone. This anthology is a magnificent quilt of poems that are made for this moment and all its intersections.

“We Don’t Have to Halt Climate Action to Fight Racism” by Mary Annaïse Heglar

“Climate People,” as she likes to call us, should be grateful that Mary Annaïse Heglar decided a few years back to pick up her pen once more as a writer. All of her essays are necessary reading, but this one is especially so, crafted from Mary’s perspective as a “Black Climate Person.” It’s a powerful articulation of the inextricability of a society that values Black lives and a livable planet for all.

Sacred Instructions: Indigenous Wisdom for Living Spirit-Based Change by Sherri Mitchell — Weh’na Ha’mu Kwasset

Weh’na Ha’mu Kwasset means “she who brings the light,” and Sherri Mitchell does exactly that in this incredible tapestry of a book, which begins with Penawahpskek Nation creation stories and concludes with guidance on what it means to live in a time of prophecy. It is rare that a book so generously shares wisdom, much less wisdom about how we got to where we are, what needs mending, and what a path forward that’s grounded in ancestral ways of knowing and being might look like.

Emergent Strategy: Shaping Change, Changing Worlds by adrienne maree brown

How lucky are we to be contemporaries of adrienne maree brown? Very. This is a book that we come back to time and time again to ground and enliven our work. We love this line from her about oak trees: “Under the earth, always, they reach for each other, they grow such that their roots are intertwined and create a system of strength that is as resilient on a sunny day as it is in a hurricane.” That’s the kind of community we’re trying to nurture.

“Circumstances Affecting the Heat of the Sun’s Rays” by Eunice Newton Foote

Eunice Newton Foote rarely gets the credit she’s due — and she deserves a lot of credit. In fact, we like to think of her as the first climate feminist. In 1856, she connected the dots between carbon dioxide and planetary warming, but science and history forgot (dismissed?) her until recently. This is her original paper, which was published in The American Journal of Science and Arts . Foote was also a signatory to the women’s rights manifesto created at Seneca Falls in 1848, alongside visionaries like Frederick Douglass.

The Drawdown Review by Project Drawdown

Full disclosure: Katharine is The Drawdown Review’ s editor-in-chief and principal writer. But Ayana fully endorses this recommendation — it’s a valuable resource as we charge ahead toward climate solutions. We all need to know what tools are in the toolbox, and The Drawdown Review is the latest compendium of climate solutions that already exist. This publication is beautifully designed, grounded in research, and you can access it for free.

The Green New Deal Resolution by the 116th US Congress

It seems that almost everyone has an opinion about the Green New Deal, but few people have read the actual piece of legislation: House Resolution 109: Recognizing the Duty of the Federal Government to Create a Green New Deal, which was introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey. The big secret is that it’s only 14 pages! It makes a clear, compelling and concise case for what comprehensive climate policy should look like in the US. We’d love for everyone to read it so we can all have a more grounded discussion about what we might agree and disagree with and chart a course forward.

“Think This Pandemic Is Bad? We Have Another Crisis Coming” by Rhiana Gunn-Wright

Speaking of policy … this op-ed , penned by Rhiana Gunn-Wright, who is one of the policy leads for the Green New Deal, makes the connections between climate, justice, COVID-19 and our recession as clear as day. She lays out an ironclad case for the the need to address these issues together, and why. As she writes, “We need to design the stimulus not only to help the US economy recover but to also become more resilient to the climate crisis, the next multitrillion-dollar crisis headed our way.”

“How Can We Plan for a Future in California?” by Leah Stokes

In the midst of raging fires and continuing pandemic, UC Santa Barbara Professor Leah Stokes, who’s based in Santa Barbara, lays it plain in her piece : “I don’t want to live in a world where we have to decide which mask to wear for which disaster, but this is the world we are making. And we’ve only started to alter the climate. Imagine what it will be like when we’ve doubled or tripled the warming, as we are on track to do.” As she and others have been pointing out, journalists have been failing to make the critical connection: “What’s happening in California has a name: climate change.”

HEATED by Emily Atkin

This is the reading rec that keeps on giving, literally — it’s a daily newsletter that brings climate accountability journalism right to your inbox. It’s chock full of smarts, spunk, truth-telling and super timely writing that isn’t hemmed in by media overlords. If you’re pissed off about the climate crisis, Emily Atkin made HEATED just for you.

The July 20 2020 Issue of TIME Magazine

This entire issue, titled “One Last Chance”, is dedicated to coverage of climate, and it includes wise words from so many luminaries from politician Stacey Abrams to soil scientist Asmeret Asefaw Berhe , with a lead piece by Time ’s climate journalist Justin Worland. Ayana also has a piece in this issue called “ We Can’t Solve the Climate Crisis Unless Black Lives Matter .” To see all of this collected in one place — insights on topics from oceans to agriculture to politics to activism — was heartening. We hope there’s much more of this to come, from many magazines.

“Wakanda Doesn’t Have Suburbs” by Kendra Pierre Louis

A pop-culture connoisseur and expert storyteller, Kendra Pierre Louis takes up the topic of climate stories in her essay — the good, the bad, and the ugly. The good, she explains, are all too rare, and that’s a big problem because stories are powerful. Black Panther may be our best story of living thoughtfully and well on this planet, not least thanks to an absence of carbon-spewing suburbs. It’s going to take much better narratives, and many more of them, if humans are to, as she puts it, “repair our relationship with the Earth and re-envision our societies in ways that are not just in keeping with our ecosystems but also make our lives better.” !

“We Need Courage, Not Hope, to Face Climate Change” by Kate Marvel PhD

This piece by NASA climate scientist Kate Marvel is, as the kids say, a whole mood. Hope is not enough, hope is often passive, and that won’t get us where we need to go. Pretty much everyone who works on climate is constantly being asked what gives us hope — how presumptuous to assume we have it! But what we do have is courage. In spades. As Marvel writes in this poetic piece: “We need courage, not hope. Grief, after all, is the cost of being alive. We are all fated to live lives shot through with sadness, and are not worth less for it. Courage is the resolve to do well without the assurance of a happy ending.”

Truth, Courage, and Solutions for the Climate Crisis

Admittedly, this last recommendation isn’t something to read, but to watch and listen to. This playlist of TED Talks by women climate leaders (who were all contributors to our anthology All We Can Save — read about it above) will inspire you, deepen your understanding, connect the dots and help you find where you might fit into the heaps of climate work that needs doing. It includes poignant talks by Colette Pichon Battle and Christine Nieves Rodriguez , which are respectively about communities in Louisiana and Puerto Rico recovering from hurricanes and rebuilding resilience and which broke our hearts open. We were so moved we invited them to adapt their talks into essays for All We Can Save . Christine’s piece — “Community is Our Best Chance” — is the final essay in the book and the note we want to end on here. It’s not about what each of us can do as individuals to address the climate crisis; it’s about what we can do together . Building community around solutions is the most important thing.

Watch Ayana Elizabeth Johnson’s TED Talk here: 

Watch Katharine Wilkinson’s TED Talk here: 

About the authors

Ayana Elizabeth Johnson PhD is a marine biologist, policy expert and Brooklyn native. She is founder of the nonprofit think tank Urban Ocean Lab, founder and CEO of the consultancy Ocean Collectiv and cocreator and cohost of the Spotify/Gimlet podcast How to Save a Planet. She coedited the anthology All We Can Save and cofounded The All We Can Save Project in support of women climate leaders. Her mission is to build community around climate solutions. Find her @ayanaeliza.

Katharine Wilkinson PhD is an author, strategist, teacher and one of 15 “women who will save the world,” according to Time magazine. Her writings on climate include The Drawdown Review, the New York Times bestseller Drawdown and Between God & Green. She is coeditor of All We Can Save and co founder of The All We Can Save Project, in support of women climate leaders. Wilkinson is a former Rhodes Scholar. Find her @DrKWilkinson.

• ayana elizabeth johnson
• climate change
• katharine wilkinson
• reading list
• society and culture

TED Talk of the Day

How to make radical climate action the new normal

6 ways to give that aren't about money

A smart way to handle anxiety -- courtesy of soccer great Lionel Messi

How do top athletes get into the zone? By getting uncomfortable

6 things people do around the world to slow down

Creating a contract -- yes, a contract! -- could help you get what you want from your relationship

Could your life story use an update? Here’s how to do it 

6 tips to help you be a better human now

How to have better conversations on social media (really!)

3 strategies for effective leadership, from a former astronaut

9 youth climate activists from around the world share their book and podcast picks

How to talk honestly to kids about climate change -- and still give them hope

Here's how your climate-related choices are contagious (in a good way!)

Jane Fonda: Why women are at the forefront of climate solutions

Science News

Abdulhamid Hosbas/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Century of Science: Theme

Our climate change crisis

The climate change emergency.

Even in a world increasingly battered by weather extremes, the summer 2021 heat wave in the Pacific Northwest stood out. For several days in late June, cities such as Vancouver, Portland and Seattle baked in record temperatures that killed hundreds of people. On June 29 Lytton, a village in British Columbia, set an all-time heat record for Canada, at 121° Fahrenheit (49.6° Celsius); the next day, the village was incinerated by a wildfire.

Within a week, an international group of scientists had analyzed this extreme heat and concluded it would have been virtually impossible without climate change caused by humans. The planet’s average surface temperature has risen by at least 1.1 degree Celsius since preindustrial levels of 1850–1900 — because people are loading the atmosphere with heat-trapping gases produced during the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and gas, and from cutting down forests.

A little over 1 degree of warming may not sound like a lot. But it has already been enough to fundamentally transform how energy flows around the planet. The pace of change is accelerating, and the consequences are everywhere. Ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting, raising sea levels and flooding low-lying island nations and coastal cities. Drought is parching farmlands and the rivers that feed them. Wildfires are raging. Rains are becoming more intense, and weather patterns are shifting .

The roots of understanding this climate emergency trace back more than a century and a half. But it wasn’t until the 1950s that scientists began the detailed measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide that would prove how much carbon is pouring from human activities. Beginning in the 1960s, researchers began developing comprehensive computer models that now illuminate the severity of the changes ahead.

Global average temperature change, 1850–2021

Long-term climate datasets show that Earth’s average surface temperature (combined land and ocean) has increased by more than 1 degree Celsius since preindustrial times. Temperature change is the difference from the 1850–1900 average.

Today we know that climate change and its consequences are real, and we are responsible. The emissions that people have been putting into the air for centuries — the emissions that made long-distance travel, economic growth and our material lives possible — have put us squarely on a warming trajectory . Only drastic cuts in carbon emissions, backed by collective global will, can make a significant difference.

“What’s happening to the planet is not routine,” says Ralph Keeling, a geochemist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif. “We’re in a planetary crisis.” — Alexandra Witze

Tracking a Greenland glacier

The calving front of Greenland’s Helheim Glacier, which flows toward the sea where it crumbles into icebergs, held roughly the same position from the 1970s until 2001 (left, the calving front is to the far right of the image). But by 2005 (right), it had retreated 7.5 kilometers toward its source. 

The first climate scientists

One day in the 1850s, Eunice Newton Foote, an amateur scientist and women’s rights activist living in upstate New York, put two glass jars in sunlight. One contained regular air — a mix of nitrogen, oxygen and other gases including carbon dioxide — while the other contained just CO 2 . Both had thermometers in them. As the sun’s rays beat down, Foote observed that the jar of CO 2 alone heated more quickly, and was slower to cool, than the one containing plain air.

The results prompted Foote to muse on the relationship between CO 2 , the planet and heat. “An atmosphere of that gas would give to our earth a high temperature,” she wrote in an 1856 paper summarizing her findings .

Three years later, working independently and apparently unaware of Foote’s discovery, Irish physicist John Tyndall showed the same basic idea in more detail. With a set of pipes and devices to study the transmission of heat, he found that CO 2 gas, as well as water vapor, absorbed more heat than air alone. He argued that such gases would trap heat in Earth’s atmosphere, much as panes of glass trap heat in a greenhouse, and thus modulate climate. “As a dam built across a river causes a local deepening of the stream, so our atmosphere, thrown as a barrier across the terrestrial rays, produces a local heightening of the temperature at the Earth’s surface,” he wrote in 1862.

Today Tyndall is widely credited with the discovery of how what are now called greenhouse gases heat the planet, earning him a prominent place in the history of climate science. Foote faded into relative obscurity — partly because of her gender, partly because her measurements were less sensitive. Yet their findings helped kick off broader scientific exploration of how the composition of gases in Earth’s atmosphere affects global temperatures.

Carbon floods in

Humans began substantially affecting the atmosphere around the turn of the 19th century, when the Industrial Revolution took off in Britain. Factories burned tons of coal; fueled by fossil fuels, the steam engine revolutionized transportation and other industries. In the decades since, fossil fuels including oil and natural gas have been harnessed to drive a global economy. All these activities belch gases into the air.

Yet Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish physical chemist, wasn’t worried about the Industrial Revolution when he began thinking in the late 1800s about changes in atmospheric CO 2 levels. He was instead curious about ice ages — including whether a decrease in volcanic eruptions, which can put CO 2 into the atmosphere, would lead to a future ice age. Bored and lonely in the wake of a divorce, Arrhenius set himself to months of laborious calculations involving moisture and heat transport in the atmosphere at different zones of latitude. In 1896 he reported that halving the amount of CO 2 in the atmosphere could indeed bring about an ice age — and that doubling CO 2 would raise global temperatures by around 5 to 6 degrees C.

It was a remarkably prescient finding for work that, out of necessity, had simplified Earth’s complex climate system down to just a few variables. Today, estimates for how much the planet will warm through a doubling of CO 2 — a measure known as climate sensitivity — range between 1.5 degrees and 4.5 degrees Celsius. (The range remains broad in part because scientists now incorporate their understanding of many more planetary feedbacks than were recognized in Arrhenius’ day.)  

But Arrhenius’ findings didn’t gain much traction with other scientists at the time. The climate system seemed too large, complex and inert to change in any meaningful way on a timescale that would be relevant to human society. Geologic evidence showed, for instance, that ice ages took thousands of years to start and end. What was there to worry about? And other laboratory experiments — later shown to be flawed — appeared to indicate that changing levels of CO 2 would have little impact on heat absorption in the atmosphere. Most scientists aware of the work came to believe that Arrhenius had been proved wrong.

One researcher, though, thought the idea was worth pursuing. Guy Stewart Callendar, a British engineer and amateur meteorologist, had tallied weather records over time, obsessively enough to determine that average temperatures were increasing at 147 weather stations around the globe. In 1938, in a paper in a Royal Meteorological Society journal , he linked this temperature rise to the burning of fossil fuels. Callendar estimated that fossil fuel burning had put around 150 billion metric tons of CO 2 into the atmosphere since the late 19th century.

Like many of his day, Callendar didn’t see global warming as a problem. Extra CO 2 would surely stimulate plants to grow and allow crops to be farmed in new regions. “In any case the return of the deadly glaciers should be delayed indefinitely,” he wrote. But his work revived discussions tracing back to Tyndall and Arrhenius about how the planetary system responds to changing levels of gases in the atmosphere. And it began steering the conversation toward how human activities might drive those changes.

When World War II broke out the following year, the global conflict redrew the landscape for scientific research. Hugely important wartime technologies, such as radar and the atomic bomb, set the stage for “big science” studies that brought nations together to tackle high-stakes questions of global reach. And that allowed modern climate science to emerge.

The Keeling curve and climate change

One major postwar effort was the International Geophysical Year, an 18-month push in 1957–1958 that involved a wide array of scientific field campaigns including exploration in the Arctic and Antarctica. Climate change wasn’t a high research priority during the IGY, but some scientists in California, led by Roger Revelle of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, used the funding influx to begin a project they’d long wanted to do. The goal was to measure CO 2 levels at different locations around the world, accurately and consistently.

The job fell to geochemist Charles David Keeling, who put ultraprecise CO 2 monitors in Antarctica and on the Hawaiian volcano of Mauna Loa. Funds soon ran out to maintain the Antarctic record, but the Mauna Loa measurements continued. Thus was born one of the most iconic datasets in all of science — the “Keeling curve,” which tracks the rise of atmospheric CO 2 . When Keeling began his measurements in 1958, CO 2 made up 315 parts per million of the global atmosphere. Within just a few years it became clear that the number was increasing year by year. Because plants take up CO 2 as they grow in spring and summer and release it as they decompose in fall and winter, CO 2 concentrations rose and fell each year in a sawtooth pattern — but superimposed on that pattern was a steady march upward.  

Monthly average CO 2 concentrations at Mauna Loa Observatory

Atmospheric carbon dioxide measurements collected continuously since 1958 at Mauna Loa volcano in Hawaii show the rise due to human activities. The visible sawtooth pattern is due to seasonal plant growth: Plants take up CO 2 in the growing seasons, then release it as they decompose in fall and winter.

“The graph got flashed all over the place — it was just such a striking image,” says Ralph Keeling, who is Charles David Keeling’s son. Over the years, as the curve marched higher, “it had a really important role historically in waking people up to the problem of climate change.” The Keeling curve has been featured in countless earth science textbooks, congressional hearings and in Al Gore’s 2006 documentary on climate change, An Inconvenient Truth . Each year the curve keeps going up: In 2016 it passed 400 ppm of CO 2 in the atmosphere, as measured during its typical annual minimum in September. In 2021, the annual minimum was 413 ppm. (Before the Industrial Revolution, CO 2 levels in the atmosphere had been stable for centuries at around 280 ppm.)

Around the time that Keeling’s measurements were kicking off, Revelle also helped develop an important argument that the CO 2 from human activities was building up in Earth’s atmosphere. In 1957 he and Hans Suess, also at Scripps at the time, published a paper that traced the flow of radioactive carbon through the oceans and the atmosphere. They showed that the oceans were not capable of taking up as much CO 2 as previously thought; the implication was that much of the gas must be going into the atmosphere instead. “Human beings are now carrying out a large-scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future,” Revelle and Suess wrote in the paper. It’s one of the most famous sentences in earth science history.

“Human beings are now carrying out a large-scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future.”

Here was the insight underlying modern climate science: Atmosheric CO 2 is increasing, and humans are causing the buildup. Revelle and Suess became the final piece in a puzzle dating back to Svante Arrhenius and John Tyndall.

“I tell my students that to understand the basics of climate change, you need to have the cutting-edge science of the 1860s, the cutting-edge math of the 1890s and the cutting-edge chemistry of the 1950s,” says Joshua Howe, an environmental historian at Reed College in Portland, Ore.

Environmental awareness grows

As this scientific picture began to emerge in the late 1950s, Science News was on the story. A March 1, 1958 article in Science News Letter , “Weather May Be Warming,” described a warm winter month in the Northern Hemisphere. It posits three theories, including that “carbon dioxide poured into the atmosphere by a booming industrial civilization could have caused the increase. By burning up about 100 billion tons of coal and oil since 1900, man himself may be changing the climate.” By 1972, the magazine was reporting on efforts to expand global atmospheric greenhouse gas monitoring beyond Keeling’s work; two years later, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration launched its own CO 2 monitoring network, now the biggest in the world.

Environmental awareness on other issues grew in the 1960s and 1970s. Rachel Carson catalyzed the modern U.S. environmental movement in 1962 when she published a magazine series and then a book, Silent Spring , condemning the pesticide DDT for its ecological impacts. 1970 saw the celebration of the first Earth Day , in the United States and elsewhere, and in India in 1973 a group of women led a series of widely publicized protests against deforestation. This Chipko movement explicitly linked environmental protection with protecting human communities, and helped seed other environmental movements.

The fragility of global energy supplies was also becoming more obvious through the 1970s. The United States, heavily dependent on other countries for oil imports, entered a gas shortage in 1973–74 when Arab members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries cut off oil supplies because of U.S. government support for Israel. The shortage prompted more people to think about the finiteness of natural resources and the possibility of overtaxing the planet. — Alexandra Witze

Climate change evidence piles up

Observational data collected throughout the second half of the 20th century helped researchers gradually build their understanding of how human activities were transforming the planet. “It was a sort of slow accretion of evidence and concern,” says historian Joshua Howe of Reed College.

Environmental records from the past, such as tree rings and ice cores, established that the current changes in climate are unusual compared with the recent past. Yet such paleoclimatology data also showed that climate has changed quickly in the deep past — driven by triggers other than human activity, but with lessons for how abrupt planetary transformations can be.

Ice cores pulled from ice sheets, such as that atop Greenland, offer some of the most telling insights for understanding past climate change. Each year snow falls atop the ice and compresses into a fresh layer of ice representing climate conditions at the time it formed. The abundance of certain forms, or isotopes, of oxygen and hydrogen in the ice allows scientists to calculate the temperature at which it formed, and air bubbles trapped within the ice reveal how much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases were in the atmosphere at that time. So drilling down into an ice sheet is like reading the pages of a history book that go back in time the deeper you go.

Scientists began reading these pages in the early 1960s, using ice cores drilled at a U.S. military base in northwest Greenland . Contrary to expectations that past climates were stable, the cores hinted that abrupt climate shifts had happened over the last 100,000 years. By 1979, an international group of researchers was pulling another deep ice core from a second location in Greenland — and it, too, showed that abrupt climate change had occurred in the past. In the late 1980s and early 1990s a pair of European- and U.S.-led drilling projects retrieved even deeper cores from near the top of the ice sheet, pushing the record of past temperatures back a quarter of a million years.

Together with other sources of information, such as sediment cores drilled from the seafloor and molecules preserved in ancient rocks, the ice cores allowed scientists to reconstruct past temperature changes in extraordinary detail. Many of those changes happened alarmingly fast. For instance, the climate in Greenland warmed abruptly more than 20 times in the last 80,000 years, with the changes occurring in a matter of decades. More recently, a cold spell that set in around 13,000 years ago suddenly came to an end around 11,500 years ago — and temperatures in Greenland rose 10 degrees Celsius in a decade.

Evidence for such dramatic climate shifts laid to rest any lingering ideas that global climate change would be slow and unlikely to occur on a timescale that humans should worry about. “It’s an important reminder of how ‘tippy’ things can be,” says Jessica Tierney, a paleoclimatologist at the University of Arizona in Tucson.

More evidence of global change came from Earth-observing satellites, which brought a new planet-wide perspective on global warming beginning in the 1960s. From their viewpoint in the sky, satellites have measured the steady rise in global sea level — currently 3.4 millimeters per year and accelerating, as warming water expands and as ice sheets melt — as well as the rapid decline in ice left floating on the Arctic Ocean each summer at the end of the melt season. Gravity-sensing satellites have ‘weighed’ the Antarctic and Greenlandic ice sheets from above since 2002, reporting that more than 400 billion metric tons of ice are lost each year.

Temperature observations taken at weather stations around the world also confirm that we are living in the hottest years on record. The 10 warmest years since record keeping began in 1880 have all occurred since 2005. And nine of those 10 have come since 2010.

What’s more, extreme weather is hammering the planet more and more frequently. That 2021 heat wave in the Pacific Northwest, for instance, is just a harbinger of what’s to come. — Alexandra Witze

Worrisome predictions from climate models

By the 1960s, there was no denying that the planet was warming. But understanding the consequences of those changes — including the threat to human health and well-being — would require more than observational data. Looking to the future depended on computer simulations: complex calculations of how energy flows through the planetary system. Such models of the climate system have been crucial to developing projections for what we can expect from greenhouse warming.

A first step in building climate models was to connect everyday observations of weather to the concept of forecasting future climate. During World War I, the British mathematician Lewis Fry Richardson imagined tens of thousands of meteorologists working to forecast the weather, each calculating conditions for a small part of the atmosphere but collectively piecing together a global forecast. Richardson published his work in 1922, to reviews that called the idea “of almost quixotic boldness.”

But it wasn’t until after World War II that computational power turned Richardson’s dream into reality. In the wake of the Allied victory, which relied on accurate weather forecasts for everything from planning D-Day to figuring out when and where to drop the atomic bombs, leading U.S. mathematicians acquired funding from the federal government to improve predictions. In 1950 a team led by Jule Charney, a meteorologist at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., used the ENIAC, the first general-purpose, programmable electronic computer, to produce the first computer-driven regional weather forecast . The forecasting was slow and rudimentary, but it built on Richardson’s ideas of dividing the atmosphere into squares, or cells, and computing the weather for each of those. With the obscure title “Numerical integration of the barotropic vorticity equation,” the paper reporting the results set the stage for decades of climate modeling to follow.

By 1956 Norman Phillips, a member of Charney’s team, had produced the world’s first general circulation model, which captured how energy flows between the oceans, atmosphere and land. Phillips ran the calculations on a computer with just 5 kilobytes of memory, yet it was able to reproduce monthly and seasonal patterns in the lower atmosphere. That meant scientists could begin developing more realistic models of how the planet responds to factors such as increasing levels of greenhouse gases. The field of climate modeling was born.

The work was basic at first, because early computers simply didn’t have much computational power to simulate all aspects of the planetary system. “People thought that it was stupid to try to study this greenhouse-warming issue by three-dimensional model[s], because it cost so much computer time,” meteorologist Syukuro Manabe told physics historian Spencer Weart in a 1989 oral history .

Climate models have predicted how much ice the Ilulissat region of the Greenland ice sheet might lose by 2300 based on different scenarios for greenhouse gas emissions. The models are compared to 2008 (first image). In a best-case scenario, in which emissions peak by mid-century, the speed at which the glacier is sending ice out into the ocean is much lower (second image) than with a worst-case scenario, in which emissions rise at a high rate (third image).

An important breakthrough came in 1967, when Manabe and Richard Wetherald — both at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, a lab born from Charney’s group — published a paper in the Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences that modeled connections between Earth’s surface and atmosphere and calculated how changes in carbon dioxide would affect the planet’s temperature. Manabe and Wetherald were the first to build a computer model that captured the relevant processes that drive climate , and to accurately simulate how the Earth responds to those processes. (Manabe shared the 2021 Nobel Prize in physics for his work on climate modeling; Wetherald died in 2011.)

The rise of climate modeling allowed scientists to more accurately envision the impacts of global warming. In 1979, Charney and other experts met in Woods Hole, Mass., to try to put together a scientific consensus on what increasing levels of CO 2 would mean for the planet. They analyzed climate models from Manabe and from James Hansen of NASA. The resulting “Charney report” concluded that rising CO 2 in the atmosphere would lead to additional and significant climate change. The ocean might take up much of that heat, the scientists wrote — but “it appears that the warming will eventually occur, and the associated regional climatic changes so important to the assessment of socioeconomic consequence may well be significant.”

In the decades since, climate modeling has gotten increasingly sophisticated . Scientists have drawn up a variety of scenarios for how carbon emissions might change in the future, depending on the stringency of emissions cuts. Modelers use those scenarios to project how climate and weather will change around the globe, from hotter croplands in China to melting glaciers in the Himalayas. Climate simulations have also allowed researchers to identify the fingerprints of human impacts on extreme weather that is already happening, by comparing scenarios that include the influence of human activities with those that do not.

And as climate science firmed up and the most dramatic consequences became clear, the political battles raged. — Alexandra Witze

Climate science meets politics

With the development of climate science tracing back to the early Cold War, perhaps it shouldn’t be a surprise that the science of global warming became enmeshed in broader societal and political battles. A complex stew of political, national and business interests mired society in debates about the reality of climate change, and what to do about it, decades after the science became clear that humans are fundamentally altering the planet’s atmosphere.

Society has pulled itself together before to deal with global environmental problems, such as the Antarctic ozone hole. In 1974 chemists Mario Molina and F. Sherwood Rowland, both of the University of California, Irvine, reported that chlorofluorocarbon chemicals, used in products such as spray cans and refrigerants, caused a chain of reactions that gnawed away at the atmosphere’s protective ozone layer . The resulting ozone hole, which forms over Antarctica every spring, allows more ultraviolet radiation from the sun to make it through Earth’s atmosphere and reach the surface, where it can cause skin cancer and eye damage.

Governments ultimately worked under the auspices of the United Nations to craft the 1987 Montreal Protocol, which strictly limited the manufacture of chlorofluorocarbons . In the years following, the ozone hole began to heal. But fighting climate change would prove to be far more challenging. Chlorofluorocarbons were a suite of chemicals with relatively limited use and for which replacements could be found without too much trouble. But the greenhouse gases that cause global warming stem from a wide variety of human activities, from energy development to deforestation. And transforming entire energy sectors to reduce or eliminate carbon emissions is much more difficult than replacing a set of industrial chemicals.

In 1980, though, researchers took an important step toward banding together to synthesize the scientific understanding of climate change and bring it to the attention of international policy makers. It started at a small scientific conference in Villach, Austria. There, experts met under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization, the International Council of Scientific Unions and the United Nations Environment Program to discuss the seriousness of climate change. On the train ride home from the meeting, Swedish meteorologist Bert Bolin talked with other participants about how a broader, deeper and more international analysis was needed. In 1985, a second conference was held at Villach to highlight the urgency, and in 1988, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC, was born. Bolin was its first chairperson.

The IPCC became a highly influential and unique body. It performs no original scientific research; instead, it synthesizes and summarizes the vast literature of climate science for policy makers to consider — primarily through massive reports issued every couple of years. The first IPCC report , in 1990, predicted that the planet’s global mean temperature would rise more quickly in the following century than at any point in the last 10,000 years, due to increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Successive IPCC reports showed more and more confidence in the link between greenhouse emissions and rising global temperatures — and explored how society might mitigate and adapt to coming changes.

IPCC reports have played a key role in providing scientific information for nations discussing how to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations. This process started with the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 , which resulted in the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. Annual U.N. meetings to tackle climate change led to the first international commitments to reduce emissions, the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. Under it, developed countries committed to reduce emissions of CO 2 and other greenhouse gases. By 2007 the IPCC declared that the reality of climate warming is “unequivocal ”; the group received the Nobel Peace Prize that year along with Al Gore for their work on climate change.

The IPCC process ensured that policy makers had the best science at hand when they came to the table to discuss cutting emissions. “If you go back and look at the original U.N. framework on climate change, already you see the core of the science represented there,” says Rachel Cleetus, a climate policy expert with the Union of Concerned Scientists in Cambridge, Mass. Of course, nations did not have to abide by that science — and they often didn’t.

Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, international climate meetings discussed less hard-core science and more issues of equity. Countries such as China and India pointed out that they needed energy to develop their economies, and that nations responsible for the bulk of emissions through history, such as the United States, needed to lead the way in cutting greenhouse gases. Meanwhile, residents of some of the most vulnerable nations, such as low-lying islands that are threatened by sea level rise, gained visibility and clout at international negotiating forums. “The issues around equity have always been very uniquely challenging in this collective action problem,” says Cleetus.

By 2015, the world’s nations had made some progress on the emissions cuts laid out in the Kyoto Protocol, but it was still not enough to achieve substantial global reductions. That year, a key U.N. climate conference in Paris produced an international agreement to try to limit global warming to 2 degrees C , and preferably 1.5 degrees C, above preindustrial levels.

Every country has its own approach to the challenge of addressing climate change. In the United States, which gets approximately 80 percent of its energy from fossil fuels, sophisticated efforts to downplay and critique the science led to major delays in climate action. For decades U.S. fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil worked to influence politicians to take as little action on emissions reductions as possible. Working with a small group of influential scientists, this well-funded, well-orchestrated campaign took many of its tactics from earlier tobacco-industry efforts to cast doubt on the links between smoking and cancer, as historians Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway documented in their book Merchants of Doubt.

Perhaps the peak of U.S. climate denialism came in the late 1980s and into the 1990s — roughly a century after Swedish physical chemist Svante Arrhenius laid out the consequences of putting too much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. In 1988 NASA scientist James Hansen testified to lawmakers about the consequences of global warming. “It is already happening now,” Hansen said, summarizing what scientists had long known.

The high-profile nature of Hansen’s testimony, combined with his NASA expertise, vaulted global warming into the public eye in the United States like never before. “It really hit home with a public who could understand that there are reasons that Venus is hot and Mars is cold,” says Joshua Howe, a historian at Reed College. “And that if you use that same reasoning, we have some concerns about what is happening here on Earth.” But Hansen also kicked off a series of bitter public battles about the reality of human-caused climate change that raged for years.        

One common approach of climate skeptics was to attack the environmental data and models that underlie climate science. In 1998, scientist Michael Mann, then at the University of Massachusetts–Amherst, and colleagues published a detailed temperature record that formed the basis of what came to be known as the “hockey stick” graph, so named because the chart showed a sharp rise in temperatures (the hockey blade) at the end of a long, much flatter period (the hockey stick). Skeptics soon demanded the data and software processing tools Mann used to create the graph. Bloggers and self-proclaimed citizen scientists created a cottage industry of questioning new climate science papers under the guise of “audits.” In 2009 hackers broke into a server at the University of East Anglia, a leading climate-research hub in Norwich, England, and released more than 1,000 e-mails between climate scientists. This “Climategate” scandal purported to reveal misconduct on the part of the researchers, but several reviews largely exonerated the scientists.  

The graph that launched climate skeptic attacks

This famous graph, produced by scientist Michael Mann and colleagues, and then reproduced in a 2001 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, dramatically captures temperature change over time. Climate change skeptics made it the center of an all-out attack on climate science.

Such tactics undoubtedly succeeded in feeding politicians’ delay on climate action in the United States, most of it from Republicans. President George W. Bush withdrew the country from the Kyoto Protocol in 2001 ; Donald Trump similarly rejected the Paris accord in 2017 . As late as 2015, the chair of the Senate’s environment committee, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, brought a snowball into Congress on a cold winter’s day in order to continue his argument that human-caused global warming is a “hoax.” In Australia, a similar mix of right-wing denialism and fossil fuel interests has kept climate change commitments in flux, as prime ministers are voted in and out over fierce debates about how the nation should act on climate.

Yet other nations have moved forward. Some European countries such as Germany aggressively pursued renewable energies, such as wind and solar, while activists such as the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg — the vanguard of a youth-action movement — pressured their governments for more.

In recent years the developing economies of China and India have taken center stage in discussions about climate action. Both nations argue that they must be allowed extra time to wean themselves off fossil fuels in order to continue economic growth. They note that historically speaking, the United States is the largest total emitter of carbon by far.

Total carbon dioxide emissions by country, 1850–2021

These 20 nations have emitted the largest cumulative amounts of carbon dioxide since 1850. Emissions are shown in in billions of metric tons and are broken down into subtotals from fossil fuel use and cement manufacturing (blue) as well as from land use and forestry (green).

China, whose annual CO 2 emissions surpassed those of the United States in 2006, declared several moderate steps in 2021 to reduce emissions, including that it would stop building coal-burning power plants overseas. India announced it would aim for net-zero emissions by 2070, the first time it has set a date for this goal.

Yet such pledges continue to be criticized. At the 2021 U.N. Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, Scotland, India was globally criticized for not committing to a complete phaseout of coal — although the two top emitters, China and the United States, have not themselves committed to phasing out coal. “There is no equity in this,” says Aayushi Awasthy, an energy economist at the University of East Anglia. — Alexandra Witze

Facing a warmer future

Climate change creeps up gradually on society, except when it doesn’t. The slow increase in sea level, for instance, causes waters to lap incrementally higher at shorelines year after year. But when a big storm comes along — which may be happening more frequently due to climate change — the consequences become much more obvious. Storm surge rapidly swamps communities and wreaks disproportionate havoc. That’s why New York City installed floodgates in its subway and tunnel system in the wake of 2012’s Superstorm Sandy , and why the Pacific island nation of Tuvalu has asked Australia and New Zealand to be prepared to take in refugees fleeing from rising sea levels.

The list of climate impacts goes on and on — and in many cases, changes are coming faster than scientists had envisioned a few decades ago. The oceans are becoming more acidic as they absorb carbon dioxide, harming tiny marine organisms that build protective calcium carbonate shells and are the base of the marine food web. Warmer waters are bleaching coral reefs. Higher temperatures are driving animal and plant species into areas in which they previously did not live, increasing the risk of extinction for many. “It’s no longer about impacts in the future,” says Rachel Cleetus, a climate policy expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “It’s about what’s happening in the U.S. here and now, and around the world.”

No place on the planet is unaffected. In many areas, higher temperatures have led to major droughts, which dry out vegetation and provide additional fuel for wildfires such as those that have devastated Australia , the Mediterranean and western North America in recent years. The Colorado River , the source of water for tens of millions of people in the western United States , came under a water-shortage alert in 2021 for the first time in history.

Then there’s the Arctic, where temperatures are rising at more than twice the global average and communities are at the forefront of change. Permafrost is thawing, destabilizing buildings, pipelines and roads. Caribou and reindeer herders worry about the increased risk of parasites to the health of their animals. With less sea ice available to buffer the coast from storm erosion, the Inupiat village of Shishmaref, Alaska, risks crumbling into the sea. It will need to move from its sand-barrier island to the mainland .

“We know these changes are happening and that the Titanic is sinking,” says Louise Farquharson, a geomorphologist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks who monitors permafrost and coastal change around Alaska. Like many Arctic scientists, she is working with Indigenous communities to understand the shifts they’re experiencing and what can be done when buildings start to slump and water supplies start to drain away. “A big part is just listening to community members and understanding what they’re seeing change,” she says.

All around the planet, those who depend on intact ecosystems for their survival face the greatest threat from climate change. And those with the least resources to adapt to climate change are the ones who feel it first .

“We are going to warm,” says Claudia Tebaldi, a climate scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California. “There is no question about it. The only thing that we can hope to do is to warm a little more slowly.”

That’s one reason why the IPCC report released in 2021 focuses on anticipated levels of global warming. There is a big difference between the planet warming 1.5 degrees versus 2 degrees or 2.5 degrees. Consider that we are now at least 1.1 degrees above preindustrial levels of CO 2 and are already seeing dramatic shifts in climate. Given that, keeping further global temperature increases as low as possible will make a big difference in the climate impacts the planet faces. “With every fraction of a degree of warming, everything gets a little more intense,” says paleoclimatologist Jessica Tierney. “There’s no more time to beat around the bush.”

Historical and projected global temperature change

Various scenarios for how greenhouse gas emissions might change going forward help scientists predict future climate change. This graph shows the simulated historical temperature trend along with future projections of global surface temperature based on five scenarios from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Temperature change is the difference from the 1850–1900 average.

The future rests on how much nations are willing to commit to cutting emissions and whether they will stick to those commitments. It’s a geopolitical balancing act the likes of which the world has never seen.

Science can and must play a role going forward. Improved climate models will illuminate what changes are expected at the regional scale, helping officials prepare. Governments and industry have crucial parts to play as well. They can invest in technologies, such as carbon sequestration, to help decarbonize the economy and shift society toward more renewable sources of energy. “We can solve these problems — most of the tools are already there,” says Cascade Tuholske, a geographer at Columbia University. “We just have to do it.”

Huge questions remain. Do voters have the will to demand significant energy transitions from their governments? How can business and military leaders play a bigger role in driving climate action? What should be the role of low-carbon energy sources that come with downsides, such as nuclear energy ? How can developing nations achieve a better standard of living for their people while not becoming big greenhouse gas emitters? How can we keep the most vulnerable from being disproportionately harmed during extreme events, and incorporate environmental and social justice into our future?

These questions become more pressing each year, as CO 2 accumulates in our atmosphere. The planet is now at higher levels of CO 2 than at any time in the last 3 million years. Yet Ralph Keeling, keeper of the iconic Mauna Loa record tracking the rise in atmospheric CO 2 , is already optimistically thinking about how scientists would be able to detect a slowdown, should the world actually start cutting emissions by a few percent per year. “That’s what the policy makers want to see — that there’s been some large-scale impact of what they did,” he says.

At the 2021 U.N. climate meeting in Glasgow diplomats from around the world agreed to work more urgently to shift away from using fossil fuels. They did not, however, adopt targets strict enough to keep the world below a warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. It’s been well over a century since Svante Arrhenius recognized the consequences of putting extra carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and yet world leaders have yet to pull together to avoid the most dangerous consequences of climate change.

Time is running out. — Alexandra Witze

Climate change facts

We know that climate change and its consequences are real, and we are responsible. Here’s what the science tells us.

How much has the planet warmed over the past century?

The planet’s average surface temperature has risen by at least 1.1 degree Celsius since preindustrial levels of 1850–1900.

What is causing climate change?

People are loading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases produced during the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and gas, and cutting down forests.

What are some of the effects of climate change?

Ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting, raising sea levels and flooding low-lying island nations and coastal cities. Drought is parching farmlands and the rivers that feed them. Wildfires are raging. Rains are becoming more intense, and weather patterns are shifting.

What is the greenhouse effect?

In the 19th century, Irish physicist John Tyndall found that carbon dioxide gas, as well as water vapor, absorbed more heat than air alone. He argued that such gases would trap heat in Earth’s atmosphere, much as panes of glass trap heat in a greenhouse, and thus modulate climate.

What is the Keeling curve?

One of the most iconic datasets in all of science, the Keeling curve tracks the rise of atmospheric CO 2 . When geochemist Charles David Keeling began his measurements in 1958 on the Hawaiian volcano of Mauna Loa, CO 2 made up 315 parts per million of the global atmosphere. Each year the curve keeps going up: In 2016 it passed 400 ppm of CO 2 in the atmosphere, as measured during its typical annual minimum in September. In 2021, the annual minimum was 413 ppm.

Does it get hotter every year?

Average global temperatures fluctuate from year to year, but temperature observations taken at weather stations around the world confirm that we are living in the hottest years on record. The 10 warmest years since record keeping began in 1880 have all occurred since 2005. And nine of those 10 have come since 2010.

What countries emit the most carbon dioxide?

The United States has been the largest total emitter of carbon dioxide by far, followed by China and Russia. China’s annual CO 2 emissions surpassed those of the United States in 2006.

What places are impacted by climate change?

No place on the planet is unaffected. Higher temperatures have led to major droughts, providing fuel for wildfires such as those that have devastated Australia , the Mediterranean and western North America in recent years. The Colorado River came under a water-shortage alert in 2021 for the first time in history. In the Arctic, where temperatures are rising at more than twice the global average, permafrost is thawing, destabilizing buildings, pipelines and roads. With less sea ice available to buffer the coast from storm erosion, the Inupiat village of Shishmaref, Alaska, risks crumbling into the sea. All around the planet, those who depend on intact ecosystems for their survival face the greatest threat from climate change. And those with the least resources to adapt to climate change are the ones who feel it first .

Editor’s note: This story was published March 10, 2022.

British mathematician Lewis Fry Richardson (shown at center) proposes forecasting the weather by piecing together the calculations of tens of thousands of meteorologists working on small parts of the atmosphere.

Geochemist Charles David Keeling (shown in 1988) begins tracking the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide at Mauna Loa in Hawaii. The record, which continues through today, has become one of the most iconic datasets in all of science.

Rachel Carson (shown) publishes the book Silent Spring , raising alarm over the ecological impacts of the pesticide DDT. The book helps catalyze the modern U.S. environmental movement.

The first Earth Day, organized by U.S. senator Gaylord Nelson and graduate student Denis Hayes, is celebrated.

The first Landsat satellite launched (shown), opening the door to continuous monitoring of Earth and its features from above.

A powerful eruption from the Philippines’ Mount Pinatubo (shown) ejects millions of tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, temporarily cooling the planet.  

World leaders gathered (shown) at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro to address how to pursue economic development while also protecting the Earth. The meeting resulted in an international convention on climate change.

Activist Greta Thunberg initiates the “School Strike for Climate” movement by protesting outside the Swedish parliament. Soon, students around the world join a growing movement demanding action on climate change . (Activists at the 2021 U.N. Climate Change Conference are shown.)

From the archive

Climate change foreseen.

In an early mention of climate change in Science News-Letter , the predecessor of Science News , British meteorologist C.E.P. Brooks warns that present warming trends could lead to “important economic and political effects.”

IGY Brings Many Discoveries

Science News Letter lists the Top 8 accomplishments of the International Geophysical Year.

Chilling possibilities

Science News explores the tentative idea that global temperatures are cooling and that a new ice age could be imminent, which is later shown to be inaccurate.

Long Hot Future: Warmer Earth Appears Inevitable

“The planet earth will be a warmer place in the 21st century, and there is no realistic strategy that can prevent the change,” Science News reports.

Ozone and Global Warming: What to Do?

Policy makers discuss how to solve the dual problems of ozone depletion and global warming.

Looking for Mr. Greenhouse

Science writer Richard Monastersky reports on scientists’ efforts to evaluate how to connect increasing greenhouse gases and a warming climate.

World Climate Panel Charts Path for Action

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that “the fingerprint of man in the past temperature record” is now apparent.

Animals on the Move

A warming climate means shifting ranges and ecosystem disruptions for a lot of species, Nancy Ross-Flanigan reports.

Changing climate: 10 years after ‘An Inconvenient Truth’

A decade after former vice president Al Gore releases the documentary film An Inconvenient Truth , Science News looks back at how climate science has advanced.

With nowhere to hide from rising seas, Boston prepares for a wetter future

Mary Caperton Morton reports for Science News on how Boston is taking action to prepare for rising seas.

The new UN climate change report shows there’s no time for denial or delay

Earth & climate writer Carolyn Gramling covers the sixth assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which documents how climate change is already affecting every region on Earth.

Climate change disinformation is evolving. So are efforts to fight back

Researchers are testing games and other ways to help people recognize climate change denial.

Extreme weather in 2022 showed the global impact of climate change

Heat waves, floods, wildfires and drought around the world were exacerbated by Earth’s changing climate.

It’s possible to reach net-zero carbon emissions. Here’s how

Cutting carbon dioxide emissions to curb climate change and reach net zero is possible but not easy.

The last 12 months were the hottest on record

The planet’s average temperature was about 1.3 degrees Celsius higher than the 1850–1900 average, a new report finds.

Science News is published by Society for Science

Subscribers, enter your e-mail address for full access to the Science News archives and digital editions.

Not a subscriber? Become one now .

Share this via Facebook Share this via X Share this via WhatsApp Share this via Email Other ways to share Share this via LinkedIn Share this via Reddit Share this via Telegram Share this via Printer

Addressing the Climate Crisis in Times of Pandemic

As More Climate Chaos Looms, Slashing Fossil Fuels Is Key

© 2020 Brian Stauffer for Human Rights Watch

By Katharina Rall

While the Covid-19 pandemic dominated the news for much of 2020, climate change—the other global crisis threatening catastrophic impacts on peoples’ lives—has continued to gain ground . The pandemic itself may have temporarily limited some activities such as aviation, which contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, but governments have largely squandered the opportunity to accelerate more meaningful emissions reductions in their economic policies. In 2021, governments will need to do much better, and there are some reasons to be hopeful they might.

In 2020, there were devastating floods in the Philippines , destructive wildfires in California, deadly heatwaves in Southern Africa , and a record-breaking hurricane season in Central America. These and other events amplified by climate change are taking a mounting toll on lives and livelihoods, especially of marginalized populations. In 2020, Human Rights Watch documented how climate change in Canada is depleting Indigenous peoples’ access to traditional food sources and contributing to a growing problem of food poverty. In Colombia, we showed how more frequent droughts are worsening malnutrition among Indigenous children. In the United States, we exposed how extreme heat is linked to adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth. These climate-related harms have profound impacts on the realization of people’s basic human rights .  And they are only a few of the growing impacts around the world that are expected to intensify as temperatures continue to rise in coming years. The consensus among scientists is that it will be catastrophic if we fail to keep global temperatures from rising more than 1.5C above pre-industrial levels. It is still possible to prevent such an outcome, but only if we are able to rapidly transition away from fossil fuels like coal, gas, and oil, toward renewable energies like wind and solar. Despite this consensus, fossil fuels continue to dominate energy markets for several reasons. Most governments actively support the fossil fuel sector through subsidies and tax-breaks, which do not benefit those populations most impacted by climate change. Inadequate environmental regulations and little accountability for clean-up also mean that companies can externalize the true cost of fossil fuels, i.e. avoid paying for the environmental, health, and economic impacts. The choices governments make about where to direct funds to stimulate and support a post-Covid-19 recovery could be a game changer to enable rapid transition to renewable energy, and to protect the rights of those impacted by the Covid-19 and climate crises. However, to date, too many governments have chosen to double down on their support for fossil fuels. Canada, one of the world’s top -10 greenhouse gas emitters, increased government fossil fuel subsidies, with sums of over US$14 billion, as part of its Covid-19 recovery. The US has spent at least $72 billion of its Covid-19 recovery funds supporting fossil fuels, while only $27 billion went to support cleaner energy. The European Union, despite committing to reducing fossil fuel dependence as part of its European Green Deal , continued to subsidize fossil fuels by at least US$ 165 billion per year .

What hope is there that 2021 will be different? First, governments will have new opportunities to prioritize renewable energy sources over fossil fuels as they inevitably roll out more Covid-19 stimulus packages. This time they can make wiser choices about which sectors of the economy they need most to support to protect the lives and wellbeing of their populations in the longer term. Second, all governments are due to scale up their domestic climate action plans to meet the goals of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. Very few complied with the 2020 deadline for doing that, but with the next global climate summit approaching in November 2021, there is increased pressure to be more ambitious. If governments choose to use their continuous Covid-19 spending to support a just transition, they will be able to submit plans that help save both their economies and the climate.

Lastly, the world’s two largest greenhouse gas emitters seem poised to take more ambitious climate action. Incoming US President Joe Biden has promised that the US, the world’s second-biggest emitter, will re-join the Paris Agreement, reach net zero emissions by 2050, and redirect fossil fuel subsidies to renewables. China, the world’s top emitter, in September pledged to reach net zero emissions before 2060. It remains to be seen how serious these big emitters are about meeting these commitments. But the pledges will in themselves increase the pressure on other top emitters to meet their carbon neutrality goals . If the top ten emitters don’t, we’ll lose another crucial year. And the threat of catastrophic consequences will intensify; for Indigenous peoples in northern Canada, pregnant people exposed to heat in the US, and Indigenous children in Colombia. For other marginalized populations around the globe, and ultimately for all of us.

Protecting Rights, Saving Lives

Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people in close to 100 countries worldwide, spotlighting abuses and bringing perpetrators to justice

September 26, 2023

Our Fragile Earth: How Close Are We to Climate Catastrophe?

Lessons from past eras when Earth was a hothouse or a snowball tell us whether we are doomed by climate change or still have time to prevent that fate

By Mark Fischetti

sankai/Getty Images

No one can predict the future. But sometimes we can get a solid idea of what’s coming by looking at the past. In his new book, Our Fragile Moment: How Lessons from Earth’s Past Can Help Us Survive the Climate Crisis , renowned climate scientist Michael Mann describes the world climate change is creating based on what we know from specific times in Earth’s four-billion-year history when the planet was extremely hot or extremely cold.

Scientific American asked Mann, director of the Penn Center for Science, Sustainability and the Media at the University of Pennsylvania, to give us the main lessons from each era and to explain the warning, and the hope, they provide for today and the future. As Mann says in his book’s intro, “the collective evidence from ... the paleoclimate record of Earth’s past climatic changes ... actually provides a blueprint for what we need to do to preserve our fragile moment” on a planet that has survived much more than what we humans could.

[ An edited transcript of the interview follows .]

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Let’s start with the first two eras: the Faint Young Sun era was three billion years ago, and then Snowball Earth occurred 800 to 550 million years ago. What happened, and what did we learn?

Early on, the sun was 30 percent less bright, but the planet wasn’t frozen; the oceans were teeming with life already. As the sun gradually got brighter and brighter, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere got lower and lower during a couple billion years. As living organisms spread, they moderated the atmosphere and temperature. It suggests that there are restorative mechanisms—that life itself helps keep the planet within livable bounds. But only to a point!

Cyanobacteria loaded Earth’s atmosphere with oxygen, which had previously been largely anoxic [deficient in oxygen]. Oxygen scavenges methane, so there was a rapid disappearance of methane; Earth lost that early methane greenhouse effect. Positive feedback loops occurred. The planet spun out of control into a snowball.

Life can help keep the planet within habitable bounds, but it can also push the planet beyond those boundaries. Today we are the living things that are impacting our climate. Is our future one of resilience or instability? The paleoclimate record tells us we’re somewhere in between. We can still achieve stability, but if we continue burning fossil fuels, we will have instability.

A massive buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere 250 million years ago, during the Permian period, led to the Great Dying , when most life on Earth was wiped out. What does it tell us about the so-called sixth extinction we’re in right now?

The Permian has the greatest documented extinction—something like 90 percent of all life went extinct. There was great natural warming driven by unusually active volcanism that loaded the atmosphere with carbon dioxide. It warmed the planet rapidly on a geological timescale, although it was nowhere near the rapidity of what we’re doing today.

Some people cite this era as a reason for believing that we are experiencing runaway warming and that our extinction is now ensured. They say we’re experiencing runaway methane-driven warming from thawing permafrost—and that it’s too late to do anything about it; we’ll all be extinct. But I spent quite a bit of time going through the literature, and it doesn’t hold up. There’s no evidence that there was any major release of methane at that time. There are a whole bunch of things that make it a bad analogue for today. I go through them in the book. For example, there was a massive continent that was very dry with very tenuous, early forests that were very vulnerable to wildfire and to collapse. So there was a much greater potential for massive deforestation and therefore a massive lowering of oxygen. There was also a huge increase in sulfur in the ocean that probably extinguished quite a bit of sea life.

There are all these things that contributed to that particular catastrophe that aren’t analogous today. There’s no evidence that we’re going to see substantial lowering of oxygen concentrations from anything that we’re doing. There’s no evidence that we’re seeing massive releases of sulfur—although deoxygenation like the Black Sea has experienced, with a larger anoxic zone and die-offs, is a bit of a warning.

About 56 million years ago Earth became very hot again—as hot as it ever has been. This was the so-called Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum , the PETM. Are we headed for that instead?

This is the same as the Great Dying. Scientists no longer think that methane played a major role in the PETM. But there is a different lesson. The PETM is notable for the rapid warmup—it happened not across millions of years but in as short as 10,000 or 20,000 years. This is very rapid from a geological standpoint, although, again, it’s 100 times slower than today. The warming spike happened on top of an already warm planet; it took the planet to temperatures higher than anything that’s documented in the geological record.

The PETM reached levels of heat that would be dangerous for human beings, and we are already encountering wet-bulb temperatures [an estimation of the effect of temperature and humidity] that are deadly in some parts of the world. The PETM would have been a world where large parts of the planet were too hot for humans. So people say, “Oh, look, life adapted.” There was a massive miniaturization of some species. Horses shrunk 30 percent in order to adapt [smaller bodies, with a higher ratio of surface area to volume, have less trouble shedding heat]. The reality is that when you see something so dramatic as horses shrinking by 30 percent, that means there would have been very large amounts of maladaptive species; there would be a massive loss of life along the way. The idea is that human beings can just adapt, but those selective pressures don’t favor anyone.

Let’s jump back 10 million years before the PETM to 65 million years ago. An enormous asteroid struck the Earth, shrouding the planet in dust, which rapidly cooled its surface, killing the land-based dinosaurs (not the avian ones). That’s very different from earlier events and from climate change today. What can that episode tell us?

The dust very rapidly cooled the planet, so any animal that couldn’t burrow into the ground or find shelter—everything larger than a dog, basically—died out. The climate story is that even though it’s a scenario of global cooling rather than global warming, it was rapid. [The event is also known as the K–Pg boundary, the transition between the Cretaceous period and the Paleogene period.]

This also relates to societal fragility. In the height of the cold war, we were focused on nuclear winter. An all-out nuclear war would shroud the planet with dust, smoke and ash. The fate that befell the dinosaurs could be our fate. Carl Sagan, of course, was the one who really raised awareness. He and his colleagues published a paper in late 1983 that said it isn’t just the physical destruction that’ll get us; what will really get us is the rapid cooling of the planet.

As the cold war ended, the world felt that that particular threat had waned. But with recent tensions with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the threat by Putin to use tactical nuclear weapons, all of a sudden this threat has reemerged. The point that applies from the dinosaurs it that it isn’t the absolute levels of warmth that matter today; it’s the planet we are evolved for. The dinosaurs had evolved for a certain climate, and when it cooled rapidly, they perished. Other animals were able to exploit the niches that emerged. Ironically, it was our ancestors, the early mammals. In one sense, we’re here because the dinosaurs perished. If we have eight billion people adapted to a climate that is disappearing as we continue to warm the planet, that’s a real danger.

Much more recently we’ve had several ice ages; the Last Glacial Maximum was about 20,000 years ago. What did these cold periods reveal about our increasingly hot period now?

The K–Pg event was a punctuated interval of cooling during an otherwise warm era. About three million years ago, CO 2  levels dropped to near what they are today. To some extent, the Pleistocene [which started about 2.6 million years ago] is a better analogue for our climate today. There was no Greenland ice sheet. Sea levels were 10 feet higher at least, maybe 20. The planet was warmer than it is today. Is that the future that we are now committed to? The answer isn’t so clear-cut because of hysteresis [when a physical change lags the force that created it]. The behavior of things when you’re on a cooling scenario is different from the behavior of things when you’re on a warming scenario. You can reach the same point, and the climate can look very different depending on how you got there. It’s probably not the case that we have committed yet to the melting the Greenland ice sheet. That hysteresis effect buys us a little bit of a margin of error but not a big one. Maybe it buys us a half a degree more warming. Once again it shows us the fragile nature of this moment. We could soon exceed that range of resilience if we continue on the path we’re on.

The last timeframe in the book is the Common Era , the past 2,000 years, when humans have dominated life on Earth. You address questions we are confronting today: How will warming affect El Nino or the Asian summer monsoons? Will the North Atlantic Ocean’s conveyor-belt circulation change? Are our climate models underestimating the pace and extent of changes underway? Given all that, what worries you the most? What surprises you?

What worries me the most is beyond the hockey stick. [The “hockey stick” was a graph published by Mann and others in 1999. It showed that the global average temperature was the same or slightly decreasing for more than 900 years and then turned sharply upward from the mid-1900s through 1999. It looked like a hockey stick laying on its side, with the blade at the far right pointing up in the air.] The obvious difference from past events is that we’ve warmed the climate so much faster during this timeframe. It turns out that El Nino, sea-level rise and Arctic sea ice levels can all follow the hockey stick pattern. There’s a theme: changes to some of these things are happening sooner than we expected.

One of these is the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, or AMOC—the ocean conveyor belt. That’s one of the surprises: the dramatic slowdown that we already see. There has been a dramatic slowdown in this circulation in the past century, even though the models say any slowdown should only occur during the upcoming next century. The blade of that hockey stick is coming about a century too early. One of the reasons is probably that we’re losing Greenland ice faster, so we’ve got more fresh water already running off into the North Atlantic earlier than we expected.

What gives you the most hope?

We don’t know precisely how close we are to triggering some devastating tipping point that could threaten human civilization. The collective evidence from the past tells us that we’ve still got a safety margin. Science tells us that if we act quickly, if we act dramatically, we can avoid warming that will bring far worse consequences. That’s the fragility of this moment: we have a little bit of a safety margin, but it’s not a large safety margin. The phrase I use often these days, a phrase that characterizes the message of this book, is the pairing of urgency and agency. Yes, it’s bad, and we face far worse consequences if we don’t act. We can see devastating climate consequences already. That’s the urgency. But the paleoclimate record tells us we haven’t triggered runaway warming yet. We can avoid that point of no return if we act quickly and dramatically. That’s the agency. We’ve got 4 billion years of Earth history. Let’s try to learn from it.

Responding to the Climate Threat: Essays on Humanity’s Greatest Challenge

A new book co-authored by MIT Joint Program Founding Co-Director Emeritus Henry Jacoby

From the Back Cover

This book demonstrates how robust and evolving science can be relevant to public discourse about climate policy. Fighting climate change is the ultimate societal challenge, and the difficulty is not just in the wrenching adjustments required to cut greenhouse emissions and to respond to change already under way. A second and equally important difficulty is ensuring widespread public understanding of the natural and social science. This understanding is essential for an effective risk management strategy at a planetary scale. The scientific, economic, and policy aspects of climate change are already a challenge to communicate, without factoring in the distractions and deflections from organized programs of misinformation and denial. 

Here, four scholars, each with decades of research on the climate threat, take on the task of explaining our current understanding of the climate threat and what can be done about it, in lay language―importantly, without losing critical  aspects of the natural and social science. In a series of essays, published during the 2020 presidential election, the COVID pandemic, and through the fall of 2021, they explain the essential components of the challenge, countering the forces of distrust of the science and opposition to a vigorous national response.  

Each of the essays provides an opportunity to learn about a particular aspect of climate science and policy within the complex context of current events. The overall volume is more than the sum of its individual articles. Proceeding each essay is an explanation of the context in which it was written, followed by observation of what has happened since its first publication. In addition to its discussion of topical issues in modern climate science, the book also explores science communication to a broad audience. Its authors are not only scientists – they are also teachers, using current events to teach when people are listening. For preserving Earth’s planetary life support system, science and teaching are essential. Advancing both is an unending task.

About the Authors

Gary Yohe is the Huffington Foundation Professor of Economics and Environmental Studies, Emeritus, at Wesleyan University in Connecticut. He served as convening lead author for multiple chapters and the Synthesis Report for the IPCC from 1990 through 2014 and was vice-chair of the Third U.S. National Climate Assessment.

Henry Jacoby is the William F. Pounds Professor of Management, Emeritus, in the MIT Sloan School of Management and former co-director of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, which is focused on the integration of the natural and social sciences and policy analysis in application to the threat of global climate change.

Richard Richels directed climate change research at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). He served as lead author for multiple chapters of the IPCC in the areas of mitigation, impacts and adaptation from 1992 through 2014. He also served on the National Assessment Synthesis Team for the first U.S. National Climate Assessment.

Ben Santer is a climate scientist and John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Fellow. He contributed to all six IPCC reports. He was the lead author of Chapter 8 of the 1995 IPCC report which concluded that “the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate”. He is currently a Visiting Researcher at UCLA’s Joint Institute for Regional Earth System Science & Engineering.

Access the Book

View the book on the publisher's website  here .

Order the book from Amazon  here . 

Related Posts

Wind and solar power can generate vital profits for texas’ dwindling farm....

The Impact of Financing Structures on the Cost of CO2 Transport

Plan for Elliott State Forest would put its 83,000 acres into fighting clim...

The role of fusion energy in a decarbonized electricity system webinar

MIT Climate News in Your Inbox

Climate Change Essay for Students and Children

500+ words climate change essay.

Climate change refers to the change in the environmental conditions of the earth. This happens due to many internal and external factors. The climatic change has become a global concern over the last few decades. Besides, these climatic changes affect life on the earth in various ways. These climatic changes are having various impacts on the ecosystem and ecology. Due to these changes, a number of species of plants and animals have gone extinct.

When Did it Start?

The climate started changing a long time ago due to human activities but we came to know about it in the last century. During the last century, we started noticing the climatic change and its effect on human life. We started researching on climate change and came to know that the earth temperature is rising due to a phenomenon called the greenhouse effect. The warming up of earth surface causes many ozone depletion, affect our agriculture , water supply, transportation, and several other problems.

Reason Of Climate Change

Although there are hundreds of reason for the climatic change we are only going to discuss the natural and manmade (human) reasons.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Natural Reasons

These include volcanic eruption , solar radiation, tectonic plate movement, orbital variations. Due to these activities, the geographical condition of an area become quite harmful for life to survive. Also, these activities raise the temperature of the earth to a great extent causing an imbalance in nature.

Human Reasons

Man due to his need and greed has done many activities that not only harm the environment but himself too. Many plant and animal species go extinct due to human activity. Human activities that harm the climate include deforestation, using fossil fuel , industrial waste , a different type of pollution and many more. All these things damage the climate and ecosystem very badly. And many species of animals and birds got extinct or on a verge of extinction due to hunting.

Effects Of Climatic Change

These climatic changes have a negative impact on the environment. The ocean level is rising, glaciers are melting, CO2 in the air is increasing, forest and wildlife are declining, and water life is also getting disturbed due to climatic changes. Apart from that, it is calculated that if this change keeps on going then many species of plants and animals will get extinct. And there will be a heavy loss to the environment.

What will be Future?

If we do not do anything and things continue to go on like right now then a day in future will come when humans will become extinct from the surface of the earth. But instead of neglecting these problems we start acting on then we can save the earth and our future.

Although humans mistake has caused great damage to the climate and ecosystem. But, it is not late to start again and try to undo what we have done until now to damage the environment. And if every human start contributing to the environment then we can be sure of our existence in the future.

{ “@context”: “https://schema.org”, “@type”: “FAQPage”, “mainEntity”: [ { “@type”: “Question”, “name”: “What is climate change and how it affects humans?”, “acceptedAnswer”: { “@type”: “Answer”, “text”: “Climate change is a phenomenon that happens because of human and natural reasons. And it is one of the most serious problems that not only affect the environment but also human beings. It affects human in several ways but in simple language, we can say that it causes many diseases and disasters that destroy life on earth.” } }, { “@type”: “Question”, “name”: “Can we stop these climatic changes?”, “acceptedAnswer”: { “@type”: “Answer”, “text”: “Yes, we can stop these climatic changes but for that, every one of us has to come forward and has to adapt ways that can reduce and control our bad habits that affect the environment. We have to the initiative and make everyone aware of the climatic changes.” } } ] }

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Security Council

Climate Change ‘Biggest Threat Modern Humans Have Ever Faced’, World-Renowned Naturalist Tells Security Council, Calls for Greater Global Cooperation

Climate change is a “crisis multiplier” that has profound implications for international peace and stability, Secretary-General António Guterres told the Security Council today, amid calls for deep partnerships within and beyond the United Nations system to blunt its acute effects on food security, natural resources and migration patterns fuelling tensions across countries and regions.

Throughout the morning, the Council’s high-level open debate on climate and security heard from a range of influential voices, including naturalist David Attenborough, who called climate change “the biggest threat to security that modern humans have ever faced”.  In video remarks telecast at the outset, he warned that concentrations of carbon dioxide currently in the atmosphere have not been equalled for millions of years.

“If we continue on our current path, we will face the collapse of everything that gives us our security,” he said:  food production, access to fresh water, habitable ambient temperature and ocean food chains.  The poorest — those with the least security — are certain to suffer.  “Our duty right now is surely to do all we can to help those in the most immediate danger.”

While the world will never return to the stable climate that gave birth to civilization, he said that, if Governments attending the twenty-sixth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in November recognize climate change as a global security threat, “we may yet act proportionately — and in time”.

Climate change can only be dealt with by unparalleled levels of global cooperation, he said.  It will compel countries to question economic models, invent new industries and recognize the moral responsibility that wealthy nations have to the rest of the world, placing a value on nature that “goes far beyond money”.  He challenged the international community to finally create a stable, healthy world where resources are equally shared and where — for the first time in history — people “come to know what it feels like to be secure”.

Mr. Guterres echoed those calls, describing the climate emergency as “the defining issue of our time”.  Noting that the last decade was the hottest in human history, he said wildfires, cyclones, floods and droughts are now the new normal.  “These shocks not only damage the environment on which we depend, they also weaken our political, economic and social systems,” he said.

Indeed, where climate change dries up rivers, reduces harvests, destroys critical infrastructure and displaces communities, it exacerbates the risks of conflict, he said.  A study by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute found that 8 of the 10 countries hosting the largest multilateral peace operations in 2018 were in areas highly exposed to climate change.

The impact is greatest where fragility and conflict have weakened coping mechanisms, he said, where people depend on natural capital for their livelihoods and where women — who bear the greatest burden of the climate emergency — do not enjoy equal rights.  He highlighted examples in Afghanistan, where reduced harvests have pushed people into poverty, leaving them susceptible to recruitment by armed groups, and across West Africa and the Sahel, where changes in grazing patterns have fostered conflict between pastoralists and farmers.  In some Pacific small island nations, entire communities have been forced to relocate.

“The forced movement of larger numbers of people around the world will clearly increase the potential for conflict and insecurity,” he observed.  He called for greater efforts to address climate‑related security risks, starting with a focus on prevention, and creating a global coalition committed to achieving net-zero emissions by mid-century.  The United Nations is asking companies, cities and financial institutions to prepare credible decarbonization plans.

In addition, immediate actions are needed to protect countries from increasingly frequent and severe climate effects.  He urged donors and multilateral and national development banks to increase the share of adaptation and resilience finance to at least 50 per cent of their climate finance support.  Developed countries, too, must keep their pledge to channel $100 billion annually to the global South.  “They have already missed the deadline of 2020,” he acknowledged.

Above all, he called for embracing a concept of security that places people at its centre, stressing that COVID-19 has laid bare the devastation that non‑traditional security threats can cause on a global scale.  In all such efforts, it will be essential to build on the strengths of the Security Council, Peacebuilding Commission, international financial institutions, regional organizations, civil society, the private sector, academia and others.

Issuing a call to action, Nisreen Elsaim, Chair of the Youth Organization on Climate Change and the United Nations Youth Advisory Group, said young people around the globe are watching the Security Council as it grapples with climate change.  Each of the organ’s four meetings on the issue — in 2007, 2011, 2018 and 2019 — have referenced serious climate-related security risks in Somalia, Darfur, West Africa and the Sahel, Mali and the Lake Chad Basin.  “Science has forecasted many more countries will join this list if we did not take the right measures now, and if we did not start adaptation specially in Africa,” she said, adding that, in her country, “we are living in continuous insecurity due to many factors that put Sudan on the top of the list when it comes to climate vulnerability”.

She recalled that, in a 2018 Council resolution on Sudan, members recognized the adverse effects of climate change, ecological changes and natural hazards on the situation in Darfur, focusing specifically on drought, desertification, land degradation and food insecurity.  “Human survival, in a situation of resources degradation, hunger, poverty and uncontrolled climate migration, will make conflict an inevitable result,” she said.  Moreover, climate-related emergencies cause major disruptions in access to health, life-saving sexual and reproductive health services, and result in loss of livelihoods and drive displacement and migration.  They also increase the risk of gender-based violence and harmful practices and force young people to flee in search of a decent life.

Welcoming the Council’s recent deployment of a new special political mission, the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in the Sudan (UNITAMS), she said it has a historic opportunity to speak to the root causes of the conflict.  Climate change and youth participation is mentioned twice in the Mission’s mandate, and climate change challenges are included in the 2020 Juba Peace Agreement.  Emphasizing that young people must be part of the solution, she declared:  “We are the present, we have the future, let’s not repeat previous generations’ lapse.”

In the ensuing dialogue, Heads of State and Government, along with ministers and other senior officials described national actions to attenuate the negative impact of climate change and offered their views on the related security risks.  Some pressed the Council to broaden its thinking about non-traditional security threats.  Several — including leaders from Kenya and Niger — stressed that the link between climate and conflict could not be more evident, while others explored the ability of Governments to meet people’s basic needs, and still others cast doubt on the assertion that the relationship between climate and conflict is causal, instead pointing to political and economic factors that are known to drive tensions.

Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Council President for February, speaking in his national capacity, said the Council, while imperfect, has been willing to lead the way in confronting threats to international security.  “That is exactly what climate change represents,” he said, acknowledging that, while there are some who disagree, these cynics “could not be more wrong”.  While the causes of climate change may not sit within the Council’s traditional purview, its effects most certainly do.  He asked delegates to consider the young man forced onto the road when his once‑fertile home becomes a desert — one of the 16 million people displaced by weather-related disasters each year — who becomes easy prey for violent extremists, or the girl who drops out of school because her daily search for water takes her away from her family — and into the sights of the human traffickers.

“If such scenes were triggered by the actions of some despotic warlord or internecine conflict, few would question this Council’s right to act or its duty to do so,” he assured.  “This is not a subject from which we should shy away.”  The world must move from 51 billion metric tons of greenhouse‑gas emissions each year to net zero, so that the increase in global temperatures remains within manageable levels.  For its part, the United Kingdom Parliament passed a law committing to net zero by 2050, he said, drawing attention to his pledge that the nation would slash emissions by 68 per cent by 2030.  He urged the Council to act, “because climate change is a geopolitical issue every bit as much as an environmental one”, stressing that, if it is to succeed in maintaining peace and security worldwide, it must galvanize and support the United Nations family of agencies into a swift and effective response.

Kaïs Saïed, President of Tunisia , agreed with Ms. Elsaim that the world must listen to youth on climate change.  More broadly, humans — and not money — must be placed at the centre of the issue.  Voicing support for the Secretary-General’s 2021 priorities, especially his efforts to galvanize Member States to confront the multiple impacts of climate change, he described it as ironic that humans are, at the same time, the phenomenon’s drivers and its greatest victims.  “It is no one’s right to […] to commit all of humanity to death,” he stressed, noting that Council resolution 2532 (2020) confirmed that insecurity can be driven by a multitude of factors, not just armed conflict.  One such driver is the deepening poverty and resource scarcity resulting from a changing climate, particularly in Africa.  Climate factors often prolong conflict and create conditions conducive to deprivation, exclusion, terrorism and organized crime.

Calling on the Council to adopt a new, more comprehensive approach and for sufficient resources for all specialized agencies related to climate change, he underlined the need for early warning systems and better prevention strategies.  Noting that the COVID-19 pandemic and other recent crises have once again revealed the need for States to strengthen their solidarity, he emphasized the need for prompt action while stressing that the burden borne by States must be differentiated based on their degree of responsibility for causing the crisis.  Moreover, mitigation cannot be at the expense of developing countries, he said.

Uhuru Kenyatta, President of Kenya , said that new approaches to investment by the public and private sector need to reach the countries and regions worst hit by climate change.  Persistent droughts, constant sea‑level rise and increasingly frequent extreme weather patterns are reversing economic growth and development gains achieved over decades.  The result is increased fragility to instability and armed conflict that then come to the attention of this Security Council.  The implementation of the Council’s mandate to maintain global peace and security will only get more difficult with time if climate change remains on its present course.  Rather than wait for a future tipping point, we must redouble the efforts to direct all the resources and multilateral frameworks of our rules-based international order to mitigate the effects of climate change.  While the bulk of this work is happening outside the Council, no body with such a strong mandate should step aside from this challenge.

The climate-security nexus is already impacting Africa.  “Listen to us Africans when we tell you that the link is clear, its impact tangible and the need for solutions urgent,” he said.  Making recommendations, he said that the Council must do more when crafting mandates for conflict resolution and post-conflict resolution to ensure they dovetail with the efforts to deploy climate change mitigation and adaptation measures.  In this regard, he applauded Council resolutions 2349 (2017) and 2502 (2019), respectively on Lake Chad and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, that have integrated measures to address the impact of climate change.  The 15-member organ can also act strongly against illicit financial outflows, illicit resource exploitation, terrorism financing and money‑laundering in the most fragile regions in Africa.  Doing so immediately boosts the resources available to Governments to undertake climate change mitigation and offer the public services and goods needed to consolidate and protect peace.

Brigi Rafini, Prime Minister of Niger , agreed that the impact of climate change on peace and security is increasingly evident, stressing that water scarcity exacerbated by climate change could see gross domestic product (GDP) in the Sahel fall by 6 per cent and hunger increase 20 per cent by 2050.  Climate change has increased competition for diminished land and water resources, ramping up tensions between livestock owners and others.  He underscored the collective responsibility to tackle this existential challenge, stressing that “climate change and land degradation are no longer purely environmental matters”.  Rather, they are part of a broader view that links environmental goals with those for economic and social development, and the pursuit of international peace and stability.

“We need to consider climate change as a threat to peace and security,” he said, urging the Council to shore up its understanding of impact on security and to systematically consider climate change in its resolutions pertaining to specific country and regional contexts.  In such efforts, it should rely on the advisory role of the Peacebuilding Commission, and the Informal Expert Group on Climate and Security, co-chaired by Niger and Ireland.  The appointment of a Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Climate and Security likewise will raise the profile of this dimension within the Council’s work.

Nguyễn Xuân Phúc, Prime Minister of Viet Nam , said the Earth’s recent calamities have placed great burdens on the political and socioeconomic life of many countries, causing unemployment and poverty, creating instability and exacerbating current conflicts.  Against that backdrop, the Council should galvanize the international community’s collective efforts with an approach that is balanced between traditional and non-traditional security challenges.  That includes addressing the root causes of conflicts such as poverty, inequality, power politics and unilateral interference and coercion.

Calling for strict adherence to the Charter of the United Nations and international law, he said the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement on climate change must guide the way, and greater resources are needed to support developing countries, least developed countries, small island developing States and landlocked countries.  The Council should also enhance its early warning capacity, bolster its mediation and conflict prevention roles, work more closely with regional organizations and fully respect States’ sovereignty and national ownership.  Noting that Viet Nam is among the six countries most severely affected by climate change, he outlined various national efforts to address the challenge while requesting more international assistance.

Erna Solberg, Prime Minister of Norway , emphasized that climate change is redefining the global security landscape.  “We must rethink and adapt the Council’s approaches to peacebuilding and sustaining peace in three ways,” she said.  First, the Council needs better information on climate-related security risks.  International research networks and the informal expert group will be important in that regard.  Norway has helped establish a Nordic-Baltic expert network.  Second, the Council should discuss climate risks in specific country contexts, based on country reporting and briefings.  The United Nations must be at the forefront of preventive diplomacy.  To achieve sustainable solutions, peace diplomacy must be climate-sensitive, and climate action must be conflict‑sensitive.  Third, it is imperative to strengthen partnerships within and beyond the United Nations system, including with affected States and regional organizations.  The active participation of diverse groups, including women and youth, is also vital.

The national security communities in many countries have understood the security risks posed by climate change, she continued.  While climate change can lead to hard security challenges, there are no hard security solutions.  The first line of defence is ambitious climate action.  It must begin with the full implementation of the Paris Agreement and 2030 Agenda.  Climate action depends on multilateral cooperation.  By shouldering a common responsibility to counter climate change, the Council will be better prepared to maintain international peace and stability.

Ralph E. Gonsalves, Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines , emphasizing that the Council has a responsibility to address the consequences of climate change, said a failure to do so would be, in part, “an abdication of our duty”.  It is time for the organ to seriously consider drafting a resolution on the matter and to map out a coherent approach, aiming for a working consensus.  Affirming UNFCCC’s role as the primary body for dealing with climate change and the Paris Agreement as a major part of the rules-based international system, he said the Council should play its role without encroaching on the work of UNFCCC’s inclusive decision-making body.  It should also engage with the Peacebuilding Commission and the General Assembly on climate and security risks that touch on issues of humanitarian support, sustainable development, health pandemics, peace and security.

Stressing that the first step to prevent or contain climate-security risks is for the major, and historical, emitters to fulfil — and indeed exceed — the commitments made in the Paris Agreement, he underlined the principle of common but differentiated responsibility.  Climate change is an existential threat that disproportionately affects the most vulnerable, especially small island developing States such as Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.  “It has become distressingly commonplace for an entire year’s [gross domestic product] to be washed away by a hurricane overnight, even as we are hindered by a lack of a sufficient inclusion, on favourable terms, into the global financial architecture,” he said.  Citing the many natural hazards in Haiti, in particular, he also drew attention to the Sahel region and the battle for dwindling resources.  However, no country is immune to such human-made challenges and all must stand in solidarity, with the Council paying close attention to climate change as it crafts its mandates, he said.

Kaja Kallas, Prime Minister of Estonia , said 7 of the 10 countries most vulnerable and least prepared to deal with climate change host a United Nations peacekeeping operation or a special political mission — a fact the Council cannot ignore.  She expressed support for the statement to be delivered by Germany’s Foreign Minister on behalf of like-minded countries pointing the way forward for the Council, stressing that “we need to acknowledge that the climate emergency can pose a danger to peace — and we must make it a part of our security policy planning and discussions here”.  She pressed the Council to “do more” to fully

aspects of its work, noting that the Secretary-General must receive a mandate to collect data and coordinate policy to this aim.

Among other efforts, she said that Estonia cooperates with small island States and least developed countries in green technology solutions and know-how transfer.  The Government also recently launched the Data for the Environment Alliance, a coalition of State and non-State actors that will support the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in developing a global environmental data strategy by 2025.

Simon Coveney, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence of Ireland , said that climate change has many complex impacts, not least on international peace and security, the very business of this Council.  Climate change is already causing upheaval, affecting peace and security and the stability of societies.  Pointing out that the relationship between climate and security works in complex ways, he said political instability undermines efforts to build climate resilience, and the impact of climactic shocks is compounded when institutions are strained.  Ireland is proud to join the Weathering Risk Project to help guide action at the Security Council and beyond, and is keen to understand better not just how climate change contributes to insecurity but how climate action can build peace.  Ireland chairs the Informal Expert Group of Member States on this topic, together with Niger, also partnering with Nauru and Germany, as Chairs of the Group of Friends on Climate and Security.

Ireland’s core message today is that the inclusion of climate in Council discussions and actions will strengthen conflict prevention and support peacebuilding efforts.  Stressing the need to ensure the full, equal and meaningful participation of women and youth in decision-making processes related to climate issues and the management of natural resources, he declared:  “But, in listening to and understanding the concerns and insights of future generations, we cannot abrogate our responsibility to provide leadership today”.

Marcelo Ebrard Casaubón, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mexico , said the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed that international peace and security can no longer be viewed through a single lens, but must also consider multiple drivers of insecurity.  Food insecurity, water scarcity and droughts — all exacerbated by climate change — have reached severe levels in several regions of the world.  Pledging Mexico’s support to the next Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC in Glasgow, later in 2021, he said climate change requires a comprehensive global response with a focus on ecosystem preservations.  Mexico recently submitted its own national plan in that arena, which is coupled with a focus on prevention and adaptation, as well as efforts to reduce inequality and strengthen communities.  Stressing that all efforts must be taken in line with the 2030 Agenda, he welcomed the Council’s creation of an informal group to monitor the links between climate and peace and security as a timely measure.  Underlining the importance of ensuring sustainable peacebuilding and protecting livelihoods, he agreed with the Secretary-General that post-pandemic recovery efforts are an opportunity to “build back better” and build more egalitarian, adaptable societies.

Emmanuel Macron, President of France , said protecting the environment has, in recent years, meant recognizing climate change as a peace and security issue.  Of the 20 countries most affected by conflict in the world, 12 are also severely impacted by climate change, he said, spotlighting the impacts of desertification, the increase in forced migration and agricultural challenges — all of which have resulted in such fallout as the advent of climate refugees and growing conflicts over land and water.  Endorsing the initiative to address such matters under the auspices of the Council, he echoed calls for the appointment of a United Nations Special Envoy for Climate Security, as well as for an annual Secretary-General’s report with relevant recommendations.

Recognizing that the effects of climate change are unfairly distributed worldwide, he recalled his recent call for France’s contribution to the Green Climate Fund to be increased to one third of its total.  France strongly supports the creation of a “Great Green Wall” in Africa, which aims to restore 250 million hectares of land for agriculture, create 10 million green new jobs and sequester carbon.  He also pledged France’s commitment to accelerating the preservation of biodiversity, while calling for strengthened dialogue between the African Union and the United Nations on climate and security.  Turning to the Pacific, where many nations are struggling to implement mitigation measures, he called for additional international support and an easing of geopolitical tensions across the region.

Prakash Javadekar, Minister for Environment, Forests and Climate Change of  India , recalled the global democratic effort to take climate action in a nationally determined manner, based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities.  He cautioned the Council against building a parallel climate track where such principles are “brushed aside”.  Noting that there is no common, widely accepted methodology for assessing the links between climate change, conflict and fragility, he said fragility and climate impact are highly context‑specific.  In fragile contexts, where Governments struggle to provide basic services, emergency conditions are largely driven by political violence disrupting harvests and aid supplies, rather than by climate factors alone.  “A complete picture of climate vulnerability only emerges with an assessment of the State’s capacity to be the primary responder to interrelated environmental, social, economic and security dynamics,” he said.  While climate change does not directly cause violent conflict, its interaction with other social, political and economic factors can exacerbate conflict drivers.  He called for the building of robust governance structures at local, national and regional levels to address climate‑ and fragility-related risks, pressing donor countries to provide greater financial, technological and capacity-building assistance to help fragile States enact adaption and mitigation strategies.

John F. Kerry, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate of the United States , thanked European and other countries for their leadership on climate change during what he described as the United States “inexcusable absence” from the debate over the past four years.  Though climate change is indeed an existential threat, the world has yet to adequately respond to it.  Noting that the question of climate change is no longer one for debate, he declared:  “The evidence, the science, is screaming at us.”  Many of the world’s regions most impacted by climate change are also projected to become future conflict hotspots.  Therefore, the issue must feature in all of the Council’s work and reporting.  Emphasizing that President Joseph R. Biden understands that “we do not have a moment to waste”, he cited his new coordinated, whole-of-Government approach which aims to elevate the issue and put the United States on the path to sustainability that can never be reversed by any future President or demagogue.

Addressing climate change will require every country to step up and boost their level of ambition, he said, noting that the world’s largest carbon emitters bear the greatest responsibility.  First and foremost will be the need to reduce the use of coal globally.  “Inaction comes with a far higher price tag than action,” he said, stressing that, not since the industrial revolution has there been such potential to build back better in every part of the globe.  Just by doing nothing, humanity will march forward in what is tantamount to a mutual suicide pact, he warned, spotlighting the importance of the climate summit to be hosted by President Biden in the coming weeks, as well as the Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC to be held in Glasgow later in 2021.  The United States will also work with like-minded countries in the Council, he said, urging Member States to begin treating climate change as the security crisis that it is.

Xie Zhenhua, Special Envoy for Climate Change of China , said that, even as global climate governance enters a new and crucial phase, the spread of COVID-19 poses serious threats to the global response.  Given the differences in historical responsibility and development levels between States, he underscored the principle of common but differentiated responsibility and urged developed nations to lead the way.  In building back after the pandemic, countries should respect nature, protect biodiversity, champion green lifestyles and “avoid old paths of giving without taking” from the Earth.  In that context, he described climate change as a development issue, urging the international community to support developing nations, least developed countries and small island developing States in implementing mitigation and adaptation measures.

“We need to stay committed to multilateralism,” he stressed, underlining the importance of UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement as the main channels for those critical discussions.  Any role to be played by the Security Council on climate change must fall under its purview, he added.  Outlining China’s commitment to fulfilling its responsibilities under the Paris Agreement, he spotlighted its recently announced plan to have national CO 2 emissions peak before 2030 and to achieve carbon neutrality prior to 2060.  He also pointed out that the country’s forest cover has been rising steadily for many years, that it leads the world in green power generation and that it tops the list of clean energy patents registered.

The representative of the Russian Federation agreed that addressing climate change requires a global approach that is coordinated, targeted at reducing emissions and implementing effective adaptation measures, especially through UNFCCC.  Noting that the Council has discussed climate change on several occasions, he said the issue is often presented as a fundamental threat to stability and as a root cause of problems, particularly in Africa, with warnings about the increasing risks of conflict.  While he agreed that climate change can exacerbate conflict, he questioned whether it is the root cause of violence.  “There are serious doubts,” he said.  The connection between climate and conflict can be examined only in certain countries and regions.  Discussing it in the global context is not relevant.  “Not all conflicts are threats to international peace and security,” he explained.  In addition, considering climate as a root cause of security issues distracts from the true root causes, and thus, hinders solutions.  Political and socioeconomic factors, which have a greater influence on conflict risk, cannot be ignored, he said, pointing out that COVID-19 has exacerbated inequalities within and between countries and sparked an uptick in hunger — including in countries that were already in conflict.  He urged donors to address the problem of “green protectionism”, seen in their refusal to exchange technology that would allow others to adapt.   While discussing climate issues in the Council is seen as beneficial, the “real work” of improving coordination of international activities would be better accomplished in the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and UNFCC.  Conflicts — in and of themselves — reduce the ability of States to adapt to climate change, he said, explaining that the increased security risks in the Sahel are, in fact, caused by countries pursuing regime change in Libya.

Lazarus McCarthy Chakwera, President of Malawi , speaking for the least developed countries, said building resilience to mitigate the security risks associated with climate change must begin with reflections on COVID-19, as Governments have relegated many other priorities in the quest to fight the virus.  Describing the impact of the nexus between climate change and security is “indiscriminate and consequential”, he said water scarcity, desertification and cyclones all foster competition for resources, and in the process, turn people into climate refugees.  Least developed countries bear the brunt of these phenomena, despite that their emissions are 30 times lower than those of high‑income countries.  Stressing that recovery from the coronavirus must be aligned with efforts to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C, he pressed developed countries to approach the 2021 UNFCC meeting with more ambition than in years past, as their current commitments to cut emissions remain “woefully inadequate”.  They must fulfil their pledges to provide $100 billion in climate financing annually, answer the call to earmark 50 per cent of financing in the Green Climate Fund for adaptation, especially in least developed countries, and to meaningfully transfer climate‑friendly technologies to help least developed countries accelerate their green development efforts.

Gaston Alphonso Browne, Prime Minister and Minister for Finance and Corporate Governance of Antigua and Barbuda , spoke on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, declaring:  “Make no mistake […] climate change’s existential threat to our own survival is not a future consideration, but a current reality.”  For the past 30 years, the Alliance has been the single most consistent advocate on climate, he said, highlighting the often-overlooked threats faced by small island developing States.  He urged the international community to simultaneously plan and operationalize a system to address inevitable loss and damage which uproot peace and security of small island developing States.  Equitable solutions are needed to systematically address difficult issues, such as climate change displacement, including the treatment of climate refugees, and loss of territory. For the past three decades, small island and low-lying States have been sounding the alarm, sending the SOS distress signal.  They are losing their territories, populations, resources and very existence due to climate change.  The Secretary-General recently stated:  “Without nature’s help, we will not thrive or even survive[…] For too long, we have been waging a senseless and suicidal war on nature.”  Sadly, small island developing States continue to be the front line for this war.  “Our appeal for the Council is to take this threat very seriously before it is too late,” he said.

Heiko Maas, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany , speaking for the Group of Friends of Climate and Security, said those countries are united by the common belief that climate change is the fundamental challenge of our time.  The poorest and most vulnerable are suffering the most, with entire islands at risk of disappearing.  “We are putting their future, their safety and their well‑being at risk if we don’t act,” he stressed, calling for concerted efforts by the United Nations in making climate change its top priority.  Agreeing with other speakers that the issue has major implications for peace and security, he said it therefore belongs firmly on the Council’s agenda.  In July 2020, the Nauru delegation presented the organ with a plan of action, including calling for the appointment of a Special Envoy on Climate and Security; regular reporting to the Council; climate‑sensitive peacebuilding; and more cooperation with civil society, regional and national actors on climate-related security risks.  Now, it is time for the Council to adopt a strong resolution reflecting each of those points, he said.

Facebook Twitter Email Print LinkedIn

• News, Stories & Speeches
• Get Involved
• Structure and leadership
• Committee of Permanent Representatives
• UN Environment Assembly
• Funding and partnerships
• Policies and strategies
• Evaluation Office
• Secretariats and Conventions
• Asia and the Pacific
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• New York Office
• North America
• Climate action
• Nature action
• Chemicals and pollution action
• Digital Transformations
• Disasters and conflicts
• Environment under review
• Environmental law and governance
• Extractives
• Fresh Water
• Green economy
• Ocean, seas and coasts
• Resource efficiency
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Youth, education and environment
• Publications & data

1. Spread the word

Encourage your friends, family and co-workers to reduce their carbon pollution. Join a global movement like  Count Us In, which aims to inspire 1 billion people to take practical steps and challenge their leaders to act more boldly on climate. Organizers of the platform say that if 1 billion people took action, they could reduce as much as 20 per cent of global carbon emissions. Or you could sign up to the UN’s  #ActNow campaign on climate change and sustainability and add your voice to this critical global debate.

2. Keep up the political pressure

Lobby local politicians and businesses to support efforts to cut emissions and reduce carbon pollution.  #ActNow Speak Up  has sections on political pressure and corporate action - and Count Us In also has  some handy tips  for how to do this. Pick an environmental issue you care about, decide on a specific request for change and then try to arrange a meeting with your local representative. It might seem intimidating but your voice deserves to be heard. If humanity is to succeed in tackling the climate emergency, politicians must be part of the solution. It’s up to all of us to keep up with the pressure. 

3. Transform your transport

Transport accounts for around a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions and across the world, many governments are implementing policies to decarbonize travel. You can get a head start: leave your car at home and walk or cycle whenever possible. If the distances are too great, choose public transport, preferably electric options. If you must drive, offer to carpool with others so that fewer cars are on the road. Get ahead of the curve and buy an electric car. Reduce the number of long-haul flights you take. 

4. Rein in your power use

If you can, switch to a zero-carbon or renewable energy provider. Install solar panels on your roof. Be more efficient: turn your heating down a degree or two, if possible. Switch off appliances and lights when you are not using them and better yet buy the most efficient products in the first place (hint: this will save you money!). Insulate your loft or roof: you’ll be warmer in the winter, cooler in the summer and save some money too. 

5. Tweak your diet

Eat more plant-based meals – your body and the planet will thank you. Today, around 60 per cent of the world’s agricultural land is used for livestock grazing and people in many countries are consuming more animal-sourced food than is healthy. Plant-rich diets can help reduce chronic illnesses, such as heart disease, stroke, diabetes and cancer.

The climate emergency demands action from all of us. We need to get to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and everyone has a role to play.

6. Shop local and buy sustainable

To reduce your food’s carbon footprint, buy local and seasonal foods. You’ll be helping small businesses and farms in your area and reducing fossil fuel emissions associated with transport and cold chain storage. Sustainable agriculture uses up to 56 per cent less energy, creates 64 per cent fewer emissions and allows for greater levels of biodiversity than conventional farming. Go one step further and try growing your own fruit, vegetables and herbs. You can plant them in a garden, on a balcony or even on a window sill. Set up a community garden in your neighbourhood to get others involved. 

7. Don’t waste food

One-third of all food produced is either lost or wasted. According to UNEP’s  Food Waste Index Report 2021 , people globally waste 1 billion tonnes of food each year, which accounts for around 8-10 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Avoid waste by only buying what you need. Take advantage of every edible part of the foods you purchase. Measure portion sizes of rice and other staples before cooking them, store food correctly (use your freezer if you have one), be creative with leftovers, share extras with your friends and neighbours and contribute to a local food-sharing scheme. Make compost out of inedible remnants and use it to fertilize your garden. Composting is one of the best options for managing organic waste while also reducing environmental impacts.

8. Dress (climate) smart

The fashion industry accounts for 8-10 per cent of global carbon emissions – more than all international flights and maritime shipping combined – and ‘fast fashion’ has created a throwaway culture that sees clothes quickly end up in landfills. But we can change this. Buy fewer new clothes and wear them longer. Seek out sustainable labels and use rental services for special occasions rather than buying new items that will only be worn once. Recycle pre-loved clothes and repair when necessary.

9. Plant trees  

Every year approximately 12 million hectares of forest are destroyed and this deforestation, together with agriculture and other land use changes, is responsible for roughly 25 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. We can all play a part in reversing this trend by planting trees, either individually or as part of a collective. For example, the Plant-for-the-Planet initiative allows people to sponsor tree-planting around the world.

Check out this UNEP guide to see what else you can do as part of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration , a global drive to halt the degradation of land and oceans, protect biodiversity, and rebuild ecosystems. 

10. Focus on planet-friendly investments

Individuals can also spur change through their savings and investments by choosing financial institutions that do not invest in carbon-polluting industries. #ActNow Speak Up  has a section on money and so does  Count Us In . This sends a clear signal to the market and already many financial institutions are offering more ethical investments, allowing you to use your money to support causes you believe in and avoid those you don’t. You can ask your financial institution about their responsible banking policies and find out how they rank in independent research. 

UNEP is at the front in support of the Paris Agreement goal of keeping the global temperature rise well below 2°C, and aiming - to be safe - for 1.5°C, compared to pre-industrial levels. To do this, UNEP has developed a Six-Sector Solution . The Six Sector Solution is a roadmap to reducing emissions across sectors in line with the Paris Agreement commitments and in pursuit of climate stability. The six sectors identified are Energy; Industry; Agriculture & Food; Forests & Land Use; Transport; and Buildings & Cities.

• Clean fuels
• Energy Efficiency
• Sustainable Development

Further Resources

• 7 climate action highlights to remember before COP26
• Climate Action Note - data you need to know
• Emissions Gap Report 2021
• Food Waste Index 2021
• Act Now: the UN campaign for individual action
• Count Us In
• Food Loss and Waste Website

Related Content

Related Sustainable Development Goals

© 2024 UNEP Terms of Use Privacy   Report Project Concern Report Scam Contact Us

Search the United Nations

• What Is Climate Change
• Myth Busters
• Renewable Energy
• Finance & Justice
• Initiatives
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Paris Agreement
• Climate Ambition Summit 2023
• Climate Conferences
• Press Material
• Communications Tips

The climate crisis is a humanitarian crisis

Climate change is a top driver of humanitarian need and human suffering, particularly for the poorest countries. The impacts threaten to deepen already wide inequalities, resulting in consequences felt by the world at large, including instability, violence and displacement.

In a recent speech on humanitarian policy, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Mark Lowcock, made the case for action to support the world’s most vulnerable communities, stressing that in 2020, 12 of the 20 countries most vulnerable to climate change had an inter-agency humanitarian appeal. He detailed ongoing and destabilizing fallout from pressures on livelihoods, water, food and health, among other issues.

“Humanitarian aid can only be a temporary band-aid – and a woefully small one at that. We need leaders around the world to take smarter decisions and make smarter investments today,” he said, offering some priorities.

First, scale up adaptation finance to prevent, prepare for, and respond to growing humanitarian crises, and to make communities more resilient.

Second, many countries are getting better at responding to climate-related disasters; the number of people killed by disasters globally has steadily declined. The world needs to continue and scale up investment in preparedness, early warning and resilience-building strategies.

Third, leaps forward in science and technology continue to improve predictions of climate-related crises, shaping anticipatory actions and allowing faster action when disaster is about to strike.

Fourth, the most vulnerable countries need greater access to contingency finance and insurance for rapid response and recovery at a larger scale.

Fifth, overlapping vulnerabilities need to be reflected in the operations of international financial institutions. As a recent IMF and World Bank report recognized, a combination of debt burdens, climate change and environmental degradation as a “systemic risk to the global economy.”

Lowcock stressed that there are far more solutions out there. “Researchers and organizers in the most vulnerable countries will have far more innovative and wise ideas than I for how to mitigate and adapt to the risks of climate change,” he concluded. “The world should listen to them.”

Reach the speech .

Explore the issues .

Heatwaves put bees at risk

Eleven-year-old Markela is a fifth generation beekeeper, but climate change is making it so that she may not be able to carry on the family tradition. Wildfires, heatwaves, and droughts that are increasing in intensity and frequency due to the climate crisis, put bees and the ecosystems at risk.

Healing Chile’s Huapi Island

On Chile’s Huapi Island, native forests have become fragmented, making the soils poorer and drier and leaving the population vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Now, thanks to the restoration efforts of Indigenous Peoples, native trees are making a comeback.

Early warning systems are saving lives in Central Asia

As Central Asia grapples with the increasing frequency and severity of climate-induced hazards, the importance of robust early warning systems cannot be overstated. However, countries need both technical knowledge and resources to effectively implement these systems on a large scale. Japan has been a reliable ally for countries, helping advance early warning systems and increase resilience in the region.

Facts and figures

• What is climate change?
• Causes and effects
• Myth busters

Cutting emissions

• Explaining net zero
• High-level expert group on net zero
• Checklists for credibility of net-zero pledges
• Greenwashing
• What you can do

Clean energy

• Renewable energy – key to a safer future
• What is renewable energy
• Five ways to speed up the energy transition
• Why invest in renewable energy
• Clean energy stories
• A just transition

Adapting to climate change

• Climate adaptation
• Early warnings for all
• Youth voices

Financing climate action

• Finance and justice
• Loss and damage
• $100 billion commitment
• Why finance climate action
• Biodiversity
• Human Security

International cooperation

• What are Nationally Determined Contributions
• Acceleration Agenda
• Climate Ambition Summit
• Climate conferences (COPs)
• Youth Advisory Group
• Action initiatives
• Secretary-General’s speeches
• Press material
• Fact sheets
• Communications tips

Explore Greyhound Nation

• Loyola Today

Our Future Is Now - A Climate Change Essay by Francesca Minicozzi, '21

Francesca Minicozzi (class of 2021) is a Writing/Biology major who plans to study medicine after graduation. She wrote this essay on climate change for WR 355/Travel Writing, which she took while studying abroad in Newcastle in spring 2020. Although the coronavirus pandemic curtailed Francesca’s time abroad, her months in Newcastle prompted her to learn more about climate change. Terre Ryan Associate Professor, Writing Department

Our Future Is Now

By Francesca Minicozzi, '21 Writing and Biology Major

 “If you don’t mind me asking, how is the United States preparing for climate change?” my flat mate, Zac, asked me back in March, when we were both still in Newcastle. He and I were accustomed to asking each other about the differences between our home countries; he came from Cambridge, while I originated in Long Island, New York. This was one of our numerous conversations about issues that impact our generation, which we usually discussed while cooking dinner in our communal kitchen. In the moment of our conversation, I did not have as strong an answer for him as I would have liked. Instead, I informed him of the few changes I had witnessed within my home state of New York.

Zac’s response was consistent with his normal, diplomatic self. “I have been following the BBC news in terms of the climate crisis for the past few years. The U.K. has been working hard to transition to renewable energy sources. Similar to the United States, here in the United Kingdom we have converted over to solar panels too. My home does not have solar panels, but a lot of our neighbors have switched to solar energy in the past few years.”

“Our two countries are similar, yet so different,” I thought. Our conversation continued as we prepared our meals, with topics ranging from climate change to the upcoming presidential election to Britain’s exit from the European Union. However, I could not shake the fact that I knew so little about a topic so crucial to my generation.

After I abruptly returned home from the United Kingdom because of the global pandemic, my conversation with my flat mate lingered in my mind. Before the coronavirus surpassed climate change headlines, I had seen the number of internet postings regarding protests to protect the planet dramatically increase. Yet the idea of our planet becoming barren and unlivable in a not-so-distant future had previously upset me to the point where a part of me refused to deal with it. After I returned from studying abroad, I decided to educate myself on the climate crisis.

My quest for climate change knowledge required a thorough understanding of the difference between “climate change” and “global warming.” Climate change is defined as “a pattern of change affecting global or regional climate,” based on “average temperature and rainfall measurements” as well as the frequency of extreme weather events. 1   These varied temperature and weather events link back to both natural incidents and human activity. 2   Likewise, the term global warming was coined “to describe climate change caused by humans.” 3   Not only that, but global warming is most recently attributed to an increase in “global average temperature,” mainly due to greenhouse gas emissions produced by humans. 4

I next questioned why the term “climate change” seemed to take over the term “global warming” in the United States. According to Frank Luntz, a leading Republican consultant, the term “global warming” functions as a rather intimidating phrase. During George W. Bush’s first presidential term, Luntz argued in favor of using the less daunting phrase “climate change” in an attempt to overcome the environmental battle amongst Democrats and Republicans. 5   Since President Bush’s term, Luntz remains just one political consultant out of many politicians who has recognized the need to address climate change. In an article from 2019, Luntz proclaimed that political parties aside, the climate crisis affects everyone. Luntz argued that politicians should steer clear of trying to communicate “the complicated science of climate change,” and instead engage voters by explaining how climate change personally impacts citizens with natural disasters such as hurricanes, tornadoes, and forest fires. 6   He even suggested that a shift away from words like “sustainability” would gear Americans towards what they really want: a “cleaner, safer, healthier” environment. 7

The idea of a cleaner and heathier environment remains easier said than done. The Paris Climate Agreement, introduced in 2015, began the United Nations’ “effort to combat global climate change.” 8   This agreement marked a global initiative to “limit global temperature increase in this century to 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels,” while simultaneously “pursuing means to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees.” 9    Every country on earth has joined together in this agreement for the common purpose of saving our planet. 10   So, what could go wrong here? As much as this sounds like a compelling step in the right direction for climate change, President Donald Trump thought otherwise. In June 2017, President Trump announced the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement with his proclamation of climate change as a “’hoax’ perpetrated by China.” 11   President Trump continued to question the scientific facts behind climate change, remaining an advocate for the expansion of domestic fossil fuel production. 12   He reversed environmental policies implemented by former President Barack Obama to reduce fossil fuel use. 13

Trump’s actions against the Paris Agreement, however, fail to represent the beliefs of Americans as a whole. The majority of American citizens feel passionate about the fight against climate change. To demonstrate their support, some have gone as far as creating initiatives including America’s Pledge and We Are Still In. 14   Although the United States officially exited the Paris Agreement on November 4, 2020, this withdrawal may not survive permanently. 15   According to experts, our new president “could rejoin in as short as a month’s time.” 16   This offers a glimmer of hope.

The Paris Agreement declares that the United States will reduce greenhouse gas emission levels by 26 to 28 percent by the year 2025. 17   As a leader in greenhouse gas emissions, the United States needs to accept the climate crisis for the serious challenge that it presents and work together with other nations. The concept of working coherently with all nations remains rather tricky; however, I remain optimistic. I think we can learn from how other countries have adapted to the increased heating of our planet. During my recent study abroad experience in the United Kingdom, I was struck by Great Britain’s commitment to combating climate change.

Since the United Kingdom joined the Paris Agreement, the country targets a “net-zero” greenhouse gas emission for 2050. 18   This substantial alteration would mark an 80% reduction of greenhouse gases from 1990, if “clear, stable, and well-designed policies are implemented without interruption.” 19   In order to stay on top of reducing emissions, the United Kingdom tracks electricity and car emissions, “size of onshore and offshore wind farms,” amount of homes and “walls insulated, and boilers upgraded,” as well as the development of government policies, including grants for electric vehicles. 20   A strong grip on this data allows the United Kingdom to target necessary modifications that keep the country on track for 2050. In my brief semester in Newcastle, I took note of these significant changes. The city of Newcastle is small enough that many students and faculty are able to walk or bike to campus and nearby essential shops. However, when driving is unavoidable, the majority of the vehicles used are electric, and many British citizens place a strong emphasis on carpooling to further reduce emissions. The United Kingdom’s determination to severely reduce greenhouse emissions is ambitious and particularly admirable, especially as the United States struggles to shy away from its dependence on fossil fuels.

So how can we, as Americans, stand together to combat global climate change? Here are five adjustments Americans can make to their homes and daily routines that can dramatically make a difference:

• Stay cautious of food waste. Studies demonstrate that “Americans throw away up to 40 percent of the food they buy.” 21   By being more mindful of the foods we purchase, opting for leftovers, composting wastes, and donating surplus food to those in need, we can make an individual difference that impacts the greater good. 22   
• Insulate your home. Insulation functions as a “cost-effective and accessible” method to combat climate change. 23   Homes with modern insulation reduce energy required to heat them, leading to a reduction of emissions and an overall savings; in comparison, older homes can “lose up to 35 percent of heat through their walls.” 24   
• Switch to LED Lighting. LED stands for “light-emitting diodes,” which use “90 percent less energy than incandescent bulbs and half as much as compact fluorescents.” 25   LED lights create light without producing heat, and therefore do not waste energy. Additionally, these lights have a longer duration than other bulbs, which means they offer a continuing savings. 26  
• Choose transportation wisely. Choose to walk or bike whenever the option presents itself. If walking or biking is not an option, use an electric or hybrid vehicle which emits less harmful gases. Furthermore, reduce the number of car trips taken, and carpool with others when applicable. 
• Finally, make your voice heard. The future of our planet remains in our hands, so we might as well use our voices to our advantage. Social media serves as a great platform for this. Moreover, using social media to share helpful hints to combat climate change within your community or to promote an upcoming protest proves beneficial in the long run. If we collectively put our voices to good use, together we can advocate for change.

As many of us are stuck at home due to the COVID-19 pandemic, these suggestions are slightly easier to put into place. With numerous “stay-at-home” orders in effect, Americans have the opportunity to make significant achievements for climate change. Personally, I have taken more precautions towards the amount of food consumed within my household during this pandemic. I have been more aware of food waste, opting for leftovers when too much food remains. Additionally, I have realized how powerful my voice is as a young college student. Now is the opportunity for Americans to share how they feel about climate change. During this unprecedented time, our voice is needed now more than ever in order to make a difference.

However, on a much larger scale, the coronavirus outbreak has shed light on reducing global energy consumption. Reductions in travel, both on the roads and in the air, have triggered a drop in emission rates. In fact, the International Energy Agency predicts a 6 percent decrease in energy consumption around the globe for this year alone. 27   This drop is “equivalent to losing the entire energy demand of India.” 28   Complete lockdowns have lowered the global demand for electricity and slashed CO2 emissions. However, in New York City, the shutdown has only decreased carbon dioxide emissions by 10 percent. 29   This proves that a shift in personal behavior is simply not enough to “fix the carbon emission problem.” 30   Climate policies aimed to reduce fossil fuel production and promote clean technology will be crucial steppingstones to ameliorating climate change effects. Our current reduction of greenhouse gas emissions serves as “the sort of reduction we need every year until net-zero emissions are reached around 2050.” 31   From the start of the coronavirus pandemic, politicians came together for the common good of protecting humanity; this demonstrates that when necessary, global leaders are capable of putting humankind above the economy. 32

After researching statistics comparing the coronavirus to climate change, I thought back to the moment the virus reached pandemic status. I knew that a greater reason underlay all of this global turmoil. Our globe is in dire need of help, and the coronavirus reminds the world of what it means to work together. This pandemic marks a turning point in global efforts to slow down climate change. The methods we enact towards not only stopping the spread of the virus, but slowing down climate change, will ultimately depict how humanity will arise once this pandemic is suppressed. The future of our home planet lies in how we treat it right now. 

• “Climate Change: What Do All the Terms Mean?,” BBC News (BBC, May 1, 2019), https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48057733 )
• Ibid. 
• Kate Yoder, “Frank Luntz, the GOP's Message Master, Calls for Climate Action,” Grist (Grist, July 26, 2019), https://grist.org/article/the-gops-most-famous-messaging-strategist-calls-for-climate-action
• Melissa Denchak, “Paris Climate Agreement: Everything You Need to Know,” NRDC, April 29, 2020, https://www.nrdc.org/stories/paris-climate-agreement-everything-you-need-know)
• “Donald J. Trump's Foreign Policy Positions,” Council on Foreign Relations (Council on Foreign Relations), accessed May 7, 2020, https://www.cfr.org/election2020/candidate-tracker/donald-j.-trump?gclid=CjwKCAjw4871BRAjEiwAbxXi21cneTRft_doA5if60euC6QCL7sr-Jwwv76IkgWaUTuyJNx9EzZzRBoCdjsQAvD_BwE#climate and energy )
• David Doniger, “Paris Climate Agreement Explained: Does Congress Need to Sign Off?,” NRDC, December 15, 2016, https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-doniger/paris-climate-agreement-explained-does-congress-need-sign )
• “How the UK Is Progressing,” Committee on Climate Change, March 9, 2020, https://www.theccc.org.uk/what-is-climate-change/reducing-carbon-emissions/how-the-uk-is-progressing/)
• Ibid.  
• “Top 10 Ways You Can Fight Climate Change,” Green America, accessed May 7, 2020, https://www.greenamerica.org/your-green-life/10-ways-you-can-fight-climate-change )
• Matt McGrath, “Climate Change and Coronavirus: Five Charts about the Biggest Carbon Crash,” BBC News (BBC, May 5, 2020), https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/science-environment-52485712 )

Project September 3, 2024

The Climate Crisis in Post-Conflict Sri Lanka

Devastated by war and economic crisis, Sri Lanka’s under-resourced and fragile Tamil-speaking region faces ongoing resistance to Sinhalese colonization. Although the demands of the Tamil minority revolve strongly around land—strong notions of homeland, self-determination, opposition to military land grabs—the land itself is changing.

The North and Northwestern provinces are climate hotspots , impacted by sea level rises, coastal inundation, salinization and extreme weather events. Although working-class agricultural and fishing communities are a majority in these areas, they have historically been marginalized from discourse and decision-making.

This project follows farmers unable to predict the weather, fishermen turning to rituals to increase their catch, and government bureaucrats who complain about the lack of resources. This reporting project also interrogates possible solutions. Will a desalination plant help mitigate the region’s persistent water insecurity? Will a mangrove replantation scheme reduce seawater intrusion? Is the solution to return to local farming systems and food cultures?

Climate Change Brings a New Emergency to the Tamil Homeland in Sri Lanka

RELATED PROJECTS

Sri lanka: beyond the headlines.

May 13, 2024

Scorched by Heat: Sri Lankan Female Farmers Bear Climate Change

February 10, 2024

Climate Change: The Cost on India's Forests and Livelihoods

October 6, 2023

RELATED TOPICS

Environment and Climate Change

Land Rights

Water and Sanitation

War and Conflict

• Share full article

Advertisement

Got Climate Doom? Here’s What You Can Do to Actually Make a Difference

Genevieve guenther and david wallace-wells on what matters and doesn’t in your personal fight against climate change..

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Today on “The Argument,” in the fight against climate change, what actions actually matter?

Climate change is are our doing. And the way we humans are occupying the planet isn’t just unsustainable, it is actively causing present and future harm. Clearly, large scale changes are urgently immediately needed at the country and corporate level for everybody everywhere. But what’s an individual like you or me to do? Should we stop flying on planes, eating meat, using straws, having children? Should we get better at composting? Does recycling matter? Not to get all existential, though I guess this is existential, but does any of it matter?

I’m Jane Coaston. And today I’m talking to two people who think really deeply about this question. My guests are author David Wallace-Wells, who wrote the book “The Uninhabitable Earth,” and Genevieve Guenther, climate communication activist and founder of the organization, End Climate Silence.

David, Genevieve, could you give me a one-sentence nutshell as to where you stand on the issue of personal responsibility on climate change?

My basic feeling is that the changes that we need are all systemic. And so the things that individuals can do to make that change are primarily through the political realm, not through their individual behavior. If we want to really halt this problem and get a handle on it, it means large, large scale changes that are beyond the capacity of individuals to enact on their own.

I actually agree with David. This is a systemic problem that is only going to be solved by governments and large corporations leading the transformation of our economies to zero-emission economies. That said, rich people across the globe have a responsibility, a personal responsibility, to reduce their discretionary emissions, to reduce their consumption, both for climate justice reasons and also simply because we need them to do it if we’re going to meet our emissions targets and halt global heating.

Could you explain what climate justice means to an audience that is me?

Basically, it means that the global north historically has been responsible for the vast majority of carbon pollution. And the global south has been responsible for almost none of it. Since 1990, for example, the top 10 percent of earners have been responsible for 52 percent of the growth of global emissions. And the poorest, 50 percent, who largely live in the global south, have been responsible for about 7 percent of global emissions. But that hasn’t grown at all. Historically, they have contributed nothing to the exponential growth of emissions and the increased and accelerating global heating that we’re already seeing. So the idea of climate justice is that global north nations have a moral responsibility to reduce their emissions first and faster so that there is some room left in whatever carbon budget we still have for the global south to pull themselves out of poverty.

It’s really, really stark, as Genevieve lays out, that it is the wealthy countries of the world and the wealthy people of the world who have engineered this crisis. So whenever we hear about the problem of India, the problem of electrifying sub-Saharan Africa, these are problems. We need to figure them out and do them clean in a way that doesn’t imperil the future of the planet. But those are only problems that we have to deal with now because of the development patterns that countries like ours and across northern Europe went through over the last few decades and centuries.

A lot of this has to do with differences in income and class and countries that are politically and culturally marginalized or politically and culturally powerful, which makes climate responsibility a very interestingly tricky issue.

Can I just jump in for one second?

And just say that the word “responsibility” has two different definitions, right? There’s the sense of responsibility as guilt. Who is responsible for this crime? Who has to pay the price? But then there’s responsibility as duty. Who’s going to take responsibility for cleaning up this mess? Most of the people who are listening to this podcast and nobody in this room, for sure, is responsible for causing the climate crisis. But we’re all responsible for now solving it to the best way that we can.

So let’s get into that. And I love that definitional split because me feeling bad about climate change doesn’t really help. So, I live in one of the wealthy countries that helped to cause this and caused this long before I was born. So, David, I’d like to start the conversation with you. Do my personal actions, be they avoiding plastic straws or composting or calculating my personal carbon footprint, as oil companies seem to really want me to do, or switching light bulbs or becoming a vegetarian, in the scheme of averting climate change or mitigating climate change, do those actions really matter?

Well, some of them can matter in limiting your carbon footprint. So if you don’t eat beef, if you don’t take airplanes, if you drive an electric car, you’re probably pretty far along in reducing your own carbon footprint. And that is one measure of climate responsibility, carbon responsibility. But ultimately, the things that we need to do to really get a hold of this are way bigger than cutting your food emissions by 10 percent or 50 percent or whatever. It’s like, the three of us in this room, we can’t build an electric grid, a solar farm. We can’t make sure that there are Tesla charging stations all across the country. We can’t re-imagine land use policy or agricultural policy. We can’t put an honest price on carbon so that when you’re buying gas, you’re actually paying for the environmental damage that’s being caused or when you’re buying an airplane ticket. Those are just things that are well outside of our capacity to control. And some of the actions that you’re talking about, the individual actions, I think can be useful in terms of generating small scale political energy that can eventually sort of trickle up into politics. Leaders see that we’re making changes. They see that we’re demanding changes. They may feel more comfortable making those changes themselves. But it’s only through policy that we’re really going to get where we are hoping to go. And some of the changes that you’re talking about, people are compelled to do because they don’t want to feel a part of the ugliness of the destruction of the planet, more than because they’re making a rational calculation about how best to use their time and what they can do that has the highest impact. And for me, that answer is really exclusively through a political engagement and political activism because we really need to shake the whole infrastructure of the world. And the only people who are capable of doing that are the people who are in corridors of power in politics and the corporate world. They just need to hear our voices screaming at them.

My same question goes for you, Genevieve. If we know that about 100 companies that are responsible for around 70 percent of emissions in the last few decades and so much of their actions have been aimed at rhetorically shifting the responsibility of climate change onto consumers, instead of doing anything about climate change, does individual action actually make a difference? You mentioned that wealthy individuals can make a difference, but what does that mean?

Well, let me contextualize this for a moment. The concept of the carbon footprint is actually a legitimate concept in sustainability research. It was developed by two researchers in the 1990s. But BP extracted this concept from academia and created a multimillion dollar campaign, trying to change the discourse of the climate crisis and make, as you said, Jane, everybody feel responsible for causing the climate crisis, but also feeling responsible for solving it by doing things like no longer driving or no longer flying or no longer eating beef or turning off lights or using plastic straws. And as David said, this is impossible. Even if every single one of us brought our personal carbon emissions down to zero, we would not halt global heating. But the fossil fuel industry, as part of their disinformation campaign, wants to make everyone feel helpless, feel overwhelmed, and wants to shift our attention away from the political action that has a chance of resolving the climate crisis to what can’t possibly work, which is focusing on our carbon footprint. That said, reducing the discretionary emissions of the top 1 percent is actually a piece of the decarbonization puzzle. So, if the top 10 percent reduced their carbon emissions down to the level of the average European, which is still quite significant — eight tons a year — we would be about one-third of the way to decarbonizing our systems. So we emit as a globe about 30 gigatons of carbon dioxide a year. And this reduction in luxury consumption would reduce emissions by about 10 gigatons a year. So that is just a staggering number. That shows how for some people this idea of reducing the carbon footprint is actually key to decarbonization.

Yeah, I think the carbon footprint story is interesting for a number of reasons. But one of them is that the implicit message is not just that the responsibility is yours, but also that you have to live like a monk to make this work. That may have been, to some degree, true 25, 30 years ago when the alternative systems that we now see right around the corner were much farther away in the distance and much more expensive. But it just isn’t the case now that to green our economy will require an enormous burden. It will require an investment, but that will sort of pay for itself in the relatively short term. And so we’re now in a situation where a lot of people often think that moving into a sustainable future is going to make their lives suck. And the truth is that just isn’t the case, but that is what the companies that are profiting from the status quo would like you to think because nobody wants their lives to suck.

Right. Genevieve, you were talking about the 1 percent, and you were mentioning bringing down their carbon emissions. What would that look like? What definite actions would that look like? I’m assuming it’s not flying Leonardo DiCaprio to climate conferences on very expensive planes and then having the cars that wait outside the climate conference just idle for hours. But what other actions should they be taking?

Well, you bring up a really important issue. And so by way of answering your question, I’m just going to stop and say that I personally think the high consumption, and particularly the flying of people who are in the public eye, trying to communicate the urgency of the climate crisis, is incredibly destructive to building a political movement. They’re actually doing something extremely counterproductive in my interpretation. They’re reinforcing everybody’s cognitive dissonance with their behavior, which is also a form of speech. They’re communicating that they’re not willing to make transformative changes and not willing to support transformative policies, and that, in fact, you need to use fossil fuels even to do climate work. And so, for me, I feel like the people who need to worry about their carbon footprints insofar as anybody does are the 1 percent and people in the climate movement. Now, the 1 percent. What is the 1 percent? In the United States, I would define the 1% as people making $450,000 a year and above. So it’s hard to imagine how much consumption is normalized among these people. It is not at all considered wasteful to buy a new SUV every two or three years as new models come out. It is not all considered extravagant to fly up to 20 times a year. It is not at all horrific to buy an entirely new wardrobe two or three times a year and throw it all away. In fact, this is considered a signal that you are in the rich group and that you are living your best life.

And there’s a way that a lot of aspects of that life are processed by our culture as actually clean. When we think about rich people and the way that they live, we think about whatever, their pilates and their juice cleanses. [LAUGHTER] And we think about how good their skin looks. It’s like we think of it as clean, and therefore, healthy. And we have a way of thinking about poverty as though it’s dirty. But when it comes to the climate, the opposite is really the reverse, that it’s wealth that’s dirty and poverty that’s clean. And I think culturally, we have a really hard time processing that properly.

Well, that goes back to the climate justice point, is that a lot of the dirt that is created by this clean consumption, this luxury consumption of the rich, is outsourced to communities of color, to the global south, to places where it’s not visible to white people in power. And so, the dirt is put onto poor people.

When you say outsourced, what do you mean?

I mean, quite literally, fossil fuel plants are very often sited in communities of color —

— in the United States and around the world. Already today, there are communities and territories in the global south that are being completely destroyed by climate change, even just at 1 degree Celsius of heating to date. I mean, to the point where people are losing their homes, their communities are flooded, or they’re not able to grow food because their ground has been completely desiccated by drought. The climate crisis has begun in the United States, too. But the real violence of it is in the global south. And I would argue that the global north doesn’t see it because the news media isn’t reporting on it and because the kind of white supremacy prevents people in this country from really recognizing that this is a violence that would feel unimaginable if it happened to their children.

It’s interesting thinking about this as also being a class issue. The people who are working in oil refineries, or in coal — on my mom’s side, we come from West Virginia, from towns that were largely built by the coal industry, supplied by the coal industry. Everything was paid for by the coal industry. When we’re talking about the 1 percent, the 1 percent is the most performatively green while not being green, whereas the people who are working in these industries, their perception is that this is my livelihood, which is true. It is a class issue in many respects in how we’re thinking about this. And that’s something I do want to make clear. But David, I know that you wanted to bring in some numbers here.

Yeah, I mean, Genevieve mentioned that this is — we’re sort of siting these polluting facilities in poor communities, communities of color, marginalized communities. To think about the concrete impacts, 350,000 Americans, it’s estimated, die every single year from the air pollution from the burning of fossil fuels. That is a death toll literally equal to the 2020 death toll from COVID. And it is borne disproportionately by Black and Brown and poor people. And the dynamic is even more horrifying elsewhere in the world where other countries have much dirtier air than we do. Estimates are as high as 10 million people globally dying of air pollution every single year, 8.7 million of them from the burning of fossil fuels. I mean, that is an absolutely mind-bendingly large impact and well beyond those who die. There are huge, huge health consequences from this pollution. It may be the case that air pollution may even be a bigger crisis than climate change. That is how dramatic these impacts are. They happen to be caused largely by the same thing so we can solve them at the same time, but we’re talking about rising rates of respiratory disease and coronary disease and cancers of all kinds and Alzheimer’s and dementia and ADHD and criminality and premature birth and low birth weight. And just every aspect of human flourishing is damaged by the pollution that is produced by the burning of fossil fuels. And when we think of it simply in terms of, is the economy going to grow faster or is it going to go slower, I think we really, really miss the huge, huge public health consequences of continuing running the systems as we are running them today, and also the huge benefits we would get from getting off those systems. So famously last year, Drew Shindell, who’s an air pollution expert at Duke, testified before U.S. Congress saying that a green transition of the American energy system would entirely pay for itself through the public health benefits of cleaner air. You could put aside all of the climate impacts. You could put aside all the benefits of cheaper electricity. And just because we would be healthier as a result, even in the U.S. where air is already clean, the dollars and cents would add up and make that a very, very clear win for all of us. While there is a sort of transition bump and we should have public policy that addresses it, especially for communities who are already suffering, it’s also the case that the obvious economic logic is also the obvious environmental logic here. These are no longer in tension. [MUSIC PLAYING]

My name is Haley. I live in Washington, D.C. And the thing I have been arguing about is having children with how the world is projected to be in the time that they would be growing up and if we want to subject more people to that. Lyman Stone, on one of your previous episodes about the falling birthrate, mentioned that a lot of women aren’t concerned about having children related to climate change. I would strongly disagree. I’m 23. I’m the age that my mom had me. And every person that I talked to about this in my kind of age group demographic feels the same way.

What are you arguing about with your family, your friends, your frenemies? Tell me about the big debate you’re having in a voicemail by calling 347-915-4324. And we might play an excerpt of it on a future episode.

I read an interesting piece in the Sierra Club magazine — Sierra, my mother is a subscriber — by Jason Mark called “Yes, actually, individual responsibility is essential to solving the climate crisis.” And he argued that a fixation on systemic change can lead to kind of a cynical self absolution. But when it comes to climate, and you’re like, OK, I’m interested in this, what is this going to require of me? Their first thought is, you should not have kids, or veganism is your only choice. I want to have explicit takeaways for listeners because I think what listeners get a lot is — pardon my language, but we’re all [BLEEP]. [LAUGHTER] We’re going to die tomorrow. And if you’re an older person, you’re like, wait, weren’t we going to die in, like, 1975? What are explicit takeaways for people to have that are real and would make real difference?

All right, well, let me talk about this point that you shouldn’t have kids or you should have one fewer kid to lower your carbon footprint because it’s misanthropic and it’s just wrong. So there was one study that came up with the top personal carbon footprint actions, and one of them was have one fewer kid. But if you dig down into that study you see that they assume that the consumption of parenthood would remain the same with each subsequent kid. People in the global south generally have large families. And it hasn’t increased their carbon emissions at all. It’s not the kids, it’s the consumption.

If we get to a place where we have decarbonized much of our economy, which is technologically and politically possible now, then you’re talking about multiplying invisible carbon footprints.

Mm-hmm, totally.

In 2070, we’re in a net zero world. Nobody has a carbon footprint. So having more kids is not going to make one difference in either direction. And I think we’re still in a place where we can keep that goal in mind and fight to make that possible so that we don’t have to do things like reduce family size. We can solve our problems more holistically and allow each of us to live the lives that we want to live on the planet throughout the modern world, where especially in the wealthy nations of the west, we think about poverty and famine in other parts of the world not just as acceptable, but almost as comforting, because they remind us of how secure and comfortable we are today. And I had this interaction just before the pandemic at an event I did. I keep thinking about it. I think about it maybe every week, maybe every day, where I gave a talk about looking at how dire some of these situations could be. And afterwards, somebody came up to me who assured me that he was not a climate denier. And then he said, so really, how bad is it going to get? And I said, well, at two degrees, we’re talking about 150 million people dying of air pollution. And he said, but that’s out of 8 billion. And I said, well, yeah, I mean, I’m not talking about the total extinction of the human race here, but 150 million is 150 million. That’s 25 Holocausts. And he said, but out of 8 billion. And I think that there is this danger —

I think you were talking to Hannibal Lecter? [LAUGHTER] That’s the most terrifying question I’ve ever heard.

Honestly, the person I was talking to was the United States. I mean, that is the perspective that we have as a country. And as guilty as I feel as responsible as I feel, as I’m sure, Genevieve, and to some extent, Jane, you feel, all of us are actually behaving in ways that are imposing that kind of suffering on people elsewhere in the world. It’s almost unavoidable, given the systems that we live in today. And that is really horrifying. But I think the more clearly that we can see that, the more likely we are to be demanding real change of our leaders and the systems in which we live, which is, to your point, about takeaways, Jane, really, to me, the most important thing, which is that we really need to get our house in order and to help the rest of the world get their house in order.

How do we get our house in order? What do I as an individual or the people listening to this podcast, how do I make this happen on my level? Knowing all of that, what do I do? What do I personally need to do? Give me a thing to do, Genevieve!

OK, I have a whole list of things to do.

Oh, great, thank God.

Pick one. Do it once a week, and things will change. First thing is vote. You can’t do that once a week, but vote in every election. Vote for climate candidates, and then once they’re in office, keep pressuring them. Call their D.C. offices. Call their local offices. Send them emails regularly. OK, number two, join a campaign or an activist group. There are local chapters of groups called the Sunrise Movement and 350.org in many communities. If you’re really hardcore, you can join Extinction Rebellion. They do direct actions, which is a really good way of moving the Overton window over and getting people awake. If you don’t have the time to do that, donate money. Donate money to organizations that are putting their bodies on the line. Here are some of them— Sunrise, Fridays for Future, which is the youth organization that is organizing the climate strikes that Greta Thunberg started, Greenpeace. And here are some social justice organizations — UPROSE and WE ACT. There are also two new organizations who are writing climate policy in a new way and lobbying on the Hill to get them passed. They are Climate Power and Evergreen Action. Donate to them. Or you can donate to groups that are working on electoral politics directly, like the Environmental Voter Project or Stacey Abrams’s Verified Action. The ability to put your preferred candidates in office is a huge part of the climate fight. Or here’s another thing you can do. You can organize your workplace to ask your company to make greener business decisions or to lobby Congress for climate policies. And then finally, one of the most impactful things that you can do is simply talk about climate change in your social networks, especially when it feels most socially awkward and embarrassing. Because unless we continue to break the kind of conspiracy of climate silence that allows people to look away, we’re not actually going to have the kind of pressure internally and psychologically in people that will help them join the climate movement. We as a culture need to normalize that it’s actually healthy not to be happy in the face of climate change and that it doesn’t mean we’re failed Americans. It means that we’re actually human beings who are having an appropriate and ethical moral response to the suffering that is coming in the pipe for everybody, also our own children. So that is my big list of things to do. Pick one, and go for it.

David, I want to hear it from you, what you think we should do.

I would say, if what Genevieve laid out feels like pie in the sky, climate strike groups were launched in parts of the world by people with very little access to political or social power. They are often teenagers who don’t have the vote, even when they’re living in democracies. Many of them aren’t living in democracies. They are overwhelmingly girls. They are often trans and queer. These are people who are on the most distant margins of global political power. And within the space of a few years, by simply refusing to accept their own impotence, they have literally remade the entire landscape of global climate politics. Like in the U.S., when we have Joe Biden who Sunrise gave an F to in the primary, talking about this as an existential threat, that is because the protests worked. And they worked in an incredibly short amount of time. When I started writing about climate five years ago, I would not have thought that this kind of political change was at all possible. We are living through what is a genuinely unprecedented global climate awakening, which has totally changed the landscape of what is possible. And it really has made the world and the future look sunnier. So it’s not nearly bright enough. It still involves an enormous amount of preventable suffering. And it’s on all of us to make that future better. But the true, are we going to make humans extinct, kind of futures that we were talking about as slim but real possibilities a few years ago, I think are much, much less likely today. And that is in large part the result of climate protests by people who started their activism within the last few years.

I was going to push back against David’s more hopeful note [WALLACE-WELLS LAUGHS] that we’re not in danger of extinction. I don’t think that extinction is off the table until emissions start to bend down. But I do agree with him that the fact that nations across the globe have made significant climate pledges to reach net zero emissions, corporations, banks have made these kinds of pledges, is entirely due to the political activity that has arisen since 2018.

I would say even more importantly, we can’t set our standard at extinction. It’s not like if we survive and avoid extinction, that that’s a success. There is huge suffering between here and there. And every degree of temperature rise is going to create more suffering. And every degree we avoid can help us avoid that.

Genevieve, you brought up some of the larger powers and corporations. And yes, they have responded to pressure with regard to investing in reducing emissions and renewable energy. But we’ve seen in 2020 that fewer than 5 percent of offsets went to removing CO2 from the atmosphere. That doesn’t mean that preserving virgin forests isn’t awesome. But how much of those actions is just performative? How much of those actions is greenwashing?

OK, well, that’s a really good point. So even Shell has come up with a net zero plan. But if you dig into it, you see that it mostly relies on a level of offsets, which is completely implausible, and on technologies that are unproven that are promising to draw carbon out of the air. So, yes, many of these net zero pledges are greenwashing. And there’s a disclaimer in the back of the Shell plan that says, readers should not make future projections based on what’s written in this report. [LAUGHTER] I mean, they really are covering their proverbial butts But what is hopeful about these net zero pledges, even as they are greenwashing, is the fact that these companies feel pressure to make them at all, right? This is a sea change in politics. If they can’t actually transform, they’re going to be pushed out, and new incumbents are going to come in. And the question is, can we do this fast enough to halt global warming in time to preserve much of the habitable world? Or is it going to take so long that, in fact, things are going to spiral out of control?

But that brings us, actually, to a point of some disagreement. The dynamic that you’re describing illustrates the power of individuals over companies, and as a result, also, I think illustrates, in a backward-looking way, our responsibility. Half of all emissions in the entire history of humanity have come in the last 30 years. Now since Al Gore published his first book on warming, you know I often joke it’s since the premiere of “Friends,” which means that, actually, the people who have done the lion’s share of the damage to the planet are alive today. And it is true, of course, that the people who have been running Shell and Chevron and ExxonMobil have much more responsibility than I do or Genevieve does or Jane does. But it is also the case that all of us have benefited in significant ways from economic activity that has been powered by fossil fuels and to which we could have raised louder objections earlier.

I want to contest the claim that we’ve all benefited from the fossil fuel system, because if you look at charts that show the rise of income inequality over the past 25 and 30 years, I mean, most of that wealth has been concentrated at the top. It’s not like we’ve all seen those gains at all. So I don’t know that we have to all take on a feeling of guilt for the rise of G.D.P. under neoliberalism, because I don’t know that most of us have actually even seen that money. And as you said earlier, David, our way of life is no longer dependent on fossil fuels. We can transition to a clean energy system, to clean systems, and maintain largely our quality of life. So I’m not going to accept that responsibility. People need to hear a lot of things more than once to really absorb it. I learned that as a parent. I only started getting worried about the climate crisis after my son was born. And I didn’t even realize how bad it was going to be, I would say, until about mid-2017 or 2018, reading your article and going down the rabbit hole from there. So I think we need to really tell the climate story as a story of good and evil because these people have known for decades what their products were going to do. And not only did they keep producing and selling fossil fuels, they lied about it. They lied about what they knew. And they tried to do everything they could to capture our political system just to sustain their own wealth and power. I think that’s pretty bad. It’s criminal. It’s absolutely criminal.

David, what do you make of what Genevieve said about the messaging about good and evil there?

I think that this story is one about our responsibility towards other humans, in which collectively, human behavior has imperiled the future of the planet. I think as a result, we have to talk about it in terms of good and evil, that there are very obvious sides. And I think that there are certain actors who have played hugely disproportionate, often toxic, roles in that story, namely the fossil fuel industry and their allies in political power, not just in the U.S. but all around the world. I just don’t think that that’s the end all, be all of it, because I do think that many people, even today, think, OK, I want the future to be stable and green and prosperous. But I don’t want to pay $1 more at the pump for a gallon of gas and may actually vote in an election on that basis. And that’s not to say that that person is as culpable as the CEOs of ExxonMobil. Obviously, there’s a huge spectrum of culpability, but I think that a huge majority of Americans are understandably viewed by people elsewhere in the world as contributing to the problem as opposed to contributing to the solution, and that we should not dismiss that judgment because we happen to think, well, I was just doing it for myself, or I was just acting in the system in which I live. We should take seriously that judgment and try to think about what we can do to sort of make it right, so to speak.

I think it’s worthwhile to point out that the vast majority of Americans are literally going to be richer once we have decarbonized, because their electricity, their heating, their transportation, and their health care costs are going to go down significantly. I mean, Vice President Harris would often say during the presidential campaign that most Americans didn’t even have $400 in their wallets to help cover an emergency. So, people’s real incomes are going to rise significantly once we’ve decarbonized. And that means that decarbonization is not a cost, but a benefit. It is going to be a benefit to most Americans.

If we manage it right.

Yeah, but and a benefit when? Because I think a lot of this messaging relies on something that, in general, people do not like, which is, you may need to do a thing or change a thing about your life for a future that we have not yet defined. From a messaging perspective, how do we message the urgency? How do we talk about what needs to change? But how do we do that, one, effectively, and two, to everyone?

OK, so the first part is understanding why we have to do this. And I would argue that most Americans still don’t know enough about global heating and the climate crisis. So, in our polling at End Climate Silence, it shows that most Americans learn everything we know about the climate crisis from the news media. And this is absolutely chilling [LAUGHTER] because the news media is still not reporting on the crisis accurately or with the urgency that it deserves. The second piece is a kind of climate communication that shows people how this is going to affect them. Most people think of this as a crisis that’s for the global south or for the distant future or for our grandchildren’s grandchildren or whatever. And it’s up to every single communicator, as far as I’m concerned, to make it clear in really concrete embodied terms what this crisis is going to mean for the children who are alive today. What I think we need to do is take everyone who already thinks they know something about the climate crisis and thinks they’re concerned about it and activate them by giving them the information they need, showing them how it’s personal, and converting fear into a kind of outrage that allows them to take up this fight. And then the third piece of that is really showing how making these changes that are required would be such a benefit to them. It’s just really important to remember that it actually has to be done right now. We don’t get another shot at this.

David, do you want to have the final word here on the messaging?

Well, I think the last point that Genevieve mentioned is maybe the most important, which is just to say that the benefits are really vivid, they are really clear. Everybody agrees that the world will be better off the faster we move. And that really wasn’t the case five or 10 years ago. There was much more muddled analysis and messaging then. And I think we have to take advantage of the new unanimity and not let people fall back on the logic of status quo bias and incumbency and just think that change is expensive and difficult. What I worry about is that the political dynamics are not entirely governed, especially in the US, by public opinion. If they were, we probably would already be moving much faster than we are. There are obstacles in the way laid by incumbent entrenched interests. And we need to figure out ways to uproot them. That doesn’t mean that everybody who cares about climate needs to be going to an Extinction Rebellion protest. It doesn’t even mean that they need to be calling their representative. There is a very small ask that can be made, which is just to support the people who support aggressive climate action. We’re talking about massive, immediate, or quasi immediate payback for all of the investments we’re making.

David Wallace-Wells and Genevieve Guenther, thank you both so much for joining me today.

Thanks, Jane. It’s been great.

Thanks, guys. [MUSIC PLAYING]

David Wallace-Wells is an editor at large at New York Magazine and the author of “The Uninhabitable Earth.” Genevieve Guenther is the founder and director of End Climate Silence and the author of the forthcoming book, “The Language of Climate Politics.” If you want to learn more about personal responsibility, I recommend Jason Marks’s article in the Sierra Club magazine, “Yes, actually, individual responsibility is essential to solving the climate crisis,” and the New York Times guest essay by Auden Schendler, “Worrying About Your Carbon Footprint is Exactly What Big Oil Wants You to Do.” You can find links to these in our episode notes. Finally, I really appreciate the time that both of my guests spent explaining this issue to me. If we want real solutions, we’re going to have to get folks involved across the political and societal spectrum. Climate change can’t just be an issue that only the 1 percent gets involved in by telling the 99 percent what to do. It’s a complicated issue, but it’s one we have to face together. And it’s one that — let’s not lie to ourselves — a lot of corporations would really rather they not take any responsibility on either. So this is hard. It’s hard for me to understand. It’s hard to explain. And it’s really hard for us not to all get our own biases in the way. But I hope that today’s episode is a start of a different conversation about climate change because as fun as doomerism is, doomerism doesn’t do anything.

The Argument is a production of New York Times Opinion. It’s produced by Phoebe Lett, Eliza Gutierrez, and Vishakha Darbha; edited by Sarah Geis; with original music and sound design by Isaac Jones and engineering by Carole Sabouraud; fact-checking by Mary Marge Locker; and audience strategy by Shannon Busta. Special thanks this week to Kristen Lin and the good people at Switch and Board Podcast Studio here in Washington, D.C.

I don’t know about you, but any time I’ve been to Europe, I feel like they live beautifully and I’m actually jealous of the societies they’ve managed to construct.

Yeah, but their dishwashers do not work. [LAUGHTER] Not one device works.

That sounded very Trumpy. What about their toilets? [LAUGHTER]

Have you ever tried to roast a chicken in England? Nothing works. [LAUGHTER]

• Apple Podcasts
• Google Podcasts

Produced by ‘The Argument’

It’s no wonder so many people feel helpless about averting climate catastrophe. This is the era of dire warnings from many scientists and increasing natural disasters, record-breaking temperatures and rising tides. Fossil-fuel executives testify before Congress while politicians waver on whether they’ll support urgently needed changes to make American infrastructure sustainable. Thousands of youth activists at the Glasgow climate talks this week demonstrated for action from world leaders whose words convey the seriousness of the emergency but whose actions against major carbon contributors are lacking.

But, as host Jane Coaston says, “as fun as doomerism is, doomerism doesn’t do anything.” So what is an individual to do?

Recycle? Compost? Give up meat or flying or plastic straws? Protest in the streets?

To parse which personal actions matter and which don’t, Jane is joined by the climate activist and author Genevieve Guenther, who argues that for the wealthier citizens of the world, there are real steps that can be taken right away to help fight the current and impending climate catastrophes. Guenther lists them according to one’s ability, time and resources.

Also joining the debate is the author of “The Uninhabitable Earth,” David Wallace-Wells, who argues that while individual behavior is a good start, it won’t bring the change needed; only large-scale political action will save us. In this episode, Guenther and Wallace-Wells disagree about extinction and blame, but they agree that when individual political pressure builds into an unignorable movement, once-impossible-to-imagine solutions will be the key to saving our future.

[You can listen to this episode of “The Argument” on Apple , Spotify or Google or wherever you get your podcasts .]

Mentioned in this episode:

David Wallace-Wells for New York magazine, “ The Uninhabitable Earth ”

Auden Schendler’s guest essay “ Worrying About Your Carbon Footprint Is Exactly What Big Oil Wants You to Do ”

Jason Mark for Sierra, “ Yes, Actually, Individual Responsibility Is Essential to Solving the Climate Crisis ”

(A full transcript of the episode will be available midday on the Times website.)

Thoughts? Email us at [email protected] or leave us a voice mail message at (347) 915-4324. We want to hear what you’re arguing about with your family, your friends and your frenemies. (We may use excerpts from your message in a future episode.)

By leaving us a message, you are agreeing to be governed by our reader submission terms and agreeing that we may use and allow others to use your name, voice and message.

“The Argument” is produced by Phoebe Lett, Elisa Gutierrez and Vishakha Darbha and edited by Sarah Geis and Alison Bruzek; fact-checking by Mary Marge Locker and Kate Sinclair; music and sound design by Isaac Jones; additional mixing by Carole Sabouraud; audience strategy by Shannon Busta. Special thanks to Kristin Lin, Matt Kwong and Switch and Board Podcast Studio.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 02 September 2024

Repeated pulses of volcanism drove the end-Permian terrestrial crisis in northwest China

• Jacopo Dal Corso   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2500-4097 1 , 2 ,
• Robert J. Newton   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0144-6867 1 ,
• Aubrey L. Zerkle 3 , 4 ,
• Daoliang Chu 2 ,
• Haijun Song   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2721-3626 2 ,
• Huyue Song   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9895-208X 2 ,
• Li Tian   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3005-2007 2 ,
• Jinnan Tong 2 ,
• Tommaso Di Rocco   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0417-6364 3 , 5 ,
• Mark W. Claire 3 , 4 ,
• Tamsin A. Mather   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4259-7303 6 ,
• Tianchen He   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8975-8667 1 , 7 ,
• Timothy Gallagher   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7271-1210 8 ,
• Wenchao Shu 2 ,
• Yuyang Wu 2 ,
• Simon H. Bottrell 1 ,
• Ian Metcalfe   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3538-1686 9   na1 ,
• Helen A. Cope 1 ,
• Martin Novak 10 ,
• Robert A. Jamieson   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6385-3930 1 &
• Paul B. Wignall 1  

Nature Communications volume  15 , Article number:  7628 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Element cycles
• Palaeoclimate

The Permo-Triassic mass extinction was linked to catastrophic environmental changes and large igneous province (LIP) volcanism. In addition to the widespread marine losses, the Permo–Triassic event was the most severe terrestrial ecological crisis in Earth’s history and the only known mass extinction among insects, but the cause of extinction on land remains unclear. In this study, high-resolution Hg concentration records and multiple-archive S-isotope analyses of sediments from the Junggar Basin (China) provide evidence of repeated pulses of volcanic-S (acid rain) and increased Hg loading culminating in a crisis of terrestrial biota in the Junggar Basin coeval with the interval of LIP emplacement. Minor S-isotope analyses are, however, inconsistent with total ozone layer collapse. Our data suggest that LIP volcanism repeatedly stressed end-Permian terrestrial environments in the ~300 kyr preceding the marine extinction locally via S-driven acidification and deposition of Hg, and globally via pulsed addition of CO 2 .

Similar content being viewed by others

Environmental crises at the Permian–Triassic mass extinction

Intensified continental chemical weathering and carbon-cycle perturbations linked to volcanism during the Triassic–Jurassic transition

Mercury deposition in Western Tethys during the Carnian Pluvial Episode (Late Triassic)

Introduction.

The Permo–Triassic mass extinction (PTME) was the most severe ecological disaster in Earth’s history 1 . The emplacement of the Siberian Traps large igneous province (LIP) with the release of large amounts of volcanic gases (including CO 2 and SO 2 ) into the atmosphere and in the ocean, and the consequent profound environmental changes are thought to have driven the collapse of all ecosystems from continental settings to the deep ocean 2 . The marine extinction is well constrained to a relatively short interval of ~60 kyr across the Permo–Triassic boundary, but there is increasing evidence that the terrestrial crisis began tens to hundreds of thousands of years before the marine extinction 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , for reasons as yet unknown.

Paleozoic-type forests disappeared suddenly in the latest Permian at most locations 6 , 8 , 9 . The loss of terrestrial biomass was massive 10 and probably unique in the geologic record. Furthermore, the PTME is the only known mass extinction of insects 11 . The collapse of the base of the terrestrial food chain triggered the extinction at all higher levels 12 , 13 . Lacustrine ecosystems collapsed and only recovered up to 10 Myr later in the Middle Triassic, beginning the so-called “Mesozoic lacustrine revolution” 14 , 15 . The recovery of primary productivity on land took an exceptionally long time, as evidenced by a “coal gap” from the PTME to the early Middle Triassic, with thick coal measures not reappearing until the Late Triassic 16 .

Several kill mechanisms have been proposed for the terrestrial crisis. A change from warm humid to unstable seasonal climate and a coeval increase in wildfire frequency, possibly caused by increasing p CO 2 , global warming and storminess, are recorded in equatorial peatlands of South China at the level of the floral crisis 4 . Global cooling to intense warming in the Late Permian–Early Triassic, and unstable climates 17 are thought to have driven a protracted extinction (up to ~1 Myr) of tetrapods 18 , 19 . Widespread mutagenesis amongst pollen and spores during the PTME has been attributed to atmospheric pollution and/or a rise in UV-B radiation caused by the depletion of the ozone layer by volcanic chemicals (SO 2 and halogens) from the Siberian Traps 13 , 20 , 21 . Evidence of an increased UV-B flux—and therefore a depleted ozone layer—across the broad interval containing both marine and terrestrial extinctions, comes from the observation of increased concentrations of UV-B absorbing compounds in sporomorphs 22 , but these records are of low resolution and correlation with the precise level of the terrestrial extinction is not proven. S-isotope data from continental fluvial PTME successions of the Karoo Basin (South Africa) and the Sydney Basin (Australia) may indicate increased S deposition in these environments 23 , 24 . In particular, the Late Permian–Early Triassic pyrite-sulfur isotope records of Li et al. 23 show a broad, long-term negative shift starting at the extinction level and spanning the entire Griesbachian and part of the Dienerian that has been interpreted as evidence of an increase in sulfate concentrations in the atmosphere. Metal poisoning has also been proposed to explain the extinction on land, but in terrestrial successions of South China, increases of Hg and Cu concentrations are found in strata above the crisis, along with unseparated spore tetrads of surviving plants 25 .

To explore the linked hypotheses related to the impact of volcanism on terrestrial ecosystems, we performed high-resolution S, Hg, and C geochemistry of the latest Permian–earliest Triassic middle latitude continental successions of the Junggar Basin in northwest China (Xinjiang; Fig.  1 and Supplementary Fig. S1 , and “Methods”). The bedrock geology of the catchment in the late Permian consisted of mainly coarse-grained continental sediments interbedded with volcanic facies 26 , which are likely to have low sulfur contents, enhancing the site’s potential to record changes in atmospheric inputs by limiting concentrations of weathered sulfate. To track the addition of volcanic sulfur to the terrestrial system, we analyzed carbonate-associated sulfate (CAS) from palaeosol and lacustrine carbonates in wholly terrestrial and lake margin settings (Taodonggou and Tarlong sections; Supplementary Fig.  S1 ): Sulfate is not retained in most terrestrial sediments because it is too soluble, but palaeosol nodules and freshwater limestones can preserve syngenetic CAS and its pristine isotopic composition. We analyzed total sulfur δ 34 S, organic δ 13 C and Hg concentrations from nearby lake sediments (Dalongkou North section) with a well-constrained record of extinction in lacustrine fauna and surrounding flora (Fig.  2 ; e.g., ref. 27 ) to provide a robust connection between volcanism, increased sulfate deposition, potential metal poisoning, and terrestrial extinction. We also analyzed the minor sulfur isotope composition of selected samples to test for the effects of ozone layer destruction.

A A map of the global end-Permian paleogeography (Light gray = shelf areas; dark gray = land) with the location of the studied sedimentary successions in a fluvio-lacustrine environment in the Junggar Basin, now in the Bogda Mountains of Xinjiang, northwest China (Supplementary Fig.  S1 ) indicated, as well as the locations of other important records referred to in the text (light blue squares), the Siberian traps (dark red) and arc volcanism (light red lines). B A schematic showing the depositional environment of the studied sections: The three sections were chosen because they represent three different depositional environments within the land-lake ecosystem. The Taodonggou series was deposited in a fluvial-mudflat environment 29 containing palaeosols with pedogenic carbonate nodules. The Tarlong section is located in the lake margin and contains both pedogenic carbonates and freshwater limestones 29 . The Guodikeng Fm. at Dalongkou North was deposited in the lake 52 . The three sections therefore contain different sulfur archives (pedogenic and freshwater carbonates, pyrite and organic-S), in which S-isotope signatures reflect S inputs and fractionation processes occurring in the lacustrine environment during the end of the Permian. CAS carbonate-associated sulfate, BSR bacterial sulfate reduction. Paleogeography after ref. 103 . Position of arc magmatism after ref. 63 .

Three negative C-isotope excursions (NCIEs) are recorded in the organic matter (δ 13 C org ) at Dalongkou: dots are new data from this study, and red squares are data from ref. 21 . The 2nd NCIE is coincident with the ecosystem crisis, as recorded by the appearance of mutated pollen 21 and an increase in the abundance of surviving lycophytes, the extinction of conchostracan and charophyte taxa, followed by a post-extinction small (Lilliput) ostrachod fauna 27 . Total organic carbon (TOC) concentrations also decreased during the terrestrial crisis. In this study, the Dalongkou North section has been analyzed. The nearby Dalongkou South section has been previously correlated to the marine record 28 , 60 , providing a timeframe for the changes observed in the terrestrial Junggar Basin. At Dalongkou South, deforestation and intense wildfires are recorded at an interval across the 2nd NCIE 104 . U/Pb ID-TIMS analysis of bentonites from the Tarlong-Taodonggou area provides ages of 253.11 ± 0.05 Ma and 253.63 ± 0.24 Ma for the lower part of the Guodikeng Formation 61 . The last coal bed in the succession of the Bogda Mountains occurs at an estimated age of 252.29 Ma 59 . WU. = Wutonggou formation. JI. = Jiucaiyuan formation. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

In the Dalongkou North lacustrine section, total organic matter (TOC) is generally low (<1 wt%; Fig.  2 ). On average, TOC is higher before the extinction (~0.5 wt%, with peaks >2 wt%) than after (~0.2 wt%) (Fig.  2 and “Methods” for the definition of the extinction level in the Junggar Basin). The C-isotope composition of TOC (δ 13 C org ) displays an ~8‰ negative C-isotope excursion (NCIE) in beds 16–18 of the studied section, and a ~5‰ NCIE in beds 22–24 at the level of the extinction of conchostracans, ostracods and Charophyte taxa 27 , and a third, partial NCIE, in the uppermost part of the studied section, beds 37–42 (Fig.  2 ). The profile of our δ 13 C org data is similar to a previous lower-resolution δ 13 C org record from the same section 21 (Fig.  2 ), from the south limb of the Dalongkou anticline, and from Taodonggou section 28 , 29 (Fig.  2 ). The δ 13 C org curve of Dalongkou North can be correlated with marine 28 and other terrestrial records 30 , where a similar decline of TOC is also observed 4 .

δ 34 S CAS data from palaeosol and lacustrine carbonates of the Tarlong and Taodonggou sections have a range of ~9–12‰ at the base of the sections with a shift toward less positive values in the range 5–6.5‰. The δ 34 S CAS shift in palaeosol carbonates starts at the second NCIE in the Taodonggou section, which corresponds to the extinction level at Dalongkou (Fig.  3 ). We note a possible diachrony between the freshwater and palaeosol carbonate δ 34 S CAS shifts at Tarlong, but this is a result of a single negative palaeosol datapoint at 129 m so may not be real. This is followed by a rebound toward pre-excursion values. The δ 34 S CAS negative shift is coupled to an increase in CAS concentration in the lacustrine limestone samples close to the point at which their δ 34 S CAS declines (Fig.  3 ), while the CAS concentration in the palaeosol carbonates is much more varied (Supplementary Fig.  S2 ). Because S-deposition can be linked to acidification, carbonates may be prevented from forming during intense depositional events. We would therefore expect that these carbonates record the average background loading of atmospheric sulfate in soils (palaeosol) and lake waters (freshwater limestones) of the catchment.

An increase in CAS concentration in the freshwater limestones, and synchronous decrease in carbonate associate sulfate S-isotope (δ 34 S CAS ) values in freshwater limestones and pedogenic carbonates in the lake margin Tarlong section, and in the pedogenic carbonates in the fully terrestrial Taodonggou section. S concentrations in palaeosols from Taodongou and Tarlong are available in the supplementary data. They are not presented in this figure because there is less reason to suppose that they hold meaningful environmental information (see main text), and when plotted, they show no relationship with the isotope events. The Permian–Triassic boundary is close to the boundary between the Guyodikeng and Jiucaiyuan formations (see also Fig.  2 ). C-isotope data at Taodonggou section is from refs. 28 , 29 . NCIE negative C-isotope excursion, WU. Wutonggou formation, JIUC. Jiucaiyuan formation. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Yields of Ag 2 S recovered after chromium extraction in selected samples show low pyrite contents ( Supplementary excel file ), hence the decision to extract total-S for S-isotope (δ 34 S TOT ) analyses. Total-S is assumed to represent reduced forms of sulfur in the sediment, i.e., sulfides and organic-S (Fig.  1 ). δ 34 S TOT from Dalongkou North fluctuate between +6 and −7‰ and record repeated large ~9–10‰ negative shifts in the lower part of the section, i.e., before the second NCIE (meters −10 to 85), where major peaks of Hg concentrations (>100 ppm) and Hg/TOC (up to ca. 300–600 ppm/wt%) are also recorded (Fig.  4 ). The negative δ 34 S TOT shifts are coupled to the increases in Hg and Hg/TOC (Fig.  2 ; Supplementary Fig.  S3 ). Total-S concentrations at Dalongkou are generally low but variable, with higher peaks in the interval below the oldest NCIE, transitioning to more consistently low concentrations in the upper part of the section (Fig.  4 ).

The geochemical record shows spikes in Hg/TOC and negative shifts in total S-isotope (δ 34 S TOT ) at Dalongkou North. V1–V6 highlight paired Hg/TOC and δ 34 S TOT spikes. NCIE negative C-isotope excursion, TOC total organic carbon, WU. Wutonggou formation. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

At Dalongkou North, minor S-isotope analysis of samples with larger yields of extracted S (see “Methods”) shows Δ 33 S values between −0.093‰ and 0.147‰, and Δ 36 S from −0.956‰ and 1.192‰ in total sulfur (Fig.  5 ). CAS Δ 33 S and Δ 36 S data from the palaeosols at Tarlong lie in a narrower range (−0.01‰ to 0.062‰) and show no major changes along the section (Fig.  5 ). Δ 33 S vs Δ 36 S data are linearly correlated with a slope = −6.43 ± 1.03 (Supplementary Fig.  S4 ), which is a pattern typical of S-isotope mass-dependent fractionation, (S-MDF; Δ 36 S = −6.85Δ 33 S; e.g., ref. 31 ). Within this range of S-MDF, Δ 33 S and Δ 36 S values fluctuate through the section, with the negative Δ 33 S shifts mostly coupled to positive shifts of Δ 36 S, negative δ 34 S TOT values and peaks of Hg and Hg/TOC (Fig.  5 ).

Δ 33 S and Δ 36 S data from Dalongkou North and Tarlong South fall within the values indicating biological mass-dependent processes (see Supplementary Fig. S4 ), inconsistent with significant UV-B radiation and photoreduction of SO 2 . The correlation between the lacustrine Dalongkou North section and the lake margin Tarlong section is based on previous stratigraphic considerations 28 , 29 . WU. Wutonggou formation, JUIC. Jiucaiyuan formation. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

An increase in reduced sulfur input to the catchment coincident with terrestrial extinction

Carbonate-associated sulfate captures the isotopic signal of the fluid from which the carbonate precipitated with negligible fractionation 32 but has almost exclusively been applied to carbonates formed in the ocean. Soil-formed carbonate extracted with similar techniques has been previously shown to record the minor oxygen isotope composition of atmospheric sulfate at a number of modern sites 33 . Our records of δ 34 S CAS in palaeosol and lacustrine carbonate agree well with each other, suggesting that they are a good representation of sulfate within the catchment (see “Discussion” in the Supplementary Information ).

The oldest sediments have a baseline signature of approximately 12‰. Sulfate from seawater is an important component of modern atmospheric sulfate deposition 34 . The similarity of background δ 34 S CAS to coeval evaporite δ 34 S values 35 suggests that this was also the case in the Junggar Basin prior to the extinction, with the sea spray blown to the depositional site from the Panthalassa Ocean margin >1000 km to the east, and is consistent with a negligible contribution of weathered sulfate from the catchment, which consisted of mainly coarse-grained sediments and volcanic rocks 26 , likely to have low sulfur contents ( Supplementary Information ).

There are a range of processes that could account for the observed decline in δ 34 S CAS , which reaches its most negative values around the time of the second NCIE and terrestrial extinction (Fig.  3 ). Sulfur deposition from the atmosphere is sourced from a mixture of seawater sulfate and reduced sulfur compounds produced by biogenic processes either in the ocean or on land (e.g., hydrogen sulfide, dimethyl sulfide, carbonyl sulfide), which, although variable, commonly have a more negative δ 34 S when compared to seawater 36 . Volcanically derived atmospheric sulfur or pyrite in the bedrock would also be expected to have a more negative isotope signal 37 . The decline in δ 34 S CAS in the records from the Junggar Basin can be most plausibly explained by an increase in the proportion of reduced sulfur being delivered to the catchment (see “Discussion” in Supplementary Information). For example, it is possible to change the ratio of reduced sulfur to sea spray sulfur if the distance to the coast were to increase via sea level fall because sea spray forms large particles, and their deposition declines with distance from the ocean shoreline 38 . However, the decline in δ 34 S CAS correlates with a transgression, rather than a regression, representing the whole Guodikeng Formation 28 , 29 , so this explanation is unlikely. The apparent diachrony between the freshwater and palaeosol carbonate δ 34 S CAS shifts is here interpreted as an artifact of the record. As also explained below, those carbonate archives record snapshots of the δ 34 S CAS in the system that could hide a more complex dynamic of multiple excursions alternating with no precipitation of carbonates in the soil and lake margin.

The controls on CAS concentration are not well understood, but sulfate concentration, the ratio of dissolved sulfate to carbonate and mineral growth rate have been shown to be important in various settings 39 , 40 , 41 . The amount of CAS in soil carbonates is likely to be highly heterogeneous and will reflect the localized balance of calcium, carbonate and sulfate ions in these waters at the time of mineral precipitation. Lake waters are likely to be much more homogenous with respect to sulfate and other chemical variables at any given time point and therefore might be expected to represent a more consistent record of regional environmental conditions. The increase of CAS concentration in the lacustrine limestones (Fig.  3 ) occurs concurrently with the decrease in δ 34 S CAS and is consistent with increases in sulfate concentration in lake waters and/or an increase in the sulfate to carbonate ion ratio driven by declining pH.

Multiple pulses of atmospheric S deposition recorded in the lacustrine environment

Changes in S inputs to lakes are recorded in the concentration and isotopic composition of S in their sediments 42 . However, if there are other concurrent changes in environmental conditions within the lake, the sediment S geochemical and isotopic signals may be affected by more than one process. The S stored in lake sediments does not necessarily have the same isotopic composition as the lake water and can be stored in three forms: lake-water sulfate trapped in precipitated minerals, e.g., carbonate, with little or no S isotope fractionation, organic-S derived from plant material, which has similar δ 34 S to the lake water 43 , 44 , and diagenetic sulfide incorporated later into the sediment either as organic-S or as sulfide minerals, commonly FeS or pyrite 45 , 46 , 47 . Sulfate-reducing microbes discriminate strongly in favor of the lighter ( 32 S) isotope when reducing sulfate, and thus, the sulfide formed has lower δ 34 S than the lake-water sulfate 48 , 49 . However, when sulfate concentrations are low, a large proportion of the total sulfate is converted to sulfide, which then has a S isotope composition similar to the original sulfate 50 . Thus, if sulfate concentrations are low, and sulfate sources (and S isotope compositions) change but sulfate concentration does not, the isotopic composition of sulfur in the sediment will closely track the changing isotopic composition of the sulfate sources. If changes to sulfate sources are accompanied by increasing sulfate concentrations, then changes in the net S isotope fractionation between lake-water sulfate and the diagenetic sulfide incorporated into the sediment may occur, as sulfate is no longer limiting. In this case, the sediment sulfur δ 34 S will reflect not only isotopic changes in the sulfate source but also in lake sulfate concentration via an increase in the expression of negative S isotope fractionation in the diagenetic component at higher sulfate concentrations 49 , 51 .

The δ 34 S TOT from Dalongkou North displays a series of large negative shifts of approximately 9–10‰ prior to, and coincident with, the second NCIE (−10 to 85 m in section; Fig.  4 ). These data suggest repeated discrete inputs of S to the lake, from a different, more 34 S-depleted source, and/or increased lake sulfate concentrations and greater fractionation effects during sulfate reduction under less sulfate-limiting conditions. Although occurring roughly in the same stratigraphic interval within the Guodikeng Fm., the multiple negative δ 34 S TOT shifts are not observed in the δ 34 S CAS record, which shows just a broader negative excursion starting from the second NCIE (Fig.  3 ). The lake succession of Dalongkou North is a more continuous record of reduced sulfur deposition than the land–lake margin palaeosol and freshwater carbonates of Taodonggou and Tarlong, which record more sporadic snapshots of the isotopic composition of sulfate in the system, as mentioned above. In addition, because the volcanic pulses are likely to have been accompanied by H + ions from various sources (including but not limited to H 2 SO 4 ), times of peak deposition may have actively prevented carbonate precipitation in the basin. The palaeosol and freshwater CAS records should therefore be viewed as the long-term background perturbation to the sulfate retained in the catchment.

The CAS concentration data from the lacustrine limestones and S-isotope data from the limestones and soil carbonates support both increases in lake sulfate concentration and a change to a more 34 S-depleted source isotope composition. Lake sulfate concentrations can also be increased by decreases in lake volume and/or increased weathering. Evidence of weathering changes is recorded in the Junggar Basin by a lithological change to coarser-grained material, which defines the transition from the Guodikeng Formation to the overlying Jiucaiyuan Formation 52 . This lithological change is much higher in the Dalongkou North section and therefore significantly younger than the negative δ 34 S TOT excursions we report here. Both changing lake level and increased weathering would be expected to be accompanied by coeval changes in sedimentology, but this does not systematically covary with δ 34 S TOT , suggesting that neither was an important influence on our record (Fig.  4 ). The absence of grain size changes during the cycles of δ 34 S TOT also suggest that changes in sedimentation rate did not exert a significant control, as has been evidenced for some marine systems 53 . Major redox variations in the lake are not recorded in the sedimentary and paleontological record of Dolongkou North (e.g., the presence of Conchostracans), and are therefore excluded as significantly affecting our record.

The preservation of sulfur as pyrite and organic-S, and therefore the ability of the sediments to record changes in lake S cycling, is dependent on the flux of organic carbon to lake sediments. Due to the dependence of S preservation on TOC, it might be expected that S/TOC would record S pulses into the basin 54 , but only if TOC was constant. However, TOC is highly variable (0.1 to 2.4 wt%, mean 0.5 wt%, between −12.8 and 90 m) up to approximately the time of extinction (Fig.  4 ) and is likely controlled by a range of factors such as nutrient availability, sedimentation rate and the balance of land plant and lake derived organic matter. These factors do not necessarily respond to S inputs, and this likely accounts for the lack of relationship between S/TOC and δ 34 S TOT . TOC becomes uniformly low above 90 m at Dalongkou North (0.03 to 0.36 wt%, mean 0.17 wt%, between 90 and 142 m) shortly after the start of the terrestrial extinction interval (Fig.  4 ), indicating that the lack of further δ 34 S TOT excursions could either be due to the cessation of S pulses to the basin or simply the loss of the potential to record them. In this respect, the presence of less positive values in the land–lake margin records of Tarlong and Taodonggou after the second NCIE (Fig.  3 ) indicate that the second option is the most likely.

Using average δ 34 S CAS values for the pre-NCIE-2 (+9.7‰) and NCIE-2 to −3 (+6.6‰) intervals from Taodonggou and Tarlong we can estimate enrichment factors (ε 34 S) between sulfate and total-S in the lake sediments in the same intervals. These vary between 0 and 5‰ during the most positive parts of the δ 34 S TOT curve to 11–16‰ when δ 34 S TOT is at its most negative. The latter may not represent a good estimate because carbonates may be systematically excluded from deposition during these events because of acid deposition. Enrichments between sulfate and sulfide have been previously used to estimate sulfate concentrations, and the very small ε 34 S during background deposition suggests lake sulfate concentrations <100 µM 55 . The reduction in TOC that occurs after NCIE-2 means that ε 34 S is unlikely to record the changes in lake concentration, which are suggested by the increase in limestone CAS concentration, after this point. Overall, our combined CAS and δ 34 S TOT data support multiple discrete additions of 34 S-depleted S to the lacustrine environment, and the lack of a sedimentological response in concert with these perturbations suggests that this came from the atmosphere.

Volcanic pulses of Hg and S to the lake catchment

The multiple Hg and Hg/TOC spikes that are coupled to the negative δ 34 S TOT shifts in the lower part of the section up to the second NCIE (V1–V6 in Fig.  4 ) indicate that the increases in atmospheric S deposition in the lacustrine ecosystems were likely to be derived from volcanic activity. Peaks in Hg concentration and Hg/TOC recorded after the second NCIE may also represent increases in volcanic-sourced Hg to the basin, but they lack the support of concurrent S-isotope shifts. As mentioned before, this may be explained by a loss of capacity of the system to bury sulfur, as TOC values are consistently very low in this part of the section (Fig.  4 ).

Records from coastal and marine environments show one or two discrete spikes in Hg and Hg/TOC at the marine extinction level, coupled with a negative shift in Hg isotopes 56 , 57 . These spikes occur within an interval with generally higher background Hg concentrations during the PTME 2 , 58 . Modeling suggests that while the longer-term Hg concentration increase can be attributed to volcanism, the large spike within this interval, which is recorded both in terrestrial and marine successions, is best explained by massive and rapid (~1000 years) oxidation of soil organic matter linked to the collapse of ecosystems on land 10 . Within the smaller reservoir of the lake experiencing high sedimentation rates, relatively brief pulses of volcanic Hg could have been more easily recorded. The Dalongkou North section is expanded, and therefore the temporal resolution of the geochemical data is higher, allowing a better resolution of discrete changes in Hg loading. Higher Hg drawdown due to euxinic conditions can be excluded due to the lack of sedimentological and paleontological evidence for major redox changes in the lake (see “Geological setting”). As explained before, weathering changes are recorded above the interval with Hg/TOC spikes (and S-isotope shifts) by a switch to coarser sedimentation at the transition from the Guodikeng to the Jiucaiyuan Formation, and cannot be the driver of higher Hg loading to the lake.

Paired δ 34 S TOT and Hg/TOC changes (V1–V6) are recorded in the lower Guodikeng Formation and are coeval with the crisis of the lacustrine ecosystem (Fig.  2 ) 28 , 52 , 58 , 59 . The available chemo-, magneto- and bio-stratigraphic constraints 28 , 52 , 60 , and radiometric ages 61 (see “Geological setting” section below for a summary) suggest that the volcanic-driven environmental perturbation in the Junggar Basin started before the 1st NCIE, possibly >300 kyr before the marine extinction at the 2nd NCIE (Fig.  2 ), similar to the record in the Southern Hemisphere from the Sydney Basin (Fig.  1 ) 3 , but before the onset of the terrestrial crisis recorded in South China (ca. 60 kyr before the marine extinction) 4 . Notably, the age of the last coal bed in the Bogda Mountains (northern high latitude) is estimated at 252.29 Ma 59 , which is the same age (252.3 ± 0.3 Ma) of the last coal found in the Sydney basin (southern high latitude) 3 .

Radioisotope data indicate that the end-Permian terrestrial crisis was linked to the initial, significantly pyroclastic phase of Siberian Traps volcanism 62 , which injected a huge amount of volcanic CO 2 and SO 2 into the atmosphere, as well as metals 2 . Additional S could have been released by the interaction of the ascending magmas with the evaporitic rocks that are abundant in the basin where the Siberian Traps were emplaced 24 . Evidence of Late Permian strong pulses of silicic arc magmatism has been found around the world at the time of the PTME (Fig.  1 ; e.g., ref. 63 ), but the amount of S released from this type of volcanism was likely much lower than that from the Siberian Traps 64 .

Mass balance calculations using the CAS isotope data (see Source Data file) suggest that the volcanic S contribution (range δ 34 S −7.5 to +5‰ 65 ), increased from 0–25% in the pre-extinction interval to 33–100% during the decrease in δ 34 S CAS across the terrestrial extinction. These calculations are based on the pre-excursion baseline δ 34 S CAS of +11 to +12‰ recorded at the base of Taodonggou and Tarlong, and the range of δ 34 S CAS values between NCIE 1 and 2 during the extinction of +5 to +7.5‰. The nature of the CAS records (see earlier “Discussion”) suggests that they likely record the average background-S loading in the catchment, meaning that the contribution of volcanic-S during individual events could have been greater.

Our Hg record fits well with the timeframe of Siberian Traps emplacement and the global Hg records 2 , supporting previous modeling results 10 : Higher loading of volcanic Hg during the terrestrial crisis and the mainly pyroclastic activity of the Siberian Traps would have increased the amount of Hg in the terrestrial reservoir which was then released at the time of the vegetation collapse.

The scenario inferred from our dataset is similar to that proposed for the Karoo Basin, where an increase in S concentrations and negative δ 34 S values in fluvial sediments across the Permo–Triassic boundary were ascribed to high atmospheric deposition due to acid rain 24 . A record from the Sydney Basin shows a broad negative shift in pyrite δ 34 S starting from near the base of the terrestrial extinction interval, just before the Permian–Triassic boundary, and ending in the Dienerian, with one datapoint showing a very negative value down to −21‰ in the terrestrial crisis interval itself 23 . Peaks in Ni/Al and Hg/TOC, which are thought to indicate increased volcanic activity, are found at the end of the terrestrial crisis interval in the same basin 23 , 66 . Our high-resolution combined multi-archive S-isotope and bulk Hg records from the Junggar Basin strongly support a link between increases in the input of volcanic gases to the atmosphere and the terrestrial crisis.

Terrestrial minor-S isotope record

The high abundance of teratological sporomorphs in several successions across the PTME has been attributed to increased UV-B radiation due to the disruption of the ozone layer by stratospheric volcanic emissions of SO 2 and halogens 13 , 20 , 21 . However, teratological sporomorphs alone are not necessarily direct evidence of UV-B radiation, as they could also be the result of the toxic effects of metals on plants 25 , 67 . More recently, Liu et al. 22 used the concentration of UV-B absorbing compounds in pollen to detect an increase in UV-B during the Permo–Triassic extinction interval. The minor isotopes of sulfur provide one of the few ways to derive direct information about the atmospheric impact of past volcanic activity 68 , 69 . The development of a sulfur mass-independent fractionation (S-MIF) signal during the photooxidation of SO 2 is sensitive to its exposure to UV-B radiation 70 : Volcanic SO 2 oxidized below the UV-B absorbing ozone layer does not display S-MIF, but larger eruptions such as Pinatubo, which injected SO 2 into or above the ozone layer show S-MIF signals 69 . S-MIF in isotopes of surface sulfate has been recorded chiefly in Archean rocks 71 but has also been detected as a result of brief SO 2 injection into the upper atmosphere during the Chicxulub impact at the end-Cretaceous event 72 . Terrestrial sediments are thought to be better archives of S-MIF than marine sediments because a number of S-cycle biogeochemical processes can modify the pristine signal in marine environments 73 . Deviations in the Δ 33 S and Δ 36 S data from Dalongkou North and Tarlong are within the bounds attributable to biological mass-dependent processes only (Supplementary Fig.  S4 ), so no S-MIF is clearly recorded in lake sulfate (Fig.  5 ). Complete destruction of the ozone layer would produce a large S-MIF signal and can be therefore excluded. However, thinning of the ozone layer 22 is still compatible with our S isotope record because it has a more muted effect on UV-B fluxes, likely making S-MIF development less sensitive to partial ozone depletion 74 . Partial depletion of the ozone layer and the resulting increase in UV-B radiation could still have had a huge impact on vegetation.

Mechanism of terrestrial extinction

The use of soil and lake carbonate CAS data is shown to be a powerful tool to explore terrestrial sulfur cycling and to define the isotopic composition of terrestrial sulfate in the past. By performing high-resolution geochemical analysis across the record of the end-Permian terrestrial crisis and defining the full sulfur isotope system, our record provides detailed evidence for the pulsed nature of S addition to the Junggar Basin catchment and clear evidence of its volcanic origin. Our dataset therefore offers a detailed picture of the cascade of events that could have triggered the biological crisis in the study area (Fig.  6 ). Acid rain, metal poisoning and ozone depletion are the main kill mechanisms proposed for the end-Permian terrestrial crisis 2 . The record from the Junggar Basin provides evidence of multiple discrete pulses of S and Hg deposition, likely driven by Siberian Trap volcanism. These events would have imposed recurring episodes of stress on the terrestrial ecosystem during an interval of ~300 Kyr prior to the marine extinction (Fig.  2 ).

Increased volcanic S and Hg in the atmosphere from the Siberian Traps large igneous province caused acid rain, acidification and methylation of Hg that severely stressed the lacustrine biota. These local effects were coupled with the global effects of volcanic CO 2 input and the consequent environmental changes. Conc. concentration, CAS carbonate-associated sulfate, BSR bacterial sulfate reduction.

For example, modern lake-water column acidification is known to have major effects on lacustrine biota, but the severity of this effect depends on the ability of the environment to buffer acidity 75 . While the Junggar catchment contains small amounts of carbonate, it is dominantly siliciclastic in nature with a relatively low buffering capacity and thus may have been more sensitive to acid deposition. Globally, the response to these acid rain pulses would have been quite heterogeneous, with catchment buffering capacity playing a role in determining extinction severity. Acid deposition mobilizes toxic metals such as Al from within catchments, and, in modern studies, acidified lakes show increased fish mortality and reduced biodiversity, with deleterious ecological effects becoming apparent after only small decreases in pH 76 . Moreover, lake-water acidification would have had effects on the ability of calcifying organisms to precipitate carbonate shells leading to their crisis. We can, for instance, speculate that a higher energy cost to produce calcium carbonate shells at decreasing pH 77 could have induced ostracods to reduce their size, as observed in the Dalongkou lake system (Lilliput effect 27 ; Fig.  2 ).

It has been shown that in modern acidified lakes, net methylation of inorganic Hg (i.e., the balance between methylation and demethylation) is higher at the sediment-water interface and in the water column 78 , 79 , 80 . Microbial sulfate reduction is thought to facilitate Hg methylation in acidic lakes and would be stimulated by increased sulfate deposition 78 , 80 . Because methylmercury is lipophilic and can easily bind to proteins 78 , it can accumulate in organisms at all trophic levels 81 , 82 , 83 . Methylmercury is highly toxic to freshwater animals and plants, and for some organisms, it can be lethal even at low concentrations 84 . Atmospheric deposition of volcanic Hg in soil and direct uptake by plants could have also had harmful effects. Hg intoxication of higher plants can modify DNA and result in mutagenesis, inhibit plant growth, and reduce photosynthesis 85 . In this respect, the occurrence of mutated pollen within the interval with Hg and S-isotope anomalies supports metal poisoning as at least a contributing cause of teratology, possibly coupled with ozone layer thinning 22 , which did not produce resolvable changes in the minor S-isotope signature (Fig.  5 ).

The deposition of S and other volcanic volatiles is likely to have been highly heterogeneous over the Earth’s surface 86 . Emissions of chemical species with shorter atmospheric lifetimes (e.g., SO 2 , HCl) from the Siberian Traps could have been particularly concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere 17 , where our record (Junggar Basin) was located (Fig.  1 ). If we assume that the evidence for pulses of Hg and S deposition were also accompanied by pulsed CO 2 emissions the chemical stressors on individual catchments may also be linked to global effects on climate, creating instability expressed as extremes of temperature, precipitation, seasonality and climate variability over short timescales. Repeated pulses of likely volcanic S deposition, as shown from our record, corroborate modeling predictions of “climate swings” (in temperature, hydrological cycle, ocean circulation) caused by outgassing of S and C from the Siberian Traps 17 . Concurrently, a partial depletion of the ozone layer, which is not excluded by our minor S-isotope records, could increase UV-B radiation with major consequences for vegetation. Recurrent stress on land during the end of the Permian over a relatively long interval (ca. 60–300 Kyr)—as observed in many different records 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 9 , 23 , 87 —driven by the combined global (climate extremes, higher UV-B radiation) and local (e.g., lake acidification and poisoning) effects of repeated injections of volcanic gases from the Siberian Traps into atmosphere, likely prevented the terrestrial ecosystems from adapting to these high-frequency changes, and eventually led to their collapse.

Sampling and geological setting

We analyzed bulk sediment samples from the Dalongkou North lacustrine section, the nearby wholly terrestrial Tarlong South, and lake marginal Taodonggou (also known as Taoshuyuan) sections for palaeosol carbonates and freshwater limestones (Taodonggou only) encompassing the Wutonggou Fm. (latest Permian) and Guodikeng Fm. (Permo–Triassic boundary) of the Junggar Basin 28 , 29 . The sections are located in the foothills of the Bogda Mountains, Xinjiang, Northwest China (Fig.  1 ). The lacustrine succession of Dalongkou has been proposed as a candidate for the global non-marine Accessory Stratotype Section and Point (ASSP) for the Permo–Triassic boundary (PTB), because of its exceptional exposure, continuity and paleontological record 52 , 88 . At Dalongkou North, the PTME is identified by the crisis of Permian conchostracans, ostracods, and Charophyte algae within the Guodikeng Fm. (Fig.  2 ). A Lilliput ostracod fauna and an increase in abundance of Lycophyte spores, which indicates the shift to herbaceous-dominated survivor flora after the collapse of late Permian forests, were recorded just above the extinction level 27 (Fig.  2 ). The first occurrence of the vertebrate Lystrosaurus and of the megaspore Otynisporites eotriassicus 21 , coupled to conchostracan, ostracod and sporomorph biostratigraphy 27 , 89 , 90 , allows the placement of the terrestrial PTB in the upper part of the Guodikeng Fm. ID-TIMS U/Pb analysis of bentonite layers in the section from the Tarlong-Taodonggou graben give ages of 253.11 ± 0.05 Ma and 253.63 ± 0.24 Ma for the lower part of the Guodikeng Formation 61 , supporting the biostratigraphic placement of the PTB (ca. 251.9 Ma) in the uppermost portion of this formation. In the middle–upper Guodikeng Fm., mutated (teratological) grains of bisaccate gymnosperm pollen ( Klauspollenites schaubergeri and Alisporites sp.) are more abundant (up to 4% of the total sporomorphs) than in background conditions 21 (Fig.  2 ). Abnormal bisaccates, instead of having the two normal air sacs used for pollen dispersal, present one, three or more sacs 21 , which hinders their ability to fertilize female gametes 13 . C-isotope (δ 13 C) analysis of bulk organic matter from the Dalongkou North and Taodonggou sections shows distinct C-isotope excursions that can be correlated to the marine records 21 , 28 , 29 (Fig.  2 ). The sampled parts of the Tarlong South and Taodonggou sections represent lake margin and fluvial/deltaic environments respectively 29 , 91 . Permian palaeosol carbonates sampled at the Tarlong South and Taodonggou sections formed in saturated to well-drained soils with a seasonal precipitation regime. Around the PTB, soil types and sediment geochemistry indicate a change to more arid conditions. Soil carbonates that are formed by the replacement of gypsum appear around the PTB interval 29 , 91 . Thin lacustrine limestones formed in shallow water at the lake margin in various settings 91 were sampled at regular intervals throughout the Tarlong South section. While the types of carbonates vary, they would all have formed in the presence of lake or soil pore water and thus can be expected to sample ambient terrestrial sulfate. To prepare the samples for geochemical analyses, fresh samples from the Dalongkou, Tarlong and Taodonggou sections were powdered using a TEMA laboratory agate disc mill at the School of Earth and Environment (SEE) of the University of Leeds (UK).

Total organic carbon (TOC) and organic carbon isotope analysis

Rock powders were decarbonated with 10% HCl. The acid-washed residue was rinsed with MilliQ water until neutral and dried. The TOC content was then measured using a LECO® SC-144DR Dual Range carbon and sulfur analyser at SEE (Leeds), and calculated using mass loss after acid digestion. For organic carbon isotope analysis, about 2 g of powder for each sample was weighed and reacted with 4 mol/L HCl for 24 h to remove carbonate, then rinsed with ultrapure water repeatedly until neutralized, and finally dried at 35 °C. The δ 13 C org was then measured using an elemental analyzer (EA) coupled to an isotope ratio mass spectrometer (Thermo Delta V Advantage) and calibrated using U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) standards: USGS40 (δ 13 C = −26.39‰) and UREA (δ 13 C = −37.32‰). The analytical precision of δ 13 C org was better than ± 0.2‰. Organic carbon isotope values are given in per mil (‰) relative to Vienna Peedee belemnite (VPDB). All carbon isotope analyses were performed at the State Key Laboratory of Biogeology and Environmental Geology of the China University of Geosciences (Wuhan, China).

Hg concentrations

Hg concentrations were measured with a Lumex RA-915 Portable Mercury Analyzer with PYRO-915 Pyrolyzer at the University of Oxford (UK). For this, 50–250 mg of powdered sample was weighed into a glass boat, placed into the pyrolyzer, and heated to 700 °C. Volatilized elementary Hg was quantified via atomic absorption spectrometry. The instrument was calibrated before use with paint-contaminated soil standards (NIST 2587; 290 ± 9 ppb Hg). At the start of each run and throughout the measurement sequences (every 10 samples), standards were analyzed, using masses ranging from 10 to 90 mg. The analytical precision measured on the standards was within 6%. In sediments, Hg is generally hosted in organic matter 92 , 93 . A prevalent sulfidic host phase is found mainly in euxinic depositional palaeoenvironments with sedimentary total sulfur >1% 93 , which is not the case for the samples analyzed here. Hg concentrations at Dalongkou North have therefore been normalized for TOC contents >0.2 following the method of Grasby et al. 92 .

Bulk lake sediment sulfur extractions

Reduced metal bound-S (assumed to be pyrite) was extracted using a standard chromium reduction method 94 with liberated sulfide trapped by a silver nitrate solution as silver sulfide. Concentrations were extremely low (range = 0–12 ppm S, median = 3.4 ppm S; see Source Data file), so total-S was extracted for isotope analysis. This will consist of the sum of metal-bound sulfides, inorganic sulfates and organic-bound sulfur. Total-S was extracted using a modified version of ASTM method D3177 95 . A mixture of ~6 g of sample and 10 g of Eschka’s mixture (2 parts MgO and 1 part Na 2 CO 3 ) covered uniformly with an additional ~1 g of Eschka’s mixture, was heated in corundum crucibles to 850 °C and held there for 2 h. The resulting solid was extracted using boiling deionized water and then filtered to remove any insoluble residue. After filtration 6–7 mL of 36% HCl was added to each solution and then boiled again before cooling and addition of 20 mL BaCl 2 . BaSO 4 was left to precipitate in a refrigerator before separation, followed by cleaning by centrifugation and washing with ultrapure water. The BaSO 4 residue was then dried and weighed for isotope analysis. Blanks were run alongside the samples during total-S extraction, and did not yield any BaSO 4 precipitate.

Carbonate-associated sulfate (CAS) extraction

To extract CAS from palaeosol carbonate nodules and freshwater limestones, we used the method of He et al. 96 . Approximately 10 g of powder was bleached with 6% NaOCl for 48 h in a 50 mL tube to oxidize possible organic sulfur and metastable sulfide minerals to soluble sulfate. The bleached solution was filtered through a 0.2 µm polypropylene membrane syringe filter and then acidified with 6 M HCl. Saturated BaCl 2 was added to the solution, and BaSO 4 was precipitated at ~2 °C, over a week. The solid bleached residue was washed in 10% NaCl solution for 24 h five times to remove all soluble sulfate contaminants that were generated during the bleaching process. The washed solid residue was then transferred into a 500 mL tube and treated with 6 M HCl to extract CAS. A larger tube is necessary as the reaction with 6 M HCl can be vigorous. The acid digestion was finished within 20 min to minimize the potential for oxidation of any remaining pyrite. The extracted CAS solution was retained by filtration through 0.2 µm polypropylene membrane syringe filters. Saturated BaCl 2 was then added to the remaining filtered solution and left to precipitate BaSO 4 . The resulting BaSO 4 precipitate was repeatedly washed with ultrapure water before being dried, weighed and analyzed for isotopes. The CAS concentrations in all samples were calculated from the amounts of residual BaSO 4 precipitate, and in selected samples, the S concentration was measured with ICP-OES in an aliquot of the filtered solution, which was pipetted before the addition of saturated BaCl 2 and precipitation of BaSO 4 . Blanks were not run for the CAS extraction as previous extensive experience of running blanks for this process shows that they do not produce any measurable BaSO 4 as long as the HCl has a specified low S content (<2 mg/L SO 4 ).

Sulfur isotope measurement

Sulfur isotopic analysis of BaSO 4 precipitate from CAS solution and the bleached filtrate and total S Eshkas’ solution was carried out in the Cohen lab of SEE (Leeds) using an Elementar Pyrocube coupled to an Isoprime continuous flow mass spectrometer. BaSO 4 precipitates were weighed into an 8 × 5 mm tin cup and combusted at 1150 °C in a flow of helium (CP grade) and pure oxygen (N5.0). Samples were weighed for mass spectrometry in duplicate, aiming for weights in a limited range to produce peak heights of between 2.5 and 3.5 nA. The source is tuned for maximum linearity and repeats of a check standard BaSO 4 with peak heights in the range 2–4 nA had a precision of ±0.3‰ (1 s.d.). Complete combustion was achieved by passing the gas through tungstic oxide. Excess oxygen was removed from the gas flow using pure copper wires at a temperature of 850 °C, and the water was removed using Sicapent©. The produced SO 2 gas was separated from contaminating N 2 or CO 2 by temperature-controlled adsorption/desorption columns. The δ 34 S value of the analyzed samples is calculated using the integrated mass 64 and 66 signals relative to those in a SO 2 reference gas (N3.0). These values were calibrated to the international V-CDT scale using a seawater-derived internal BaSO 4 standard, SWS-3 (20.3‰), which has been analyzed against the international standards NBS-127 (20.3 ‰), NBS-123 (17.01‰), IAEA S-1 (−0.30‰) and IAEA S-3 (−32.06‰), and an inter-lab chalcopyrite standard CP-1 (−4.56‰). The precision obtained for repeat analysis of the internal BaSO 4 standard was ± 0.3 ‰ (1 sd) or better.

Multiple S-isotope analysis

Quadruple sulfur isotopes were measured at the University of St Andrews using a Curie-point pyrolysis method modified from Ueno et al. 97 , as described in Warke et al. 98 . Briefly, BaSO 4 precipitates were converted to Ag 2 S by reduction with a thode solution under a stream of oxygen-free N 2 99 , 100 . From 0.3 to 0.5 mg of Ag 2 S were weighed into an iron nickel–cobalt alloy pyrofoil with excess CoF 3 , and placed in a borosilicate glass tube with ~1 g of optical NaF crystals. The reaction tube was placed in a Curie-point pyrolyzer (JHP-22, Japan Analytical Industry), evacuated down to 10 −3 mbar, and flash heated at 590 °C for 297 s to produce SF 6 gas. The product gas was introduced into a bespoke vacuum line and purified cryogenically, and by passing through an SRI 8610 C gas chromatograph equipped with a 12 ft HayeSep Q packed column (1/800 OD, 80–100 mesh) and a 12 ft Molecular Sieves 5 A˚ packed column (1/800 OD, 60–80 mesh) operating at a He flow rate of 24 mL/min and a temperature of 80 °C. The resulting purified SF 6 gas was monitored by a thermal conductivity detector (TCD), captured at liquid N 2 temperature into the microvolume inlet system of a Thermo MAT 253 mass spectrometer and then expanded into the source of the mass spectrometer at room temperature. Sulfur isotope abundances were analyzed on m/z 127, 128, 129 and 131 (corresponding to 32 SF 5+ , 33 SF 5+ , 34 SF 5+ , and 36 SF 5+ ) and compared to reference SF 6 gas calibrated to V-CDT 98 .

Measured sulfur isotope ratios are reported in the delta notation (δ 33 S, δ 34 S, δ 36 S) relative to VCDT. For mass-dependent processes δ 33 S ≈ 0.515 × δ 34 S, and δ 36 S ≈ 1.90 × δ 34 S 31 . Deviations from these predicted relationships are expressed using ∆ 33 S and ∆ 36 S notation, where:

The Δ 33 S and Δ 36 S values for IAEA-S1 produced by this method ( n  = 78) are 0.115 ± 0.015‰ and −0.581 ± 0.172‰ (mean ± 1σ). These values overlap, within uncertainty, with values published in the literature 97 , 101 , 102 . The precision of a single measurement (1σ) was typically in the range of 0.01‰ for Δ 33 S and 0.1‰ for Δ 36 S. We do not quote δ 34 S values from the SF 6 measurements because there is a documented small but variable mass-dependent offset that occurs during the fluorination process. This effect scales with mass and therefore has no effect on the Δ values 97 . Our δ 34 S data are therefore only derived from the continuous flow SO 2 measurements described in the previous section.

Data availability

All new data presented in this paper are available in the supplementary excel file.  Source data are provided with this paper.

Erwin, D. H. The Great Paleozoic Crisis: Life and Death in the Permian (Columbia Univ. Press, 1993).

Dal Corso, J. et al. Environmental crises at the Permian–Triassic mass extinction. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 3 , 197–214 (2022).

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Fielding, C. R. et al. Age and pattern of the southern high-latitude continental end-Permian extinction constrained by multiproxy analysis. Nat. Commun. 10 , 385 (2019).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Chu, D. et al. Ecological disturbance in tropical peatlands prior to marine Permian-Triassic mass extinction. Geology 48 , 288–292 (2020).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Gastaldo, R. A. et al. The base of the Lystrosaurus Assemblage Zone, Karoo Basin, predates the end-Permian marine extinction. Nat. Commun. 11 , 1428 (2020).

Biswas, R. K., Kaiho, K., Saito, R., Tian, L. & Shi, Z. Terrestrial ecosystem collapse and soil erosion before the end-Permian marine extinction: organic geochemical evidence from marine and non-marine records. Glob. Planet. Change 195 , 103327 (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Kaiho, K., Aftabuzzaman, M., Jones, D. S. & Tian, L. Pulsed volcanic combustion events coincident with the end-Permian terrestrial disturbance and the following global crisis. Geology 49 , 289–293 (2021).

Feng, Z. et al. From rainforest to herbland: new insights into land plant responses to the end-Permian mass extinction. Earth Sci. Rev. 204 , 103153 (2020).

Vajda, V. et al. End-Permian (252 Mya) deforestation, wildfires and flooding—an ancient biotic crisis with lessons for the present. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 529 , 115875 (2020).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Dal Corso, J. et al. Permo–Triassic boundary carbon and mercury cycling linked to terrestrial ecosystem collapse. Nat. Commun. 11 , 2962 (2020).

Labandeira, C. C. & Sepkoski, J. J. Insect diversity in the fossil record. Science 261 , 310–315 (1993).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Angielczyk, K. D., Roopnarine, P. D. & Wang, S. C. Modeling the role of primary productivity disruption in end-Permian extinctions. N. Mex. Mus. Nat. Hist. Sci. Bull. 30 , 16–23 (2005).

Google Scholar  

Benca, J. P., Duijnstee, I. A. P. & Looy, C. V. UV-B–induced forest sterility: implications of ozone shield failure in Earth’s largest extinction. Sci. Adv. 4 , e1700618 (2018).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Zhao, X. et al. Recovery of lacustrine ecosystems after the end-Permian mass extinction. Geology 48 , 609–613 (2020).

Zheng, D. et al. Middle-Late Triassic insect radiation revealed by diverse fossils and isotopic ages from China. Sci. Adv. 4 , eaat1380 (2018).

Retallack, G. J., Veevers, J. J. & Morante, R. Global coal gap between Permian-Triassic extinction and Middle Triassic recovery of peat-forming plants. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 108 , 195–207 (1996).

Black, B. A. et al. Systemic swings in end-Permian climate from Siberian Traps carbon and sulfur outgassing. Nat. Geosci. 11 , 949–954 (2018).

Viglietti, P. A. et al. Evidence from South Africa for a protracted end-Permian extinction on land. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118 , e2017045118 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Liu, J., Abdala, F., Angielczyk, K. D. & Sidor, C. A. Tetrapod turnover during the Permo-Triassic transition explained by temperature change. Earth Sci. Rev. 224 , 103886 (2022).

Visscher, H. et al. Environmental mutagenesis during the end-Permian ecological crisis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101 , 12952–12956 (2004).

Foster, C. B. & Afonin, S. A. Abnormal pollen grains: an outcome of deteriorating atmospheric conditions around the Permian-Triassic boundary. J. Geol. Soc. 162 , 653–659 (2005).

Liu, F. et al. Dying in the Sun: direct evidence for elevated UV-B radiation at the end-Permian mass extinction. Sci. Adv. 9 , eabo6102 (2023).

Li, M. et al. Sulfur isotopes link atmospheric sulfate aerosols from the Siberian Traps outgassing to the end-Permian extinction on land. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 592 , 117634 (2022).

Maruoka, T., Koeberl, C., Hancox, P. J. & Reimold, W. U. Sulfur geochemistry across a terrestrial Permian-Triassic boundary section in the Karoo Basin, South Africa. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 206 , 101–117 (2003).

Chu, D. et al. Metal-induced stress in survivor plants following the end-Permian collapse of land ecosystems. Geology 49 , 657–661 (2021).

Jin, Y. & Shang, Q. The Permian of China and its interregional correlation. Dev. Palaeontol. Stratigr. 18 , 71–98 (2000).

Chu, D. et al. Lilliput effect in freshwater ostracods during the Permian-Triassic extinction. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 435 , 38–52 (2015).

Cao, C., Wang, W., Liu, L., Shen, S. & Summons, R. E. Two episodes of 13C-depletion in organic carbon in the latest Permian: evidence from the terrestrial sequences in northern Xinjiang, China. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 270 , 251–257 (2008).

Thomas, S. G. et al. Palaeosol stratigraphy across the Permian-Triassic boundary, Bogda Mountains, NW China: implications for palaeoenvironmental transition through earth’s largest mass extinction. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 308 , 41–64 (2011).

Wu, Y. et al. Organic carbon isotopes in terrestrial Permian-Triassic boundary sections of North China: implications for global carbon cycle perturbations. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 132 , 1106–1118 (2020).

Ono, S. Photochemistry of sulfur dioxide and the origin of mass-independent isotope fractionation in Earth’s atmosphere. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 45 , 301–329 (2017).

Barkan, Y., Paris, G., Webb, S. M., Adkins, J. F. & Halevy, I. Sulfur isotope fractionation between aqueous and carbonate-associated sulfate in abiotic calcite and aragonite. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 280 , 317–339 (2020).

Howell, K. J. & Bao, H. Caliche as a geological repository for atmospheric sulfate. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33 , L13816 (2006).

Whelpdale, D. M. An overview of the atmospheric sulphur cycle. Sulphur Cycling on the Continents (Wiley, 1992).

Bernasconi, S. M. et al. An evaporite-based high-resolution sulfur isotope record of Late Permian and Triassic seawater sulfate. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 204 , 331–349 (2017).

Newman, L., Krouse, H. R. & Grinenko, V. A. Sulphur isotope variations in the atmosphere in Stable Isotopes in the Assessment of Natural and Anthropogenic Sulphur in the Environment (Wiley, 1991).

Newton, R. & Bottrell, S. Stable isotopes of carbon and sulphur as indicators of environmental change: past and present. J. Geol. Soc. 164 , 691–708 (2007).

Rech, J. A., Quade, J. & Hart, W. S. Isotopic evidence for the source of Ca and S in soil gypsum, anhydrite and calcite in the Atacama Desert, Chile. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 67 , 575–586 (2003).

Busenberg, E. & Niel Plummer, L. Kinetic and thermodynamic factors controlling the distribution of SO 3 2 − and Na + in calcites and selected aragonites. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 49 , 713–725 (1985).

Paris, G., Fehrenbacher, J. S., Sessions, A. L., Spero, H. J. & Adkins, J. F. Experimental determination of carbonate-associated sulfate δ 34 S in planktonic foraminifera shells. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 15 , 1452–1461 (2014).

van Dijk, I., de Nooijer, L. J., Boer, W. & Reichart, G. J. Sulfur in foraminiferal calcite as a potential proxy for seawater carbonate ion concentration. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 470 , 64–72 (2017).

Watanabe, T., Naraoka, H., Nishimura, M. & Kawai, T. Biological and environmental changes in Lake Baikal during the late Quaternary inferred from carbon, nitrogen and sulfur isotopes. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 222 , 285–299 (2004).

Trust, B. A. & Fry, B. Stable sulphur isotopes in plants: a review. Plant Cell Environ. 15 , 1105–1110 (1992).

Novák, M., Bottrell, S. H. & Přechová, E. Sulfur isotope inventories of atmospheric deposition, spruce forest floor and living Sphagnum along a NW-SE transect across Europe. Biogeochemistry 53 , 23–50 (2001).

Nriagu, J. O. & Soon, Y. K. Distribution and isotopic composition of sulfur in lake sediments of northern Ontario. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 49 , 823–834 (1985).

Mitchell, M. J., Owen, J. S. & Schindler, S. C. Factors affecting sulfur incorporation into lake sediments: paleoecological implications. J. Paleolimnol. 4 , 1–22 (1990).

Urban, N. R., Ernst, K. & Bernasconi, S. Addition of sulfur to organic matter during early diagenesis of lake sediments. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 63 , 837–853 (1999).

Rudd, J. W. M., Kelly, C. A. & Furutani, A. The role of sulfate reduction in long term accumulation of organic and inorganic sulfur in lake sediments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 31 , 1281–1291 (1986).

Fry, B. Stable sulfur isotopic distributions and sulfate reduction in lake sediments of the Adirondack Mountains, New York. Biogeochemistry 2 , 329–343 (1986).

Bottrell, S. H. & Raiswell, R. Sulphur isotopes and microbial sulphur cycling in sediments in Microbial Sediments (Springer, 2000).

Mayer, B., Alpay, S., Gould, W. D., Lortie, L. & Rosa, F. The onset of anthropogenic activity recorded in lake sediments in the vicinity of the Horne smelter in Quebec, Canada: sulfur isotope evidence. Appl. Geochem. 22 , 397–414 (2007).

Metcalfe, I. et al. Stratigraphy, biostratigraphy and C-isotopes of the Permian-Triassic non-marine sequence at Dalongkou and Lucaogou, Xinjiang Province, China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 36 , 503–520 (2009).

Pasquier, V. et al. Pyrite sulfur isotopes reveal glacial-interglacial environmental changes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114 , 5941–5945 (2017).

Berner, R. A. & Raiswell, R. C/S method for distinguishing freshwater from marine sedimentary rocks. Geology 12 , 365–368 (1984).

Algeo, T. J., Luo, G. M., Song, H. Y., Lyons, T. W. & Canfield, D. E. Reconstruction of secular variation in seawater sulfate concentrations. Biogeosciences 12 , 2131–2151 (2015).

Sanei, H., Grasby, S. E. & Beauchamp, B. Latest Permian mercury anomalies. Geology 40 , 63–66 (2012).

Grasby, S. E. et al. Isotopic signatures of mercury contamination in latest Permian oceans. Geology 45 , 55–58 (2017).

Shen, J. et al. Mercury evidence of intense volcanic effects on land during the Permian-Triassic transition. Geology 47 , 1117–1121 (2019).

Yang, W. et al. Paleoenvironmental and paleoclimatic evolution and cyclo- and chrono-stratigraphy of upper Permian–Lower Triassic fluvial-lacustrine deposits in Bogda Mountains, NW China—implications for diachronous plant evolution across the Permian–Triassic boundary. Earth Sci. Rev. 222 , 103741 (2021).

Glen, J. M. G. et al. Magnetostratigraphic correlations of Permian-Triassic marine-to-terrestrial sections from China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 36 , 521–540 (2009).

Yang, W. et al. Depositional environments and cyclo- and chronostratigraphy of uppermost Carboniferous-Lower Triassic fluvial-lacustrine deposits, southern Bogda Mountains, NW China—a terrestrial palaeoclimatic record of mid-latitude NE Pangea. Glob. Planet. Change 73 , 15–113 (2010).

Burgess, S. D. & Bowring, S. A. High-precision geochronology confirms voluminous magmatism before, during, and after Earth’s most severe extinction. Sci. Adv. 1 , e1500470 (2015).

Chapman, T., Milan, L. A., Metcalfe, I., Blevin, P. L. & Crowley, J. Pulses in silicic arc magmatism initiate end-Permian climate instability and extinction. Nat. Geosci . 15 , 411–416 (2022).

Self, S., Schmidt, A. & Mather, T. A. Emplacement characteristics, time scales, and volcanic gas release rates of continental flood basalt eruptions on Earth in Volcanism, Impacts, and Mass Extinctions: Causes and Effects (Geological Society of America, 2014).

Black, B. A., Lamarque, J. F., Shields, C. A., Elkins-Tanton, L. T. & Kiehl, J. T. Acid rain and ozone depletion from pulsed Siberian Traps magmatism. Geology 42 , 67–70 (2014).

Shen, J. et al. Mercury evidence from southern Pangea terrestrial sections for end-Permian global volcanic effects. Nat. Commun. 14 , 6 (2023).

Lindström, S. et al. Volcanic mercury and mutagenesis in land plants during the end-Triassic mass extinction. Sci. Adv. 5 , eaaw4018 (2019).

Baroni, M., Thiemens, M. H., Delmas, R. J. & Savarino, J. Mass-independent sulfur isotopic compositions in stratospheric volcanic eruptions. Science 315 , 84–87 (2007).

Savarino, J., Romero, A., Cole-Dai, J., Bekki, S. & Thiemens, M. H. UV induced mass-independent sulfur isotope fractionation in stratospheric volcanic sulfate. Geophys. Res. Lett. 30 , 2131 (2003).

Claire, M. W. et al. Modeling the signature of sulfur mass-independent fractionation produced in the Archean atmosphere. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 141 , 365–380 (2014).

Farquhar, J., Bao, H. & Thiemens, M. Atmospheric influence of Earth’s earliest sulfur cycle. Science 289 , 756–758 (2000).

Junium, C. K. et al. Massive perturbations to atmospheric sulfur in the aftermath of the Chicxulub impact. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119 , e2119194119 (2022).

Halevy, I. Production, preservation, and biological processing of mass-independent sulfur isotope fractionation in the Archean surface environment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110 , 17644–17649 (2013).

Pavlov, A. A. & Kasting, J. F. Mass-independent fractionation of sulfur isotopes in archean sediments: strong evidence for an anoxic archean atmosphere. Astrobiology 2 , 27–41 (2002).

Clair, T. A., Dennis, I. F., Scruton, D. A. & Gilliss, M. Freshwater acidification research in Atlantic Canada: a review of results and predictions for the future. Environ. Rev. 15 , 153–167 (2007).

Schindler, D. W. et al. Long-term ecosystem stress: the effects of years of experimental acidification on a small lake. Science 228 , 1395–1401 (1985).

Spalding, C., Finnegan, S. & Fischer, W. W. Energetic costs of calcification under ocean acidification. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 31 , 866–877 (2017).

Ullrich, S. M., Tanton, T. W. & Abdrashitova, S. A. Mercury in the aquatic environment: a review of factors affecting methylation. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 31 , 241–293 (2001).

Gilmour, C. C. & Henry, E. A. Mercury methylation in aquatic systems affected by acid deposition. Environ. Pollut. 71 , 131–169 (1991).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Gilmour, C. C., Henry, E. A. & Ralph, M. Sulfate stimulation of mercury methylation in freshwater sediments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 26 , 2281–2287 (1992).

Little, M. E., Burgess, N. M., Broders, H. G. & Campbell, L. M. Mercury in little brown bat ( Myotis lucifugus ) maternity colonies and its correlation with freshwater acidity in Nova Scotia, Canada. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49 , 2059–2065 (2015).

Wyn, B., Kidd, K. A., Burgess, N. M. & Allen Curry, R. Mercury biomagnification in the food webs of acidic lakes in Kejimkujik National Park and National Historic Site, Nova Scotia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 66 , 1532–1545 (2009).

Brown, D., Goncharov, A., Paul, E., Simonin, H. & Carpenter, D. O. The relationship between Adirondack lake pH and levels of mercury in yellow perch. J. Aquat. Anim. Health 22 , 280–290 (2010).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Boening, D. W. Ecological effects, transport, and fate of mercury: a general review. Chemosphere 40 , 1335–1351 (2000).

Azevedo, R. et al. Inorganic Hg toxicity in plants: a comparison of different genotoxic parameters. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 125 , 247–254 (2018).

Schmidt, A. et al. Selective environmental stress from sulphur emitted by continental flood basalt eruptions. Nat. Geosci. 9 , 77–82 (2016).

Mays, C. et al. Refined Permian-Triassic floristic timeline reveals early collapse and delayed recovery of south polar terrestrial ecosystems. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 132 , 1489–1513 (2020).

Cheng, Z. & Lucas, S. G. A possible nonmarine GSSP for the Permian-Triassic boundary. Albertiana 12 , 39–44 (1993).

Hou, J. P. Two sporo-pollen assemblages of Guodikeng formation and discussion on the Permo-Triassic boundary in Junggar Basin, Xinjiang. Prof. Pap. Stratigr. Palaeontol. 28 , 177–204 (2004).

Kozur, H. W. & Weems, R. E. Detailed correlation and age of continental late Changhsingian and earliest Triassic beds: implications for the role of the Siberian Trap in the Permian-Triassic biotic crisis. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 308 , 22–40 (2011).

Yang, W. et al. Sedimentary evidence of Early-Late Permian mid-latitude continental climate variability, southern Bogda Mountains, NW China. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 252 , 239–258 (2007).

Grasby, S. E., Them, T. R., Chen, Z., Yin, R. & Ardakani, O. H. Mercury as a proxy for volcanic emissions in the geologic record. Earth Sci. Rev. 196 , 102880 (2019).

Shen, J. et al. Sedimentary host phases of mercury (Hg) and implications for use of Hg as a volcanic proxy. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 543 , 116333 (2020).

Canfield, D. E., Raiswell, R., Westrich, J. T., Reaves, C. M. & Berner, R. A. The use of chromium reduction in the analysis of reduced inorganic sulfur in sediments and shales. Chem. Geol. 54 , 149–155 (1986).

Subcommittee D05.21, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 26: Gaseous Fuels; Coal and Coke; Atmospheric Analysis. (American Society for Testing and Materials, 1977).

He, T. et al. An enormous sulfur isotope excursion indicates marine anoxia during the end-Triassic mass extinction. Sci. Adv. 6 , eabb6704 (2020).

Ueno, Y., Aoyama, S., Endo, Y., Matsu’ura, F. & Foriel, J. Rapid quadruple sulfur isotope analysis at the sub-micromole level by a flash heating with CoF 3 . Chem. Geol. 419 , 29–35 (2015).

Warke, M. R. et al. The great oxidation event preceded a paleoproterozoic ‘snowball earth’. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117 , 13314–13320 (2020).

Thode, H. G., Monster, J. & Dunford, H. B. Sulphur isotope geochemistry. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 25 , 159–174 (1961).

Arnold, G. L., Brunner, B., Müller, I. A. & Røy, H. Modern applications for a total sulfur reduction distillation method—what’s old is new again. Geochem. Trans. 15 , 4 (2014).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Ono, S., Wing, B., Rumble, D. & Farquhar, J. High precision analysis of all four stable isotopes of sulfur ( 32 S, 33 S, 34 S and 36 S) at nanomole levels using a laser fluorination isotope-ratio-monitoring gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Chem. Geol. 225 , 30–39 (2006).

Defouilloy, C., Cartigny, P., Assayag, N., Moynier, F. & Barrat, J. A. High-precision sulfur isotope composition of enstatite meteorites and implications of the formation and evolution of their parent bodies. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 172 , 393–409 (2016).

Boucot, A. J., Xu, C. & Scotese, C. R. Phanerozoic Paleoclimate: An Atlas of Lithologic Indicators of Climate , Vol. 11 (SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology, 2013).

Cai, Y. F. et al. Wildfires and deforestation during the Permian–Triassic transition in the southern Junggar Basin, Northwest China. Earth Sci. Rev. 218 , 103670 (2021).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work has been funded by the “Ecosystem resilience and recovery from the Permo-Triassic crisis” project (EcoPT; NERC grant number NE/P013724/1, P.I. = P.B.W.), which was a part of the NERC and NSFC-funded Biosphere Evolution, Transitions and Resilience (BETR) programme, and by NSFC 42030513 (P.I. = J.T.).

Author information

Deceased: Ian Metcalfe.

Authors and Affiliations

School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

Jacopo Dal Corso, Robert J. Newton, Tianchen He, Simon H. Bottrell, Helen A. Cope, Robert A. Jamieson & Paul B. Wignall

State Key Laboratory of Biogeology and Environmental Geology, School of Earth Sciences, China University of Geosciences Wuhan, Wuhan, China

Jacopo Dal Corso, Daoliang Chu, Haijun Song, Huyue Song, Li Tian, Jinnan Tong, Wenchao Shu & Yuyang Wu

School of Earth and Environmental Sciences and Centre for Exoplanet Science, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK

Aubrey L. Zerkle, Tommaso Di Rocco & Mark W. Claire

Blue Marble Space Institute of Science, Seattle, WA, USA

Aubrey L. Zerkle & Mark W. Claire

Geochemistry and Isotope Geology Department, Geosciences Center, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany

Tommaso Di Rocco

Department of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Tamsin A. Mather

College of Oceanography, Hohai University, Nanjing, China

Tianchen He

Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, USA

Timothy Gallagher

Division of Earth Science, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia

Ian Metcalfe

Department of Environmental Geochemistry and Biogeochemistry, Czech Geological Survey, Prague, Czech Republic

Martin Novak

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

P.B.W., R.J.N. and J.T. provided the funding. R.J.N., P.B.W. and J.D.C. planned the study. D.C., Y.W., W.S., R.J.N., T.G. and I.M. collected the samples. J.D.C. processed the samples for the analyses with help from T.H. for CAS extraction, and H.A.C. and M.N. for total S extraction. J.D.C. measured TOC. J.D.C. and T.A.M. measured Hg. R.A.J., R.J.N. and J.D.C. measured total and CAS δ 34 S. J.D.C., T.D.R., M.W.C. and A.L.Z. measured minor S-isotopes. J.D.C. and R.J.N. wrote the manuscript. A.L.Z., D.C., H.-J.S., H.-Y.S., L.T., J.T., T.D.R., M.W.C., T.A.M., T.H., T.G., W.S., Y.W., S.H.B., I.M., H.A.C., M.N., R.A.J. and P.B.W. revised the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jacopo Dal Corso or Robert J. Newton .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Communications thanks Christopher Fielding, Guillaume Paris and the other anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work. A peer review file is available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information, peer review file, source data, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Dal Corso, J., Newton, R.J., Zerkle, A.L. et al. Repeated pulses of volcanism drove the end-Permian terrestrial crisis in northwest China. Nat Commun 15 , 7628 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51671-5

Download citation

Received : 17 September 2023

Accepted : 12 August 2024

Published : 02 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51671-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.