The geological and specifically stratigraphic logic of the Anthropocene concept means that its formal assessment as a possible new unit in the official geological timeline of the Earth often focuses less on human activity itself, and more on the traces that this activity will leave behind. The sort of future geological ‘signals’ sent to imagined future geological subjects that the Anthropocene Working Group have been looking for include the chemostratigraphic (altered chemical composition of land and atmosphere – including minerals that are new to the Earth or at least to its surface,[1] the biostratigraphic (evidence of accelerating biological and ecological change) and the lithostratigraphic (changes in rock formation, either by altering existing sedimentary processes or laying down wholly novel strata). [2] A later paper by the Anthropocene Working Group brings attention to the way that human production of manufactured goods and consumption and movement of natural resources combine to produce a ‘diachronous signal of technofossils and human bioturbation across the planet’.[3]
[1] Jan Zalasiewicz, Ryszard Kryza and Mark Williams (2014) ‘The mineral signature of the Anthropocene in its deep-time context,’ Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 395(1), pp. 109-17.
[2] Jan Zalasiewicz, Mark Williams, Richard Fortey, et al. (2011) ‘Stratigraphy of the Anthropocene,’ Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 369(1938), pp. 1036-55.
[3] Mark Williams, Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N. Waters, et al. (2016) ‘The Anthropocene: a conspicuous stratigraphical signal of anthropogenic changes in production and consumption across the biosphere,’ Earth’s Future, 4(3), pp. 34-53.
Amy Balkin’s polluted soils and Fabien Giraud’s post-Fukushima irradiated land echo the chemostratigraphic nature of many sites that were considered for the Anthropocene GSSP. Nicholas Mangan’s airport runway and David Claerbout’s slowly decaying Olympia stadium are striking examples of the sort of larger anthropogenic geological formations and ‘trace fossils’ that human activity will leave in the Earth. The idea of anthropogenic strata and novel minerals as lithic markers of the Anthropocene is referenced by the asphalt layer in Mark Dion’s proposed monuments, and the plastic minerals that Yesenia Thibault-Picazo invites people to make with her devices – strata and mineral formations that Pascale Martine Tayou suggests may be peppered with dimly understood fragments of disposable consumer goods. In different ways, these designs explored the future ‘haunting’ of the Earth by anthropogenic materials and entities, both precious and useless, that are no longer animated as part of the anthroposphere, but have a ghostly afterlife – a ‘timeprint’.[4]
[4] Barbara Adam and Chris Groves (2007) Future Matters: Action, Knowledge, Ethics, Leiden: Brill.
