Editing James Lovelock (section)

== Career ==
After leaving school Lovelock worked at a photography firm, attending [[Birkbeck College]] during the evenings, before being accepted to study chemistry at the [[Victoria University of Manchester|University of Manchester]], where he was a student of the [[Nobel Prize laureate]] professor [[Alexander R. Todd]].<ref name="The Manchester Magazine">{{Cite web |title=From Manchester to Mars |url=http://www.manchestermag.com/features/the-mancunian-maverick |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160820173422/http://www.manchestermag.com/features/the-mancunian-maverick |archive-date=20 August 2016 |access-date=15 August 2016 |website=The Manchester Magazine}}</ref> Lovelock worked at a Quaker farm before a recommendation from his professor led to him taking up a [[Medical Research Council (United Kingdom)|Medical Research Council]] post,<ref name="ecolo.org">{{Cite web |title=Detailed Biography of James Lovelock |url=http://www.ecolo.org/lovelock/lovedeten.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120326205914/http://www.ecolo.org/lovelock/lovedeten.htm |archive-date=26 March 2012 |access-date=30 July 2022 |publisher=[[Environmentalists For Nuclear]]}}</ref> working on ways of shielding soldiers from burns. Lovelock refused to use the shaved and anaesthetised rabbits that were used as burn victims, and exposed his skin to heat radiation instead, an experience he describes as "exquisitely painful".<ref name="Carey-2009">{{Cite news |last=Carey |first=John |name-list-style=vanc |date=22 February 2009 |title=The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning by James Lovelock and He Knew He Was Right: The Irrepressible Life of James Lovelock and Gaia by John and Mary Gribbin |url=http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/non-fiction/article5761585.ece |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090511183144/http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/non-fiction/article5761585.ece |archive-date=11 May 2009 |access-date=24 May 2011 |work=The Sunday Times}}</ref> His student status enabled temporary deferment of [[military service]] during the [[Second World War]]. Still, he registered as a [[conscientious objector]].<ref name="Irvine-2005" /> He later abandoned his conscientious objection in the light of [[Nazi atrocities]] and tried to enlist in the armed forces but was told that his medical research was too valuable for the enlistment to be approved.{{sfn|Lovelock|2000|p=80}}

In 1948, Lovelock received a PhD degree at the [[London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine]].<ref>{{Cite thesis |last=Lovelock |first=J. E |title=The properties and use of aliphatic and hydroxy carboxylic acids in aerial disinfection. |degree=PhD |publisher=London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine |oclc=1006122881 |name-list-style=vanc |year=1947}}</ref> He spent the next two decades working at London's [[National Institute for Medical Research]].<ref name="Irvine-2005" /> In the United States, he conducted research at [[Yale]], [[Baylor College of Medicine]] and [[Harvard University Medical School]].<ref name="ecolo.org" />

In the mid-1950s, Lovelock experimented with the [[cryopreservation]] of rodents, determining that [[hamster]]s could be frozen and revived successfully.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J. E. |last2=Smith |first2=Audrey U. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1956 |title=Studies on Golden Hamsters during Cooling to and Rewarming from Body Temperatures below 0 degrees C. III. Biophysical Aspects and General Discussion |journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences |volume=145 |issue=920 |pages=427–442 |bibcode=1956RSPSB.145..427L |doi=10.1098/rspb.1956.0054 |issn=0080-4649 |jstor=83008 |pmid=13359396 |s2cid=6474737}}</ref> Hamsters were frozen with 60% of the water in the brain crystallised into ice with no adverse effects recorded. Other organs were shown to be susceptible to damage.<ref>{{Cite magazine |date=March 1988 |title=The Cryobiological Case for Cryonics |url=https://www.alcor.org/cryonics/cryonics8803.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200417212211/https://www.alcor.org/cryonics/cryonics8803.pdf |archive-date=17 April 2020 |magazine=Cryonics |publisher=[[Alcor Life Extension Foundation]] |page=27 |volume=9(3) |issue=92}}</ref>

A lifelong inventor, Lovelock created and developed many scientific instruments, some of which were designed for [[NASA]] in its planetary exploration program. While working as a NASA consultant, Lovelock developed the [[Gaia hypothesis]], for which he is most widely known.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Wintle |first=Justin |url={{GBurl|id=1SEHDAAAQBAJ|dq=while working as a consultant for NASA that Lovelock developed the Gaia hypothesis, for which he is most widely known|p=931}} |title=New Makers of Modern Culture |date=22 April 2016 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-136-76882-8 |page=931 |url-access=limited |name-list-style=vanc}}</ref>

In early 1961, Lovelock was engaged by NASA to develop sensitive instruments for the analysis of extraterrestrial atmospheres and planetary surfaces.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Highfield |first=Roger |name-list-style=vanc |date=8 November 2019 |title=James Lovelock's Greatest Epiphany: Quest for Life on Mars |url=https://blog.sciencemuseum.org.uk/james-lovelocks-greatest-epiphany-quest-for-life-on-mars/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220520031801/https://blog.sciencemuseum.org.uk/james-lovelocks-greatest-epiphany-quest-for-life-on-mars/ |archive-date=20 May 2022 |access-date=18 April 2022 |website=Science Museum Blog}}</ref> The [[Viking program]], which visited [[Mars]] in the late 1970s, was motivated in part to determine whether Mars supported life, and some of the sensors and experiments that were ultimately deployed [[Viking lander biological experiments|aimed to resolve this issue]]. During work on a precursor of this program, Lovelock became interested in the composition of the [[Magnetosphere of Mars|Martian atmosphere]], reasoning that many life forms on Mars would be obliged to make use of it (and, thus, alter it). However, the atmosphere was found to be in a stable condition close to its [[chemical equilibrium]], with very little [[oxygen]], [[methane]], or [[hydrogen]], but with an overwhelming abundance of [[carbon dioxide]]. To Lovelock, the stark contrast between the Martian atmosphere and chemically dynamic mixture of the Earth's [[biosphere]] was strongly indicative of the absence of [[life on Mars]].<ref name="Lovelock-1965" /> However, when they were finally launched to Mars, the [[Viking probes]] still searched (unsuccessfully) for [[extant taxon|extant]] life there. Further experiments to search for life on Mars have been carried out by additional space probes, for instance, by NASA's [[Perseverance rover]], which landed in 2021.
[[File:James Lovelocks Electron capture detector for a gas chromatograph, 1960. (9660569973).jpg|right|thumb|Electron capture detector developed by Lovelock in [[the Science Museum]], London]]
Lovelock invented the [[electron capture detector]], which ultimately assisted in discoveries about the persistence of [[chlorofluorocarbon]]s (CFCs) and their role in [[stratospheric]] [[ozone depletion]].<ref name="Lovelock-1971">{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J. E. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1971 |title=Atmospheric Fluorine Compounds as Indicators of Air Movements |journal=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]] |volume=230 |issue=5293 |pages=379 |bibcode=1971Natur.230..379L |doi=10.1038/230379a0 |s2cid=4194303 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="Lovelock-1973">{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J. E. |last2=Maggs |first2=R. J. |last3=Wade |first3=R. J. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1973 |title=Halogenated Hydrocarbons in and over the Atlantic |journal=Nature |volume=241 |issue=5386 |pages=194 |bibcode=1973Natur.241..194L |doi=10.1038/241194a0 |s2cid=4222603}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Lovelock |first=James |name-list-style=vanc |date=29 October 1997 |title=Travels with an Electron Capture Detector |url=http://www.resurgence.org/resurgence/issues/lovelock187.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070927043230/http://www.resurgence.org/resurgence/issues/lovelock187.htm |archive-date=27 September 2007 |magazine=Resurgence |publication-date=<!-- March/April --> 1998 |issue=187}} <!-- acceptance speech given at the [[Blue Planet Prize]] award ceremony. --></ref> After studying the operation of the Earth's [[sulphur cycle]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J. E. |last2=Maggs |first2=R. J. |last3=Rasmussen |first3=R. A. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1972 |title=Atmospheric Dimethyl Sulphide and the Natural Sulphur Cycle |journal=Nature |volume=237 |issue=5356 |pages=452 |bibcode=1972Natur.237..452L |doi=10.1038/237452a0 |s2cid=4259274}}</ref> Lovelock and his colleagues, [[Robert Jay Charlson]], [[Meinrat Andreae]] and Stephen G. Warren developed the [[CLAW hypothesis]] as a possible example of biological control of the Earth's climate.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Charlson |first=R. J. |last2=Lovelock |first2=J. E. |last3=Andreae |first3=M. O. |last4=Warren |first4=S. G. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1987 |title=Oceanic phytoplankton, atmospheric sulphur, cloud albedo and climate |journal=Nature |volume=326 |issue=6114 |pages=655 |bibcode=1987Natur.326..655C |doi=10.1038/326655a0 |s2cid=4321239}}</ref>

Lovelock was elected a [[Fellow of the Royal Society]] in 1974.<ref name="Royal Society">{{Cite web |title=Library and Archive Catalogue EC/1974/16: Lovelock, James Ephraim |url=http://royalsociety.org/DServe/dserve.exe?dsqIni=Dserve.ini&dsqApp=Archive&dsqDb=Catalog&dsqCmd=show.tcl&dsqSearch=(RefNo==%27EC%2F1974%2F16%27) |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20140410000832/http://royalsociety.org/DServe/dserve.exe?dsqIni=Dserve.ini&dsqApp=Archive&dsqDb=Catalog&dsqCmd=show.tcl&dsqSearch=(RefNo=='EC/1974/16') |archive-date=10 April 2014 |publisher=[[Royal Society]] |location=London}}</ref> He served as the president of the [[Marine Biological Association]] (MBA) from 1986 to 1990 and was an Honorary Visiting Fellow of [[Green Templeton College, Oxford]] (formerly [[Green College, Oxford]]) from 1994.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Curriculum Vitae |url=http://www.jameslovelock.org/curriculum-vitae/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201002051049/http://www.jameslovelock.org/curriculum-vitae/ |archive-date=2 October 2020 |access-date=17 February 2021 |publisher=James Lovelock |language=en-GB}}</ref>

As an [[independent scientist]], inventor and author, Lovelock worked out of a barn-turned-laboratory he called his "experimental station" located in a wooded valley on the [[Devon]]–[[Cornwall]] border in South West England.<ref name="Hickman-2012">{{Cite news |last=Hickman |first=Leo |name-list-style=vanc |date=15 June 2012 |title=James Lovelock: The UK should be going mad for fracking |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jun/15/james-lovelock-interview-gaia-theory |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190804231611/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jun/15/james-lovelock-interview-gaia-theory |archive-date=4 August 2019 |access-date=24 June 2012 |work=The Guardian}}</ref>

In 1988 he made [[After Dark (TV programme)#"Save the Whale, Save the World?"|an extended appearance]] on the Channel 4 television programme ''[[After Dark (TV programme)|After Dark]]'', alongside [[Heathcote Williams]] and [[Petra Kelly]], among others.

On 8 May 2012, he appeared on the [[Radio Four]] series ''[[The Life Scientific]]'', talking to [[Jim Al-Khalili]] about the Gaia hypothesis. On the programme, he mentioned how his ideas had been received by various people, including [[Jonathon Porritt]]. He also said how he had a claim for inventing the [[microwave oven]]. He later explained this claim in an interview with ''[[The Manchester Magazine]]''. Lovelock said that he did create an instrument during his time studying causes of damage to living cells and tissue, which had, according to him, "almost everything you would expect in an ordinary microwave oven". He invented the instrument to heat frozen hamsters in a way that caused less suffering to the animals, as opposed to the traditional way, which involved putting red-hot spoons on the animals' chests to heat them. He believed that, at the time, nobody had gone that far and made an embodiment of an actual microwave oven.<ref>{{Cite episode |title=James Lovelock |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01h666h |access-date=26 June 2019 |series=The Life Scientific |station=[[BBC Radio 4]] |date=8 May 2012 |archive-date=12 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190812114502/https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01h666h |url-status=live}}</ref> However, he did not claim to have been the first person to have the idea of using microwaves for cooking.<ref name="The Manchester Magazine" />

=== CFCs ===
{{Main|Free-radical halogenation}}
[[File:AYool CFC-11 history.png|thumb|upright=1.2|Reconstructed time-series of atmospheric concentrations of CFC-11<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Walker |first=S. J. |last2=Weiss |first2=R. F. |last3=Salameh |first3=P. K. |name-list-style=vanc |year=2000 |title=Reconstructed histories of the annual mean atmospheric mole fractions for the halocarbons CFC-11 CFC-12, CFC-113, and carbon tetrachloride |journal=[[Journal of Geophysical Research]] |volume=105 |issue=C6 |pages=14285–14296 |bibcode=2000JGR...10514285W |doi=10.1029/1999JC900273 |doi-access=free}}</ref>]]
After developing his electron capture detector, in the late 1960s, Lovelock was the first to detect the widespread presence of [[CFCs]] in the atmosphere.<ref name="Lovelock-1971" /> He found a concentration of 60 [[parts per trillion]] of [[CFC-11]] over Ireland and, in a partially self-funded research expedition in 1972, went on to measure the concentration of CFC-11 from the northern hemisphere to the Antarctic aboard the [[research vessel]] {{RRS|Shackleton}}.<ref name="Lovelock-1973" />{{sfn|Lovelock|1988|p=164}} He found the gas in each of the 50 air samples that he collected but, not realising that the breakdown of CFCs in the stratosphere would release [[chlorine]] that posed a threat to the [[ozone layer]], concluded that the level of CFCs constituted "no conceivable hazard".{{sfn|Lovelock|1988|p=164}} He later stated that he meant "no conceivable toxic hazard".{{sfn|Lovelock|2000|p=216}}

However, the experiment did provide the first useful data on the ubiquitous presence of CFCs in the atmosphere. The damage caused to the ozone layer by the [[photolysis]] of CFCs was later discovered by [[Sherwood Rowland]] and [[Mario Molina]]. After hearing a lecture on the subject of Lovelock's results,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Rowland |first=F. Sherwood |last2=Molina |first2=Mario J. |name-list-style=vanc |date=7 December 2000 |title=CFC-Ozone Puzzle: Lecture |url=http://www.eoearth.org/article/CFC-Ozone_Puzzle:_Lecture |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090216160905/http://www.eoearth.org/article/CFC-Ozone_Puzzle%3A_Lecture |archive-date=16 February 2009 |access-date=10 December 2007 |website=[[Encyclopedia of Earth]]}}</ref> they embarked on research that resulted in the first published paper that suggested a link between stratospheric CFCs and ozone depletion in 1974 (for which Sherwood and Molina later shared the 1995 [[Nobel Prize in Chemistry]] with [[Paul Crutzen]]).<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1995 |url=https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/1995/summary/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200522181342/https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/1995/summary/ |archive-date=22 May 2020 |access-date=30 July 2022 |publisher=[[Nobel Foundation]] |quote=...{{nbsp}}for{{nbsp}}... work in atmospheric chemistry, particularly concerning the formation and decomposition of ozone.}}</ref> Lovelock was sceptical of the CFC–ozone depletion hypothesis for several years, calling the US ban of CFCs as [[aerosol propellant]]s in the late 1970s arbitrary overkill.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lovelock |first=James E. |title=Stratospheric Ozone and Man |publisher=CRC Press |year=1982 |isbn=978-1-351-07693-7 |editor-last=Bower |editor-first=Frank A. |volume=1 |location=Boca Raton, Florida |pages=195–201 |chapter=Epilogue |editor-last2=Ward |editor-first2=Richard B. |name-list-style=vanc}}</ref>

=== Gaia hypothesis ===
{{Main|Gaia hypothesis}}
{{Excerpt|Gaia hypothesis|only=file|hat=no}}
Drawing from the research of [[Alfred C. Redfield]] and [[G. Evelyn Hutchinson]], Lovelock first formulated the Gaia hypothesis in the 1960s resulting from his work for NASA concerned with detecting life on Mars<ref name="Lovelock-1965">{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J. E. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1965 |title=A Physical Basis for Life Detection Experiments |journal=Nature |volume=207 |issue=4997 |pages=568–70 |bibcode=1965Natur.207..568L |doi=10.1038/207568a0 |pmid=5883628 |s2cid=33821197}}</ref> and his work with [[Royal Dutch Shell]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Aronowsky |first=Leah |name-list-style=vanc |date=Winter 2021 |title=Gas Guzzling Gaia, or: A Prehistory of Climate Change Denialism |journal=[[Critical Inquiry]] |volume=47 |issue=2 |pages=306–327 |doi=10.1086/712129 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The hypothesis proposes that living and non-living parts of the Earth form a [[cybernetics|complex interacting system]] that can be thought of as a single [[organism]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1972 |title=Gaia as seen through the atmosphere |journal=[[Atmospheric Environment]] |volume=6 |issue=8 |pages=579–580 |bibcode=1972AtmEn...6..579L |doi=10.1016/0004-6981(72)90076-5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=J.E. |last2=Margulis |first2=L. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1974 |title=Atmospheric homeostasis by and for the biosphere: the gaia hypothesis |journal=[[Tellus A]] |language=en |volume=26 |issue=1–2 |pages=2–10 |bibcode=1974Tell...26....2L |doi=10.3402/tellusa.v26i1-2.9731 |s2cid=129803613 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Named after the [[Greek mythology|Greek]] [[Greek primordial gods|goddess]] [[Gaia]] at the suggestion of novelist [[William Golding]],{{sfn|Lovelock|1988|p=3}} the hypothesis postulates that the biosphere has a regulatory effect on the Earth's environment that acts to sustain life.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ball |first=P. |name-list-style=vanc |year=2014 |title=James Lovelock reflects on Gaia's legacy |journal=Nature |doi=10.1038/nature.2014.15017 |s2cid=125073140}}</ref>

While the hypothesis was readily accepted by many in the environmentalist community, it has not been widely accepted within the [[scientific community]] as a whole. Among its most prominent critics were the evolutionary biologists [[Richard Dawkins]], [[Ford Doolittle]] and [[Stephen Jay Gould]], a convergence of opinion among a trio whose views on other scientific matters often diverged. These (and other) critics have questioned how [[natural selection]] operating on individual organisms can lead to the evolution of planetary-scale [[homeostasis]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |title=The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene |title-link=The Extended Phenotype |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=1982 |isbn=0-19-288051-9 |edition=Revised |publication-date=1999 |name-list-style=vanc}}</ref>{{page needed|date=August 2022}}

In response to this, Lovelock, together with [[Andrew Watson (scientist)|Andrew Watson]], published the computer model [[Daisyworld]] in 1983, which postulated a [[hypothetical planet]] orbiting a star whose [[radiant energy]] is [[geologic time scale|slowly]] [[stellar evolution|increasing or decreasing]]. In the non-biological case, the temperature of this planet simply tracks the energy received from the star. However, in the biological case, ecological competition between "daisy" species with different albedo values produces a [[homeostatic]] effect on global temperature. When energy received from the star is low, black daisies proliferate since they absorb a greater fraction of the heat, but when energy input is high, white daisies predominate since they reflect excess heat. As the white and black daisies have contrary effects on the planet's overall albedo and temperature, changes in their relative populations stabilise the planet's climate and keep the temperature within an optimal range despite fluctuations in [[solar constant|energy from the star]]. Lovelock argued that Daisyworld, although a parable, illustrates how conventional natural selection operating on individual organisms can still produce planetary-scale homeostasis.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Watson |first=A.J. |last2=Lovelock |first2=J.E. |name-list-style=vanc |year=1983 |title=Biological homeostasis of the global environment: the parable of Daisyworld |journal=[[Tellus B]] |publisher=International Meteorological Institute |volume=35 |issue=4 |pages=286–9 |bibcode=1983TellB..35..284W |doi=10.1111/j.1600-0889.1983.tb00031.x}}</ref>

[[File:James Lovelock in 2005.jpg|left|thumb|Lovelock in 2005]]
In Lovelock's 2006 book, ''[[The Revenge of Gaia]]'', he argued that the lack of respect humans have had for Gaia, through the damage done to [[rainforest]]s and the [[Biodiversity loss|reduction in planetary biodiversity]], is testing Gaia's capacity to minimise the effects of the [[Greenhouse gas emissions|addition of greenhouse gases]] to the atmosphere. This eliminates the planet's [[negative feedback]]s and increases the likelihood of homeostatic [[positive feedback]] potential associated with [[runaway global warming]]. Similarly, the [[Ocean heat content|warming of the oceans]] is extending the oceanic [[thermocline]] layer of tropical oceans into the Arctic and Antarctic waters, preventing the rise of oceanic nutrients into the surface waters and eliminating the [[algal bloom]]s of [[phytoplankton]] on which [[oceanic food chain]]s depend. As phytoplankton and forests are the main ways in which Gaia draws down greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, taking it out of the atmosphere, the elimination of this environmental buffering will see, according to Lovelock, most of the Earth becoming uninhabitable for humans and other life-forms by the middle of this century, with a massive [[Desertification|extension of tropical deserts]]. In 2012, Lovelock distanced himself from these conclusions, saying he had "gone too far" in describing the [[consequences of climate change]] over the next century in this book.<ref name="Johnston-2012" />

In his 2009 book, ''[[#{{harvid|Lovelock|2009}}|The Vanishing Face of Gaia]]'', he rejected [[Climate model|scientific models]] that disagree with the findings that [[Sea level rise|sea levels are rising]] and [[Arctic sea ice decline|Arctic ice is melting]] faster than the models predict. He suggested that we may already have passed the [[Tipping points in the climate system|tipping point]] of terrestrial [[climate resilience]] into a permanently hot state. Given these conditions, Lovelock expected that human civilisation would be hard-pressed to [[End of civilisation|survive]]. He expected the change to be similar to the [[Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum]] when the temperature of the Arctic Ocean was 23&nbsp;°C.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Russill |first=C. |last2=Nyssa |first2=Z. |name-list-style=vanc |year=2009 |title=The tipping point trend in climate change communication |journal=[[Global Environmental Change]] |volume=19 |issue=3 |pages=336 |bibcode=2009GEC....19..336R |doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.04.001}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pagani |first=M. |last2=Caldeira |first2=K. |last3=Archer |first3=D. |last4=Zachos |first4=C. |name-list-style=vanc |date=Dec 2006 |title=Atmosphere. An ancient carbon mystery |journal=[[Science (journal)|Science]] |volume=314 |issue=5805 |pages=1556–1557 |doi=10.1126/science.1136110 |issn=0036-8075 |pmid=17158314 |s2cid=128375931}}</ref>

=== Nuclear power ===
{{See also|Nuclear power and climate change}}
Lovelock became concerned about the threat of global warming from the [[greenhouse effect]]. In 2004 he broke with many fellow environmentalists by stating that "only [[nuclear power]] can now halt global warming".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Lovelock |first=James |date=24 May 2004 |title=Nuclear power is the only green solution |url=http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article61727.ece |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060422055649/http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article61727.ece |archive-date=22 April 2006 |access-date=16 April 2006 |work=[[The Independent]]}}</ref>

In his view, nuclear energy is the only realistic alternative to [[fossil fuel]]s that can both fulfil the large scale energy needs of humankind while also reducing [[greenhouse emissions]].<ref>{{Cite news |date=28 August 2004 |title=Time for a rethink |url=http://www.jameslovelock.org/time-for-a-rethink/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210823125159/http://www.jameslovelock.org/time-for-a-rethink/ |archive-date=23 August 2021 |access-date=30 July 2022 |work=[[The Independent]] |first=James |last=Lovelock}}</ref> He was an open member of [[Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy]] (EFN).<ref>{{Cite web |title=Environmentalists For Nuclear Energy |url=http://www.ecolo.org/base/baseen.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210908172345/http://www.ecolo.org/base/baseen.htm |archive-date=8 September 2021 |access-date=23 August 2021 |website=ecolo.org}}</ref>

In 2005, against the backdrop of renewed [[Nuclear power in the United Kingdom|UK government interest in nuclear power]], Lovelock again publicly announced his [[pro-nuclear movement|support for nuclear energy]], stating, "I am a Green, and I entreat my friends in the movement to drop their wrongheaded objection to nuclear energy".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Kristof |first=Nicholas |author-link=Nicholas Kristof |name-list-style=vanc |date=9 April 2005 |title=Nukes Are Green |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/09/opinion/nukes-are-green.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200325023234/https://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/09/opinion/nukes-are-green.html |archive-date=25 March 2020 |access-date=25 August 2019 |work=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref> Although those interventions in the public debate on nuclear power were in the 21st century, his views on it were longstanding. In his 1988 book ''The Ages of Gaia'', he stated: {{blockquote|I have never regarded [[nuclear radiation]] or nuclear power as anything other than a normal and inevitable part of the environment. Our [[prokaryotic]] forebears evolved on a planet-sized lump of [[fallout]] from a star-sized nuclear explosion, a [[supernova]] that synthesised the elements that go to make our planet and ourselves.{{sfn|Lovelock|1988|pp=174–175}}}}

In ''The Revenge of Gaia'' (2006), where he put forward the concept of {{anchor link|sustainable retreat}}, Lovelock wrote: {{blockquote|A television interviewer once asked me, "But what about [[nuclear waste]]? Will it not poison the whole biosphere and persist for millions of years?" I knew this to be a nightmare fantasy wholly without substance in the real world{{nbsp}}... One of the striking things about places heavily contaminated by radioactive nuclides is the richness of their wildlife. This is true of the land around Chernobyl, the bomb test sites of the Pacific, and areas near the United States' Savannah River nuclear weapons plant of the Second World War. Wild plants and animals do not perceive radiation as dangerous, and any slight reduction it may cause in their lifespans is far less a hazard than is the presence of people and their pets{{nbsp}}... I find it sad, but all too human, that there are vast bureaucracies concerned about nuclear waste, huge organisations devoted to decommissioning power stations, but nothing comparable to deal with that truly malign waste, carbon dioxide.{{sfn|Lovelock|2006|pp=116–118}}{{Long quote|date=November 2024}}}}

In 2019 Lovelock said he thought difficulties in getting nuclear power going again were due to propaganda, that "the coal and oil business fight like mad to tell bad stories about nuclear", and that "the greens played along with it. There's bound to have been some corruption there – I'm sure that various green movements were paid some sums on the side to help with propaganda".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Wallace-Wells |first=David |name-list-style=vanc |date=2 October 2019 |title=James Lovelock: 'Any Further Interference Is Likely to Be Disastrous' |url=http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/10/james-lovelock-on-nuclear-power-and-if-ai-can-stop-warming.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191025210710/http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/10/james-lovelock-on-nuclear-power-and-if-ai-can-stop-warming.html |archive-date=25 October 2019 |access-date=25 October 2019 |work=[[New York (magazine)|New York]]}}</ref>

=== Climate ===
{{Over-quotation|section|both=y |date=November 2024}}

Writing in ''[[The Independent]]'' in 2006, Lovelock argued that, as a result of global warming, "billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the [[Arctic]] where the climate remains tolerable" by the end of the 21st century.<ref name="Lovelock-2006">{{Cite news |last=Lovelock |first=James |name-list-style=vanc |date=16 January 2006 |title=The Earth is about to catch a morbid fever that may last as long as 100,000 years |url=http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article338830.ece |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060408121826/http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article338830.ece |archive-date=8 April 2006 |access-date=4 October 2007 |work=The Independent |ref=none}}</ref> The same year he suggested that "we have to keep in mind the awesome pace of change and realise how little time is left to act, and then each community and nation must find the best use of the resources they have to sustain civilisation for as long as they can."<ref name="Lovelock-2006" /> He further predicted in 2007 that the temperature increase would leave much of the world's land uninhabitable and unsuitable for farming, with northerly migrations and new cities created in the Arctic; furthermore that much of Europe will have turned to desert and Britain will have become Europe's "life-raft" due to its stable temperature caused by being surrounded by the ocean.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Jeffries |first=Stuart |name-list-style=vanc |date=15 March 2007 |title=We should be scared stiff |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/mar/15/desertification.ethicalliving |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220728175751/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/mar/15/desertification.ethicalliving |archive-date=28 July 2022 |access-date=28 July 2022 |work=The Guardian}}</ref>  He was quoted in ''[[The Guardian]]'' in 2008 that 80% of humans will perish by 2100, and this [[climate change]] will last 100,000 years.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Aitkenhead |first=Decca |name-list-style=vanc |date=1 March 2008 |title=James Lovelock: 'Enjoy life while you can: in 20 years global warming will hit the fan' |url=https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2008/mar/01/scienceofclimatechange.climatechange |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220728175750/https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2008/mar/01/scienceofclimatechange.climatechange |archive-date=28 July 2022 |access-date=28 July 2022 |work=The Guardian}}</ref>

In a 2010 interview with the ''Guardian'' newspaper, he said that democracy might have to be "put on hold" to prevent climate change.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Hickman |first=Leo |name-list-style=vanc |date=29 March 2010 |title=James Lovelock: Humans are too stupid to prevent climate change |url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock-climate-change |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190806204710/https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock-climate-change |archive-date=6 August 2019 |access-date=25 August 2019 |work=The Guardian}}</ref> He continued:

{{blockquote|Even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.}}

Statements from 2012 portrayed Lovelock as continuing his concern over global warming while at the same time criticising extremism and suggesting alternatives to oil, coal and the green solutions he did not support.<ref name="Johnston-2012">{{Cite news |last=Johnston |first=Ian |name-list-style=vanc |date=23 April 2012 |title='Gaia' scientist James Lovelock: I was 'alarmist' about climate change |url=http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/23/11144098-gaia-scientist-james-lovelock-i-was-alarmist-about-climate-change?lite |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120424004036/https://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/23/11144098-gaia-scientist-james-lovelock-i-was-alarmist-about-climate-change?lite |archive-date=24 April 2012 |access-date=12 November 2016 |publisher=[[MSNBC]]}}</ref>

In a 2012 interview aired on [[MSNBC]], Lovelock stated that he had been "alarmist", using the words "All right, I made a mistake," about the timing of climate change and noted the documentary ''[[An Inconvenient Truth]]'' and the book ''[[The Weather Makers]]'' as examples of the same kind of alarmism. Lovelock still believed the climate to be warming, although not at the rate of change he once thought; he admitted that he had been "extrapolating too far." He believed that climate change is still happening, but it will be felt further in the future.<ref name="Johnston-2012" /> Of the claims "the science is settled" on global warming, he stated:<ref name="Goldstein-2012" />  {{blockquote |One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don't know it.<ref name="Goldstein-2012">{{Cite news |last=Goldstein |first=Lorrie |name-list-style=vanc |date=23 June 2012 |title=Green 'drivel' exposed |url=http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/22/green-drivel |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120724105948/http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/22/green-drivel |archive-date=24 July 2012 |access-date=22 June 2012 |work=[[Toronto Sun]]}}</ref>}} He criticised environmentalists for treating global warming like a religion.<ref name="Goldstein-2012" /> {{blockquote |It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion.}} {{blockquote |I don't think people have noticed that, but it's got all the sort of terms that religions use{{nbsp}}... The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can't win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air.<ref name="Goldstein-2012" />}}
In this 2012 MSNBC article, Lovelock is quoted as saying:<ref name="Johnston-2012" /> {{blockquote |The problem is we don't know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn't happened.
The climate is doing its usual tricks. There's nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.
The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time{{nbsp}}... it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising – carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that.<ref name="Johnston-2012" />}}  In a follow-up interview also in 2012, Lovelock stated his support for natural gas; he favoured [[fracking]] as a low-polluting alternative to coal.<ref name="Hickman-2012" /><ref name="Goldstein-2012" /> He opposed the concept of "[[sustainable development]]", where modern economies might be powered by [[wind turbine]]s, calling it meaningless drivel.<ref name="Goldstein-2012" /><ref>{{Cite news |date=12 December 2012 |title=James Lovelock letter on wind turbines Broadbury Ridge |url=http://regmedia.co.uk/2013/01/30/james_lovelock_objection.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140112043835/http://regmedia.co.uk/2013/01/30/james_lovelock_objection.pdf |archive-date=12 January 2014 |access-date=12 January 2013 |work=The Register}}</ref> He kept a poster of a wind turbine to remind himself how much he detested them.<ref name="Hickman-2012" />

In ''[[Novacene]]'' (2019), Lovelock proposed that benevolent [[superintelligence]] may take over and save the ecosystem and stated that the machines would need to keep organic life around to keep the planet's temperature habitable for electronic life.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Poole |first=Steven |name-list-style=vanc |date=27 June 2019 |title=Novacene by James Lovelock review – a big welcome for the AI takeover |url=http://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/27/novacene-by-james-lovelock-review |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220730203730/https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/27/novacene-by-james-lovelock-review |archive-date=30 July 2022 |access-date=30 July 2022 |work=The Guardian |language=en}}</ref> On the other hand, if instead life becomes entirely electronic, "so be it: we played our part and newer, younger actors are already appearing on stage".{{sfn|Lovelock|Appleyard|2019}}{{page needed|date=July 2022}}

==== Ocean fertilisation ====
In 2007, Lovelock and [[Chris Rapley]] proposed the construction of [[Pelagic pumping|ocean pumps to pump water up]] from below the thermocline to "fertilize [[algae]] in the surface waters and encourage them to bloom".<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lovelock |first=James E. |last2=Rapley |first2=Chris G. |name-list-style=vanc |date=27 September 2007 |title=Ocean pipes could help the Earth to cure itself |journal=Nature |volume=449 |issue=7161 |pages=403 |bibcode=2007Natur.449..403L |doi=10.1038/449403a |issn=1476-4687 |pmid=17898747 |s2cid=4340626 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The basic idea was to accelerate the transfer of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to the ocean by increasing [[primary production]] and enhancing the [[export production|export]] of organic carbon (as [[marine snow]]) to the deep ocean. A scheme similar to that proposed by Lovelock and Rapley was later developed independently by a commercial company.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Biological Ocean Sequestration of {{CO2}} Using Atmocean Upwelling |url=http://www.atmocean.com/sequestration.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071013153833/http://atmocean.com/sequestration.htm |archive-date=13 October 2007 |access-date=3 October 2007 |publisher=[[Atmocean, Inc.]]}}</ref>

The proposal attracted widespread media attention<ref name="Smith-2007">{{Cite news |last=Smith |first=Lewis |name-list-style=vanc |date=26 September 2007 |title=Scientists propose 'plumbing' method to solve crisis of global warming |url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2538897.ece |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080512022710/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2538897.ece |archive-date=12 May 2008 |access-date=3 October 2007 |work=[[The Times]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Highfield |first=Roger |author-link=Roger Highfield |name-list-style=vanc |date=26 September 2007 |title=James Lovelock's plan to pump ocean water to stop climate change |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fearth%2F2007%2F09%2F26%2Fsciwater126.xml |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071011082244/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fearth%2F2007%2F09%2F26%2Fsciwater126.xml |archive-date=11 October 2007 |access-date=4 October 2007 |work=[[The Telegraph (newspaper)|The Telegraph]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=McCarthy |first=Michael |author-link=Michael McCarthy (journalist) |name-list-style=vanc |date=27 September 2007 |title=Pipes hung in the sea could help planet to 'heal itself' |url=http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article3001626.ece |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071011013930/http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article3001626.ece |archive-date=11 October 2007 |access-date=4 October 2007 |work=The Independent}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Jha |first=Alok |name-list-style=vanc |date=27 September 2007 |title=How sea tubes could slow climate change |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/sep/27/climatechange |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141005173131/http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/sep/27/climatechange |archive-date=5 October 2014 |access-date=4 October 2007 |work=The Guardian}}</ref> and criticism.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Williamson |first=Phillip |name-list-style=vanc |date=1 October 2007 |title=Cold water on global warming plans |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/oct/01/climatechange.mainsection |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190825222938/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/oct/01/climatechange.mainsection |archive-date=25 August 2019 |access-date=25 August 2019 |work=The Guardian}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Hari |first=Johann |name-list-style=vanc |date=6 October 2007 |title=The last green taboo: engineering the planet |url=https://www.seattlepi.com/local/opinion/article/The-last-green-taboo-engineering-the-planet-1251713.php |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190825222641/https://www.seattlepi.com/local/opinion/article/The-last-green-taboo-engineering-the-planet-1251713.php |archive-date=25 August 2019 |access-date=25 August 2019 |work=[[Seattle Post-Intelligencer]]}}</ref><ref name="Shepherd-2007">{{Cite journal |last=Shepherd |first=J. |last2=Iglesias-Rodriguez |first2=D. |last3=Yool |first3=A. |name-list-style=vanc |year=2007 |title=Geo-engineering might cause, not cure, problems |journal=Nature |volume=449 |issue=7164 |pages=781 |bibcode=2007Natur.449..781S |doi=10.1038/449781a |pmid=17943101 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Commenting on the proposal, [[Corinne Le Quéré]], a [[University of East Anglia]] researcher, said "It doesn't make sense. There is absolutely no evidence that [[climate engineering]] options work or even go in the right direction. I'm astonished that they published this. Before any geoengineering is put to work a massive amount of research is needed – research which will take 20 to 30 years".<ref name="Smith-2007" /> Other researchers claimed that "this scheme would bring water with high natural [[PCO2|{{italics correction|''p''}}{{CO2}}]] levels (associated with the nutrients) back to the surface, potentially causing exhalation of {{CO2}}".<ref name="Shepherd-2007" /> Lovelock subsequently said that his proposal was intended to stimulate interest and that research would be the next step,{{sfn|Lovelock|2009|p=98}} and several research studies were published in the wake of the original proposal.<ref name="Yool-2009">{{Cite journal |last=Yool |first=A. |last2=Shepherd |first2=J.G. |last3=Bryden |first3=H.L. |last4=Oschlies |first4=A. |name-list-style=vanc |year=2009 |title=Low efficiency of nutrient translocation for enhancing oceanic uptake of carbon dioxide |journal=[[Journal of Geophysical Research]] |volume=114 |issue=C8 |pages=C08009 |bibcode=2009JGRC..114.8009Y |doi=10.1029/2008JC004792 |quote=...{{nbsp}}enhancing the ocean's uptake of CO2 by 1 Gt C / y would require approximately 0.8 billion pumps (of 1&nbsp;m diameter) to be deployed. |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="Oschlies-2010">{{Cite journal |last=Oschlies |first=A. |last2=Pahlow |first2=M. |last3=Yool |first3=A. |last4=Matear |first4=R.J. |name-list-style=vanc |year=2010 |title=Climate engineering by artificial ocean upwelling: Channelling the sorcerer's apprentice |url=https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009GL041961 |url-status=live |journal=[[Geophysical Research Letters]] |volume=37 |issue=4 |pages=L04701 |bibcode=2010GeoRL..37.4701O |doi=10.1029/2009GL041961 |s2cid=28795204 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230104143428/https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009GL041961 |archive-date=4 January 2023 |access-date=2023-01-04 |quote=However, the model predicts that about 80% of the carbon sequestered is stored on land, as a result of reduced respiration at lower air temperatures brought about by upwelling of cold waters.}}</ref> However, these estimated that the scheme would require a huge number of pipes,<ref name="Yool-2009" /> and that the main effect of the pipes may be on the land rather than in the ocean.<ref name="Oschlies-2010" />

==== Sustainable retreat ====
{{See also|Climate change adaptation}}
Sustainable retreat is a concept developed by Lovelock to define the necessary changes to human settlement and dwelling at the global scale to adapt to global warming and prevent its expected negative consequences on humans.{{sfn|Lovelock|2006}}{{page needed|date=July 2022}}

Lovelock thought the time was past for sustainable development and that we had come to a time when development is no longer [[sustainable]]. Therefore, we needed to retreat. Lovelock stated the following to explain the concept:<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Goodell |first=Jeff |author-link=Jeff Goodell |name-list-style=vanc |date=1 November 2007 |title=James Lovelock, the Prophet |url=https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/james-lovelock-the-prophet-192646/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190825222938/https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/james-lovelock-the-prophet-192646/ |archive-date=25 August 2019 |access-date=25 August 2019 |magazine=[[Rolling Stone]]}}</ref>{{blockquote|Retreat, in his view, means it's time to start talking about changing where we live and how we get our food; about making plans for the migration of millions of people from low-lying regions like Bangladesh into Europe; about admitting that New Orleans is a goner and moving the people to cities better positioned for the future. Most of all, he says, it's about everybody "absolutely doing their utmost to sustain civilization, so that it doesn't degenerate into Dark Ages, with warlords running things, which is a real danger. We could lose everything that way."}}

The concept of sustainable retreat emphasises a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs with lower levels or less environmentally harmful types of resources.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Gray |first=John |name-list-style=vanc |date=27 January 2006 |title=The Revenge of Gaia, by James Lovelock |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/the-revenge-of-gaia-by-james-lovelock-6110631.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220727224852/https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/the-revenge-of-gaia-by-james-lovelock-6110631.html |archive-date=27 July 2022 |access-date=30 July 2022 |work=The Independent |language=en}}</ref>