Book Review: Field Notes From A Catastrophe

Citation: Kolbert, E., 2006, Field notes from a catastrophe: man, nature, and climate change: New York, Bloomsbury USA
Link to Amazon.com

I just finished reading Elizabeth Kolbert's "Field Notes From A Catastrophe: Man, Nature, and Climate Change." Each chapter in "Field Notes" is essentially based off of a different journalistic assignment of Kolbert (she writes for the New Yorker). So in each chapter Kolbert explains why she was in a particular place, recounts her interviews, and adds aditional context so that the reader realizes the gravity of the situation she is investigating. In short the book explores how climate change is already affecting the globe and how it will in the future. Kolbert also explores how politics and big corporations skew our perceptions of global warming, but I'll get to that in a different post. I highly recommend reading this book. It is short, very readable, and compelling.


Kolbert's experiences teach us that climate change is already having major effects, but that the future changes will be much more exaggerated and therefore, much harder to adapt to. The reason for this is that the climate system does not respond to a stimulus linearly. In other words, as time goes on, the same stimulus has a greater and greater effect. So, even if the global economy stopped growing, so that we generated the same emissions this year and next year and the next year (because currently, we emit more and more CO2 every year, thanks to both us and developing nations that are now using more energy), the earth is going to continue to get warmer. Part of the reason for this phenomenon is that there is an inherent delay in the climate system. The climate system is so big and so complex that it takes a long time (years to decades depending on the type of change) for it to reestablish an equilibrium. Much of the projected warming of the next century derives from anthropogenic actions that have already happened, and the climate system simply has yet to adjust. So even if we all miraculously disappeared tomorrow and the Earth was rid of us it would still get warmer in the coming decades because of things we put into motion.

The other major drivers of this non-linear relationship are climate feedbacks. The most well known and maybe the most detrimental is known as the ice-albedo feedback. Essentially, materials on earth's surface absorb and reflect differing fractions of incoming solar energy due to their physical properties. How efficiently something reflects incoming radiation is defined as its albedo. For instance a white surface (like ice) has a high albedo because it reflects lots of energy (90 to 50% of it), and a dark surface (like liquid water) has a low albedo because it absorbs lot of energy (~90% of it). Much of the reflected energy gets transmitted back to space, and thus does not warm our climate system. SO, as the climate system warms, we melt progressively more sea-ice, which exposes progressively more ocean water, which in turn absorbs more energy than the ice previously did, so the climate gets warmer faster, and melts more ice and so on. This process feeds back on itself and accelerates the rate of global warming. Positive feedbacks are scary.

But Kolbert's book is awesome. Kolbert explores climate change through a broad lens and interviews not only scientists, but also people who live in regions that are seriously affected by climate change. Additionally she interviews politicians at the municipal and national level. Kolbert starts by examining the visible effects of climate change on the “natural environment." She uses concrete examples such as shifting ranges of butterfly species in Europe, earlier molting times and shorter hibernation periods of mosquitoes, and the extinction of a tropical toad species due to prolonged droughts & the death of Costa Rican cloud forests. These changes are all due to our warming climate. These are not isolated events, but simply illustrative examples of common phenomena.

Kolbert also shows how climate change is already affecting some human populations. For example, people in arctic Alaska, who depend on stable sea-ice to hunt, are experiencing ice break-up at progressively earlier times, and thus have less time and speace each year to gather their primary food source; their very way of life is threatened. A quarter of the Netherlands lies below sea-level, due to the extensive network of canals and levees in the lowlands (very much like New Orleans and southern Louisiana). With continually rising sea-level, maintaining the levees and canals which support these lowlands is no longer feasible. The Dutch government is now paying people to abandon their lands. The government is also funding housing developments on platforms that can float during floods, because the frequency of floods in these areas is simply too great for traditional housing.

There is also historical evidence of the negative effects of climate change on civilization. Civilizations in Mesopotamia, Central and South America, even the Roanoke colony, met their demise, at least to some degree, due to extreme climate intervals (see this post for more on that topic). Kolbert then asks us (p. 119) to consider the following: does man create stability through culture and civilization or is stability (which includes climatic stability) an essential precondition to culture and civilization? I ask you: How will we fare in an increasingly unstable climate?

With our warming climate, the frequency and intensity of droughts in the US will almost surely increase (p. 110). Will “amber waves of grain” become a thing of the past, simply a memory of an earlier America? I doubt it will get that severe in our lifetime, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the cost of bread and grain-based goods increase. The mighty Colorado River doesn't even reach the Pacific, due to irrigation demands and increasing drought frequency. The Ogallala Aquifer over the central US, which supports essential agricultural lands, is being depleted at an unsustainable rate, and climate change will likely exacerbate this problem (Rosenberg et al., 1999). We all acknowledge that political and social revolutions can drastically (whether for better or worse) affect societies. It’s time to acknowledge that climate instability (or rather, “revolutions”) can also dictate our ways of life.  

  

But we should not despair. Action is the appropriate response. Simple changes in our consumption of energy (electricity, food, fuel, etc.) can have marked effects. Kolbert writes a whole chapter about Burlington, VT (a place near to my heart), and how it should be a model for modern municipalities in the US and beyond. Through an engaged populous, local politicians who care about climate change, and an eco-friendly culture, Burlington has reduced its energy consumption despite the fact that average energy use statewide in Vermont has increased 15% over the last decade (p. 177). Local investment in farms and producers has created, in my opinion, a vibrant community and stimulating culture. It’s not about Teen Mom or TMZ in Burlington, it’s about “my neighbor’s Kombucha starter” or “the carrier bag I bought for my bike”. YES, there is absolutely a degree of pretension when it comes to this type community… and I think it’s bad for the wider acceptance of this ethos, but there is a general sense of purpose and good vibes emanating from the people who actively challenge themselves to consume less energy. Consider giving it a try, you may like the way you feel!