Climate 420 Million Years Ago Poised for Comeback

Starting in the next century, atmospheric carbon levels could begin to approach those of hundreds of millions of years ago, and have their warming effect augmented by a brighter sun. 

Getty Images/iStockphoto

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

“We’re hearing a lot of the arguments against action on reducing CO2 being based on, ‘well CO2 was higher in the past, so we don’t have to worry about it.’

Gavin Foster, a geochemist at the University of Southampton. But Foster says that’s a flawed argument. For starters, just how far back in time do you have to look to find CO2 concentrations like what we expect to see in the future, and does it even make sense to compare the levels now and then?

To answer these questions, Foster and his colleagues reconstructed the history of atmospheric carbon dioxide for the last 420 million years. They compiled roughly 1,500 estimates of CO2 concentrations from 112 previous studies. When the researchers combined these data, they found that atmospheric carbon dioxide went up and down over time, but that, in general, it gradually declined from almost 3,000 parts per million down to less than 300 parts per million before humans started burning fossil fuels.


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.


However, we have already started to reverse that trend. If we continue on a business-as-usual scenario, by the middle of this century, CO2 could reach levels not seen in 50 million years, according to Foster’s reconstruction. That’s long before humans evolved, back when the climate was much warmer and there were no large ice sheets at the poles. If we continue on that trajectory, by the year 2250, concentrations could approach what they were in the Triassic, 200 million years ago, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth.

But greenhouse gases aren’t the only factor impacting Earth’s climate. The sun also plays a major role. It’s grown brighter over time, offsetting most of the cooling related to dropping CO2 levels, Foster’s team found. And that fact has important implications for modern climate change. Because while we’re headed toward a world with CO2 levels similar to what they were in the distant geologic past, it won’t just be like rewinding the clock.

“So, because the sun is now brighter than it was 200 million years ago, or 400 million years ago, that radiative forcing from CO2 in the future is going to be that much more potent. And that, we thought, was quite a strong message that hadn’t been noted before.”

The findings are published in the journal Nature Communications. [Gavin L. Foster, Dana L. Royer and Daniel J. Lunt, Future climate forcing potentially without precedent in the last 420 million years]

Foster stresses that this isn’t a vision of what will be, but what could be. “It’s more of cautionary note that, in the absence of any action, we will be entering a world quite rapidly—in the next 150 years—where the climate is receiving a magnitude of forcing that, as far as we know, it hasn’t received for 420 million years…it’s outside the bounds at which the Earth is normally functioning. Doesn’t sound like a good place to be to me.”

—Julia Rosen

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe