8 mars

Rain-fed agriculture, the backbone of rural livelihoods, are no longer predictable as droughts follows floods.

Les articles sur l’environnement ne trouvent plus le même écho qu’auparavant. Les écrivains, les chercheurs et les militants remarquent ce changement : les contenus sur le climat qui suscitaient autrefois l’engagement passent désormais au second plan. La question n’est pas de savoir si les gens se soucient de la planète, mais plutôt que de nombreux lecteurs dépassent le stade des discours sur la prise de conscience et l’action individuelle (ou du moins, c’est ce qu’ils devraient faire, à mon avis !). Ils veulent comprendre le pouvoir. Ils veulent comprendre les systèmes. Ils veulent un espoir ancré dans la transformation collective, et non un optimisme vendu comme une thérapie personnelle.

It looked like snow under water: white, endless, and still. The reef, my friend Lisbeth said, was “the most beautiful thing she’d ever seen.” For a second, I almost agreed. Then, I stared at it for a long time before replying. She wasn’t wrong about its beauty. But she was also showing me death. Bleached coral isn’t a kind of coral. It’s the moment just after the funeral, what’s left when life is gone. A cathedral of bone-white skeletons stretching over an empire of calcified death. From above, it glows like marble. Up close, it’s a graveyard.

Why Environmental Writing Isn’t Resonating As Much Anymore Active hope, not optimism. And why facts alone no longer move people. Environmental pieces aren’t landing like they used to. Writers, researchers, and activists are noticing the shift: climate content that once sparked engagement now fades into the background. The question isn’t whether people care about the planet — it’s that many readers are moving past narratives of awareness and individual action (or at least I think they should!). They want to understand power. They want to understand systems. They want hope rooted in collective transformation, not optimism sold as personal therapy. We Know the Planet Is Dying. So Now What?

This Contemplation is the result of my beginning to put together a different one that’s focussing upon an academic article I’ve been reading (Collapse, Environment, and Society) but that got me thinking about the academic ‘debate’ regarding what ‘societal collapse’ is, how it may–or may not–unfold for our current experiment in large, complex societies, and how things are perceived in the moment by those experiencing societal change. The ‘debate’ (centred more-or-less on the question: Do societies actually ‘collapse’ or are they ‘merely’ shifting/transforming/adapting to changing conditions?) is rather ‘academic’ in that in the grand scheme of things it’s intellectually interesting but doesn’t have much to do with the on-the-ground, real-life experiences and concerns of most humans in a society–especially if they are experiencing some of the more ‘problematic’ consequences of collapse/transformation.

Pourquoi les 485 derniers millions d’années de la planète constituent une alerte climatique Une nouvelle étude révèle l'histoire des températures profondes de la Terre et montre à quel point le dioxyde de carbone a toujours contrôlé le climat.

A new study uncovers Earth’s deep temperature history and shows just how tightly carbon dioxide has always controlled the climate

My childhood was perpetually filled with creative people. My parents, both musicians, often hosted gatherings of artists, writers, and performers. At each event a recurring theme emerged: the struggle of the creative mind in a world that seemed increasingly indifferent, if not hostile, to their contributions. Each person laid out what became a very clear window into how our systems exploited and marginalized the most creatively intelligent.

January 2025 was the 18th month in a 19-month period with a global-average surface air temperature exceeding 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels. According to the Copernicus Climate Change Service…

2024 marks the first time since record keeping began that all of the 10 hottest years have fallen within the most recent decade.

La stratégie rhétorique adoptée par Georges-Louis Bouchez n’est pas une maladresse isolée, elle s’inscrit pleinement dans une méthode populiste qui dépasse largement les frontières belges. L’objectif profond de cette instrumentalisation populiste du droit international est double. D’une part, elle permet d’éviter une analyse rigoureuse des actes répréhensibles commis par Israël à Gaza, pourtant documentés en détail par Human Rights Watch et Amnesty International : exécutions extrajudiciaires, bombardements disproportionnés sur des populations civiles, restrictions délibérées d’accès aux soins médicaux. D’autre part, elle consolide un électorat sensible à une posture autoritaire simpliste, où la violence d’État est justifiée par opposition systématique au terrorisme.

The collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) is one of the global tipping points that will spell doom for our children's futures.

Collapse isn’t loud. It’s not a Hollywood explosion, not a sudden black hole swallowing the United States overnight. There’s no singular moment when the world collectively gasps and realizes everything has come undone. Instead, collapse is a slow, grinding process — insidious, creeping, and patient.

Les riches continuent de s’enrichir. Cela ne fait aucun doute. Mais ce que l’on oublie souvent de dire, c’est comment ils y parviennent, non seulement par l’exploitation habituelle, mais aussi en conduisant activement le monde vers la catastrophe tout en se protégeant des retombées.

Gaslighting on a national scale is a political strategy. If you’ve been feeling despondent since the inauguration, congratulations — you’re paying attention. And if your brain feels like it’s constantly screaming into the void, you’re not alone. Millions of people are staring into the abyss of our political hellscape, watching in real-time as the pillars of a functioning society get bulldozed, torched, and sold for scrap.

Le 12 juin 2024 les YouTubers Rodolphe Meyer et Jean-Lou Fourquet diffuse deux nouvelles vidéos sur le sujet polémique de l’usage des concepts de la thermodynamique dans l’exploration de la faisabilité d’une transition énergétique pour les sociétés thermo-industrielles : Entropie : la transition condamnée ? (1/2) (ft. @ApresLaBiere) et Entropie : la transition condamnée ? (2/2) (ft. @lereveilleur). L’entropie condamne-t-elle la transition ? Les arguments présentés par les auteurs de ces vidéos ne semblent pas clore le débat.

Climate change will cause agricultural failure and subsequent collapse of hyperfragile modern civilization, likely within 10–15 years. By 2050 total human population will likely be under 2 billion. Humans, along with most other animals, will go extinct before the end of this century. These impacts are locked in and cannot be averted. Everything in this article is supporting information for this conclusion.

Read writing from Alan Urban on Medium. Preparing for the collapse of global industrial civilization. Every day, Alan Urban and thousands of other voices read, write, and share important stories on Medium.

The only publication for climate action, covering the environment, biodiversity, net zero, renewable energy and regenerative approaches. It’s time for The New Climate.

For those trying to pay attention in our post-truth, post fact-checking brave new world that has such misinformation systems in it, Dr. Rees is a source to consider. The link: Climate Change, Overshoot and the Demise of Large Cities: Why large cities will need to contract or be abandoned altogether

The CIO of Goldman Sachs has said that in the next year, companies at the forefront will begin to use AI agents as if they were employees — as team members with tasks to do.

Climate projections versus population projections - There is a puzzling disconnect at the core of climate science between climate projections and population projections. Indeed, comparing the two, one might be forgiven for thinking that population scientists and climate scientists live in two completely different worlds.

In 2024, global average temperatures breached the critical threshold of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels — a tipping point long warned about by scientists. Instead of catalyzing swift global action, this milestone has only underscored a grim reality: the collapse of our global ecological and economic systems is not a distant possibility — it is unfolding before us. Climate change, combined with the many other dimensions of the polycrisis — resource depletion, biodiversity loss, political instability, and economic inequities — has created a perfect storm. This storm is not just brewing; it’s here.

And what we need to do it right,

It’s better to burn out than fade away…until it kills you.

The masses cry out for immediate solutions to long-term problems, inviting despots to lead them.

Why governmental climate plans are a complete joke.

When it comes to writing about climate change … or energy transition … or resource depletion … the new “it” word seems to be COLLAPSE. Collapse is everywhere. But collapse is an inherently fuzzy…

As an average citizen of the United States, one with no particular power over our political trajectory beyond my ability to vote and encourage others to vote, I have very little say in how our descent into a hotter, resource-depleted world will play out. This contrasts with how much I worry about that impending descent, its impact on my children and grandchildren, and its deep implications for the future of humanity writ large.

“Que peut-on faire ?” se transforme souvent en “A qui la faute ?” avant d’atterrir sur “Prenons tous des initiatives à un maximum d’endroits”. A force d’observer ce schéma dans des discussions, je l’ai formalisé en Triangle de l’inaction pour gagner du temps et se focaliser directement sur les initiatives,