Books on the subject of climate change follow a common formula. They begin with a frank assessment of the climate crisis and conclude by listing the practical solutions available to us to avoid catastrophe. Often these optimistic sections stray from their practical roots into fanciful, utopian forecasts, stressing the enlightened, rational foundations of human nature.

That kind of cheer-leading has not been found very often in this blog.

Instead, I have worked very hard to steer clear of feel-good assurances. This is despite my own personal desire to see an egalitarian, green society grow out of the ashes of the present carbon industrial complex. Also there is already more than enough of this kind of hopeful thinking out there. Not only do I view replicating it as redundant, I see it as somewhat counterproductive.

My role, as I see it, is more to focus on the fast-approaching storm and to convince my fellow shipmates that the vessel of civilization will not survive the wind and waves that will sink us if we do not change course. I do not do this to be negative or cynical. I do it because history shows that in most cases, when climate emergencies arise, rational enlightenment is abandoned and civilizations collapse.

However, as Jared Diamond has shown in his work, Collapse, there are exceptional societies that have changed just in time. Examples of these success stories include the Vikings of Iceland and the Tokugawa Shogunate of Japan. So we cannot rule enlightened reform out as a possibility. But, of course, these cultures were not dealing with a global collapse of all societies and ecosystems. And they did not have weapons of mass destruction to use in their struggles over the last remaining resources. This is what makes our current predicament so unique and so dangerous.

But, all that said, let me entertain the idea for once that we might actually respond in time, if only to paint two radically different futures for us to consider.

The first, as readers of this blog know, involves the total collapse of civilization and possibly the total extinction of the human race. In this catastrophic future scenario (the likely scenario according to this blog), the effects of climate change are so devastating that they undo the global order, which leads to desperate actions by many different parties, from mobs of refugees, armed militias, armies and even nuclear-armed nations and alliances. As times grow more and more desperate, the tempo of violence increases accordingly. My personal fear is that loss of the glaciers of the Hindu-Kush, which provide water for hundreds of millions of people in Asia, will provoke a nuclear war.

The second scenario, the optimistic scenario, is that we somehow overcome the many obstacles to reform: the oil and coal industries and their political stooges, the denialists, agribusiness and other dirty industries, and all the international mistrust that keeps a useful treaty from being adopted. But assuming these factions can be overcome or cajoled, in the optimistic scenario we are able to achieve a transformation of our world. Through a crash program of innovation and regulation (like that envisioned by the One Degree War Plan), we would experience significant economic pain, and not a little bloodshed, but emerge by mid-century with a new economic order in place. Underlying this Green Order would be an economy that prices carbon and which gets nearly 100% of its energy from currently available renewables like solar, thermal and wind as well as new sources not yet invented. In conjunction with this switch to carbon neutral energy sources, our industrial processes will also be transformed. Some of the most obvious changes would involve genetically engineered organisms such as grains that grow in harsh conditions and naturally resist pests, to microbes that produce sustainable building materials and fuels. And, most likely, we would see a culture of austerity develop, in line with a new conservationist politics and economics that would see us through for the long-term.

Alternatively, the above rosy-scenario might be less savory with “benign” dictatorships enforcing the new sustainable regime. Such an authoritarian system might be a natural development arising from the chaos of war and instability that climate change will likely hurl at us. Indeed, one of the first casualties of our post-industrial collapse might be the abandonment of representative democracy as emergency measures lead to emergency powers. Like societal collapse, dictatorship as a response to crisis is not unknown to history.

Yes, there is a sliver of hope…or at least, uncertainty in total collapse. And yes, the world could be remade into a better, more sustainable place. But no, you won’t read much about that here. This blog is about historical precedent and scientific forecasts—in other words, demonstrable facts. As for utopianism, I will leave that to others.