How The Greed of Few

Leads to Destruction of All

Rayyan ul Haq
Dr. Severine Minot
What is Modernity (CORE 102)
Habib University, Spring 2018
In the first chapter, ‘Welcome to the Anthropocene’, the writer introduces the origin of the

word and expands upon its meaning, delving into the human activities that have contributed

to the change in environment and bringing about the concept of a new geological epoch,

‘Anthropocene.’ He also compares this proposed new geological epoch with the last two

epochs that were namely the ‘Pleistocene’ and the ‘Holocene’ and how the Anthropocene

distinguishes itself from them. He also discusses possible starting times for this new

geological epoch.

The fist argument the writer makes is, that the starting dates of the last two epochs were

both based on events related to humans. The start of the Pleistocene coincided “with the

appearance of the genus Homo 2.5 million years ago” (Bonneuil, 2017: 3) and Holocene with

the “emergence of humans” (Idem). This makes it suitable to start the next epoch at the

point when humanity has become a “new telluric power” (Idem). He then goes on to discuss

the specific ways in which mankind has influenced the environment to bring the planet out

of the Holocene. These include the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere

specifically CH4, N2O and CO2 as well as the addition of new substances including fluoride

gases and radioactive substances all of which have together brought about a rise in the

global temperature which is still rapidly increasing. The writer could have further discussed

the damage to the ozone layer the release of fluoride gases is causing. The ozone layer has

been shielding living things on Earth from harmful rays of the sun for almost a billion years

and the full consequences of its depletion are still unknown. In fact, it was the shielding

provided by its formation that allowed creatures to spread from the sea to land. This would

have added support to the point the writer was going to make next.
Next the writer discusses the damage to the biosphere which includes the rapid extinction

of species at rate “100 to 1000 times greater than the geological norm” (Bonneuil, 2017: 5)

due to the fact that “climate condition on between 12 and 39 percent of the Earth’s surface

will be such as present living organisms have never before faced” (Idem). He further

elaborates how the water, nitrogen and phosphate natural cycles have become disturbed

due to the construction of large dams, industrialization and use of fertilizers and fossil fuels.

He points that most of the phosphate gets washed into rivers and the sea and how “an

increase in phosphate level of only 20 percent in relation to the underlying natural flow was

in the geological past one of the causes for the collapse of the oxygen level in the oceans,

leading to massive extinction of aquatic life”. (Idem) Here, the writer could have explained

the process of Eutrophication, which is the unchecked growth of bacteria and algae due to

fertilizers which then massively start to consume the oxygen in the oceans, allowing the

reader to understand exactly how the increase in phosphorus affected oxygen levels as the

writer states.

Finally, he points out stratigraphic differences between the Anthropocene and Holocene,

and suggests possible starting dates for the new epoch. These differences include the level

of carbon dioxide which “has not been equaled for 4 million years” (Bonneuil, 2017: 8), “the

transformations of lake side and coastal fauna and flora caused by the human forcing of

nitrogen and phosphorus cycles (which) have also left a specific mark”, and the deposition of

“entirely new substances … in the planet’s ecosystem” (Bonneuil, 2017: 9). The possible

starting dates he suggests include the conquest of America, the invention of the steam

engine and the great acceleration of the mid-20 th century. Although the writer is in favor of

placing the start of the Anthropocene at the birth of the steam engine, I disagree and would

place this start at the great acceleration. This is because it is not until the great acceleration
that the stratigraphic markers become noticeable and although the writer is correct in

saying that the cause for these changes started with the industrial revolution, but the

geological timeline is marked by large visible changes not their causes and it is only the

privilege of our time that we are able to explore the causes in such detail but for all previous

major changes and epochs we can only guess. For example, the Cambrian Explosion remains

a big mystery.

The next chapter is titled the ‘Thermocene: A Political History of CO2’ which focuses on

carbon dioxide but more broadly on energy changes throughout the modern period and the

factors that drove these changes. The writer starts of by challenging by the idea of energy

transitions because “there was not a movement from wood to coal, then from coal to oil,

then from oil to nuclear. The history of energy is not one of transitions, but rather of

successive additions of new sources of primary energy” (Bonneuil, 2017: 100). He bases this

on the fact that “If, in the twentieth century, the use of coal decreased in relation to oil, it

remains that its consumption continually grew” (Idem). He then proceeds to tackle the

commonly held belief that the adoption of new sources of energy was based on higher

efficiency or abundance of reserves but rather was rather based on political causes. An

example he provides is of “the switch from cotton to coal (which was based) … on the

industrialist’s refusal to submit to the collective discipline that a common management of

hydraulic resources would have imposed … The steam engine on the other hand, despite

being more expensive, constituted a flexible, modular and individual source that matched

very well the ideology the ideology of English textile capitalism” (Bonneuil, 2017: 104).

Another example the writer used is of how individual transport replaced communal

transport, even though the latter was much more cost efficient, due to “antagonism that
opposed local authorities to the street car companies” (Bonneuil, 2017: 106) and the

introduction of Ford’s first car, Model T, which worked wonderfully with the wave of

opposition to communism that was sweeping over at the time. Here the writer could have

added that Ford’s first car Model T1 used hemp as fuel, which was a renewable fuel derived

from plants, but was then eventually replaced with petrol when the government banned its

use to encourage petrol consumption. This would have gone well with the other point the

writer made about the presence of renewable sources even in the late nineteenth and early

twentieth century but were stomped out by larger corporations with investments to sustain.

An example the writer mentions is of General Electric which at the time “was even

threatening building developers not to connect new states if they offered alternative

sources of power” (Bonneuil, 2017: 106) and how “electric heating was promoted in the

United States without any technological necessity for it” (Idem).

Another example the writer provided of where the transition was not based on efficiency

was in agriculture as the move from “traditional agriculture to an intensive and mechanized

one led to a fall in energy yield: more calories had to be used in order to produce each

calorie of food” (Bonneuil, 2017: 103). This was part of the green revolution based on

“hybrid varieties of rice and maize, along with the use of machines, pesticides and chemical

fertilizers” (Bonneuil, 2017: 109). Here the writer could have included how the crops were

genetically engineered to be able to resist the pesticides and herbicides which led to the

spread of uniculture in agriculture which lead to exhaustion of soil and water tables

dropped.

This chapter was highly focused on the West, with the writer mildly touching upon other

regions. It would have been much more inclusive if the writer had focused on the East as
well as most of what the West thought was imposed upon the East. As in the case of the

green revolution there was a large turn to cash crops in British Ruled regions. The British

also introduced coal and railways into all the regions they ruled and were largely responsible

for the trend of the entire world in the move towards fossil fuels and the entry of the planet

into the Anthropocene.

Bibliography

Bonneuil, C., & Fressoz, J. (2017) Chapter 1,Welcome to the anthropocene.The shock of the
Anthropocene; the Earth, history, and us. London: Verso. pp. 3-12

Bonneuil, C., & Fressoz, J. (2017) Chapter 5,Thermocene:A political history of CO2. The
shock of the Anthropocene; the Earth, history, and us. London: Verso. pp. 99-112