Timelapse

Powered By

Watch the world change over the course of nearly three decades of satellite photography

Pictured: The megacity of Dubai grows in the desert, from 1984 to today
  • Las Vegas

    The city has exploded over the past few decades, sprawling into the desert—even as a growing population and worsening drought shrink nearby Lake Mead.

  • Dubai

    Once little more than a fishing village, this Middle Eastern megacity has blown up in recent years, even extending onto new land in the Persian Gulf. But can a desert city be sustainable?

  • Shanghai

    The financial capital of China was always a major city, but over the past 30 years it has metastasized across the Yangtze River Delta, building skyscrapers over what were once farming villages.

  • Oil Sands

    The once quiet forests of northeastern Alberta have been transformed by the boom in unconventional oil. Is the economic benefit worth the environmental cost?

  • Mendenhall Glacier

    A warming climate has helped cause this Alaskan glacier to retreat by nearly 2 miles over the past few decades. As the Arctic warms, will glaciers become a thing of the past?

  • Wyoming Coal

    The Powder River Basin produces more than 40% of America's coal, and the land bears the scars of all that mining. But does Wyoming coal have a future in a climate-conscious world?

  • Columbia Glacier

    This long tongue of ice in Alaska's Prince William Sound is one of the fastest-moving glaciers in the world thanks to rapid warming in the far north.

  • Lake Urmia

    The largest lake in the Middle East, this saline body of water has been drying up over the past few decades because of drought and overconstruction.

  • Explore the World

    Search for a location below

TIME and Space | By Jeffrey Kluger

Spacecraft and telescopes are not built by people interested in what’s going on at home. Rockets fly in one direction: up. Telescopes point in one direction: out. Of all the cosmic bodies studied in the long history of astronomy and space travel, the one that got the least attention was the one that ought to matter most to us—Earth.

That changed when NASA created the Landsat program, a series of satellites that would perpetually orbit our planet, looking not out but down. Surveillance spacecraft had done that before, of course, but they paid attention only to military or tactical sites. Landsat was a notable exception, built not for spycraft but for public monitoring of how the human species was altering the surface of the planet. Two generations, eight satellites and millions of pictures later, the space agency, along with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), has accumulated a stunning catalog of images that, when riffled through and stitched together, create a high-definition slide show of our rapidly changing Earth. TIME is proud to host the public unveiling of these images from orbit, which for the first time date all the way back to 1984.

Over here is Dubai, growing from sparse desert metropolis to modern, sprawling megalopolis. Over there are the central-pivot irrigation systems turning the sands of Saudi Arabia into an agricultural breadbasket — a surreal green-on-brown polka-dot pattern in the desert. Elsewhere is the bad news: the high-speed retreat of Mendenhall Glacier in Alaska; the West Virginia Mountains decapitated by the mining industry; the denuded forests of the Amazon, cut to stubble by loggers.

It took the folks at Google to upgrade these choppy visual sequences from crude flip-book quality to true video footage. With the help of massive amounts of computer muscle, they have scrubbed away cloud cover, filled in missing pixels, digitally stitched puzzle-piece pictures together, until the growing, thriving, sometimes dying planet is revealed in all its dynamic churn. The images are striking not just because of their vast sweep of geography and time but also because of their staggering detail. Consider: a standard TV image uses about one-third of a million pixels per frame, while a high-definition image uses 2 million. The Landsat images, by contrast, weigh in at 1.8 trillion pixels per frame, the equivalent of 900,000 high-def TVs assembled into a single mosaic.

These Timelapse pictures tell the pretty and not-so-pretty story of a finite planet and how its residents are treating it — razing even as we build, destroying even as we preserve. It takes a certain amount of courage to look at the videos, but once you start, it’s impossible to look away.

Chapter 1: Satellite Story | By Jeffrey Kluger

It’s a safe bet that few people who have grown up in the Google era have ever heard of Stewart Udall. A U.S. Representative of Arizona’s 2nd Congressional District from 1955 to 1961, Udall left the House to become Interior Secretary under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. That was pretty much it for his time in the public eye — not exactly an icon of the wired generation, right?

But in 1966, Udall and his staff had an idea. For all the attention the then budding space program was devoting to other planets, our own was being overlooked. If humanity wanted to protect its threatened natural resources, we first had to be able to keep an eye on them. That meant a satellite or, preferably, multiple satellites that could maintain a steady downward gaze, tracking habitat destruction, urbanization, industrial sprawl and more. Udall’s concern gave rise to Project EROS (Earth Resources Observation Satellites), later renamed Landsat. For all the bad and misguided ideas that came out of the 1960s, this scheme turned out to be very, very good.

Since NASA launched the first Landsat satellite in 1972, the program has been in constant operation. Seven other satellites followed the first into orbit over the years, sometimes replacing ones that had reached the end of their operational life, sometimes joining ones still in operation. The most recent member of the fleet, Landsat 8, went aloft in February. At an altitude of 438 miles (705 km), the satellites make one orbit of Earth every 84.3 minutes. Keep that up for 41 years, maintaining a photographic record of your travels, and you compile a whole lot of pictures — millions of them, which have since been digitized into petabytes, or billions of bytes of data.

In 2008 the U.S. government ruled that those pictures, which had been available for sale to the public, should be free. That caught the attention of the folks at Google. While Google Maps and Google Earth were wildly popular with Web users, scientists found the satellite images limiting. They captured only part of the visible spectrum, and what’s more, they were static. A picture of, say, a reservoir or a section of forest could tell you a lot about those sites, but only how they looked at one moment on one day. Landsat’s cameras, on the other hand, revisit the same part of the planet on average once every 16 days. Collect enough of those pictures and sequence them, and you can create a moving image that shows just how a region has changed environmentally — often for the worse — over the years.

In 2009 Google met with Tom Loveland, a lead scientist with the USGS — which is home to the Landsat archives — about turning the trove of images into maps and mini-movies for the use of governments and researchers around the world. Google and the USGS soon struck a deal, but that was the easy part.

First, even though the USGS had millions of images in its vaults, there were still more to be had, most of them tucked away in active and former Landsat ground stations around the world. Google began reaching out to the countries that are home to those facilities, working to repatriate as many of the images as it could. In one six-month period, it collected half a million pictures, most of them stored in traditional negatives and prints, and began digitizing them. Even getting the already digitized EROS and Landsat images from the USGS to Google took some doing, necessitating the construction of a new digital pipeline that could handle the massive stream of data.

Processing the images required another magnitude of complexity. The atmosphere does not always cooperate when a satellite tries to take a picture from orbit. Everything from cloud cover and industrial haze to smoke from forest fires can obscure the view. Stitching together a panorama, to say nothing of making a moving image, often requires hundreds of images, some of which must be digitally scrubbed to filter out atmospheric interference. A single, cloud-free map of the world requires 9,000 discrete images.

The pictures, and particularly the movies, that resulted from this painstaking work are astounding. A single pixel measures about 33 yards (30 m) square, or roughly the size of a baseball infield. That seems like a lot of ground to pack into a single dot, and the truth is, no one pixel reveals very much. But tens of thousands of them tell rich tales: the decapitation of mountaintops by mining companies extracting the mineral riches beneath; the fish-bone-like patterns loggers carve into forests as they fell trees in intersecting avenues, until the entire region is denuded; lakes and reservoirs that shrink in inverse proportion to the thirsty cities and communities growing up around them; the retreat and disappearance of glaciers.

There is some good news: central-pivot irrigation systems can be seen turning deserts into gardens, forming their own pixelated patterns as little circles of green appear, accumulate and expand. There are also the oil sands fields of Canada that pop up from nowhere and aren’t pretty to look at but are helping to free the U.S. and other countries from dependence on petro-dictators.

Already, the public-private collaboration is paying environmental dividends. Anxious to get a handle on the health of its forests, the government of Mexico contacted Google about putting together a comprehensive map that could reveal how much ground cover is still intact and how much has been lost. Google and Landsat delivered, creating a visual survey made up of 53,000 images, representing 18 terabytes of data that required 15,000 hours of computer time to complete. The process was actually quite quick: Google put a thousand computers to work simultaneously, so the job was completed in a single, rather long workday. A solitary computer would have needed three years.

For governments and environmental scientists, there is a lot of arcane data to extract from the maps and movies. For everyone else, there is something subtler but just as important: perspective. We tend our own tiny plots on Earth, our houses and yards often taking up less room than that infield-size pixel. It’s only when we get above ourselves — say, 438 miles above — that we can see how we’re changing our planet and begin to consider how we can be better stewards of it.

Chapter 2: Extreme Resources | By Bryan Walsh

You can’t understand the sheer scale of the oil-sands development in northeastern Alberta unless you’ve been there — preferably flying over the vast spread of open mines, roads and broken forests in a helicopter. Starting near the booming frontier town of Fort McMurray, you can see vast chunks of land that have been carved out of the endless arboreal forest, where massive machines dig out the rich, black sand that just might transform the global oil market—unless environmentalists stop it. Oil-sands development isn’t just changing Alberta, where oil companies have stripped away forests to dig open mines and tailing ponds filled with waste are visible from the sky. The oil sands represent a new kind of extreme energy resource that promises to make fossil fuels available far into the future but at a heavy environmental price.

What’s truly amazing — and perhaps alarming — about this new era of extreme resources is how fast they’re developing. My visit to the Albertan oil sands came late in 2010. In the two and a half years since, oil companies there have produced nearly a billion new barrels of crude. As time-lapse satellite images show, much of this development is relatively new, a response to the sharp increase in the price of oil over the past decade. Similar trends are also at work in the vast coalfields of the Powder River Basin in Wyoming, the mountaintop mines of West Virginia and the rain forests of the Brazilian state of Rondonia. A growing global population and a ravenous demand for natural resources is altering the very face of the planet. Thanks to the Timelapse imagery, we can see it happening.

The oil sands near the Athabasca river in Alberta aren’t a recent discovery. They first came to the attention of European settlers in the early 18th century, and native Canadians in the region had been using the sticky, bituminous sands for centuries — not to burn for energy but to caulk their canoes. True to the name “oil sands,” the crude found near the Athabasca is bound in the sand itself, and it wasn’t until the mid-20th century that researchers developed a way to process the oil. Unlike conventional crude found in places like Saudi Arabia and Texas, oil-sands crude can’t simply be pumped out of the ground; companies have to dig it out and then heat it, separating the oil from the sand. There’s a lot there — as many as 200 billion barrels are economically recoverable at today’s oil price. And that price matters. All that additional effort and energy means that it costs more to produce a barrel of oil sands crude than traditional oil. It also means a barrel produces about 15% more greenhouses gases, on average, than a barrel of conventional crude.

Given the extra cost and effort, commercial oil-sands production began only in 1967, with investment slowing or stopping when the global price of oil plummeted in the 1980s and much of the ’90s. Even that early production took a toll on the land. Companies mined oil sands in open pits that left scars on the earth, and processing the resulting ore left a lot of tailings and wastewater, which were discharged into ponds. Up close you can smell the tarry stench from the processing upgraders. It’s not for nothing that the oil-sands region has been compared to Mordor, and First Nations Canadians who live downriver from the oil-sands developments worry about water contamination and even cancer.

Still, as the satellite images show, as long as the demand for oil is strong — it grew to 88 million barrels a day last year — the oil-sands development in Alberta will keep increasing. The footprint may shrink somewhat thanks to a new mining process called in-situ extraction, which involves cooking and processing the sands underground, without open-pit mining. But that method requires more energy, which can mean more greenhouse gases. Full-throttle development of the oil sands might not be “game over” in the fight against climate change, as the global-warming researcher and activist James Hansen put it a couple of years ago; the oil sands represent just a fraction of the fossil fuels left to be burned. But it certainly wouldn’t help us get off carbon any faster.

And that’s why something that you can’t yet see in the Timelapse images of the oil sands is still very important to their future — and perhaps the climate’s as well. The proposed Keystone XL pipeline would carry nearly a million barrels of oil-sands crude a day across the border into the U.S. The pipeline has yet to be approved by President Obama, and environmentalists have identified Keystone as a red line, calling on the White House to cancel the project over climate concerns. At the same time, conservatives are pushing Obama to approve it on the grounds that the U.S. will be able to use Canadian oil to displace imported crude from the politically antagonistic Middle East and Russia. How the Athabasca oil sands will look in 30 years may depend on Obama’s decision.

The name says it all: In mountaintop-removal mining (MTR), the summit ridges of hills and mountains — known in mining parlance as the “overburden” — are removed, allowing miners to get at the seams of coal underneath. The process is effective and cheap, requiring fewer workers than conventional mining. That’s why, as satellite photos show, miners have decapitated mountains throughout the Appalachian area in West Virginia and Kentucky, one range after another.

But if MTR has helped keep the faltering Appalachian coal-mining industry alive, it can also exact a terrible toll on the environment and human health. Removed overburden needs to be put somewhere, and as a result, soil contaminated by toxic mining by-products ends up in valley fills, poisoning local streams. The mountaintop-removal process destroys deciduous forests, and while companies work to reclaim the land after mining is finished, some environmental disruption will always remain.

The communities that live near mining sites can be endangered by contaminated water or toxic dust in the air. A 2011 study found that counties in and near mountaintop mining areas had higher rates of many birth defects, as well as higher rates of cancer. The dramatic effects of mountaintop removal mining can be seen from space. But the real dangers might be invisible.

While the popular image of coal miners is still sooty-faced West Virginians, the real center of coal mining in the U.S. is shifting away from Appalachia. Instead it’s found in the Powder River Basin (PRB), which covers some of Wyoming and Montana and which now produces nearly half of America’s coal. As the Timelapse images show, full-scale production in the PRB is relatively recent. That’s because PRB coal contains on average about a third less sulfur than Appalachian coal, which means that plants that burn PRB coal release less sulfur dioxide (SO2) into the air. The cleaner PRB coal wasn’t worth the extra effort of mining it until the government enacted tougher air-pollution standards that mandate a reduction in SO2, a major cause of acid rain. Switching to low-sulfur PRB coal was a cheap way for plants to meet air-pollution standards, prompting increased coal mining in Wyoming and Montana.

Full ScreenA Mountaintop Removal mine site and its accompanying valley fill hovers over a resident's home in Fayette County, WV. This site is operated by Frasure Creek Mining LLC which was sued in 2010 by four environmental groups for violations regarding their MTR in Kentucky. They were accused of committing over 20,000 water discharge violations and fraud for falsifying reports.
Paul Corbit Brown
A Mountaintop Removal mine site and its accompanying valley fill hovers over a resident's home in Fayette County, WV. This site is operated by Frasure Creek Mining LLC which was sued in 2010 by four environmental groups for violations regarding their MTR in Kentucky. They were accused of committing over 20,000 water discharge violations and fraud for falsifying reports.

But that may change in the future. Thanks to increasing concern over climate change and competition from cheaper and cleaner natural gas, coal use is on the wane in the U.S. If we ever get truly serious about climate change, we’ll need to completely cut out coal, the single biggest contributor to global warming. So the U.S. coal industry is increasingly looking to the export market. Last year American coal exports hit a record 126 million tons. The biggest potential market for coal exports is China, which consumed nearly 3.9 billion metric tons last year, and the PRB region is well situated to ship across the Pacific. Or at least it would be, if there were any coal export terminals on the West Coast. Coal companies are trying to build several terminals in Oregon and Washington State, while environmentalists are trying to stop them. The PRB region’s fate will depend on who wins that battle.

The state of Rondonia in western Brazil is in the heart of the Amazon and was once home to nearly 50 million acres of pristine rain forest. No longer, though. Today Rondonia represents one of the most heavily deforested areas in the Amazon. The loss of forest has been rapid—nearly 25,000 sq. mi. (65,000 sq. km) of forest disappeared from 1978 to 2003. That’s an area roughly the size of West Virginia.

How do humans clear that much forest? Satellite images show that deforestation occurs in a fishbone pattern. Usually a road first extends deep into the forest. Some trees fall to make way for the road, but the real impact is caused by an influx of settlers and loggers. They clear more forest to make room for farmland, but the heavy rains soon erode the soil, which then forces settlers to clear even more forest. People then convert the leftover land into pasture for growing herds of cattle. And so the rain forest dies.

The good news is that in recent years the Brazilian government has reduced the rate of deforestation, in part with the help of advanced satellite imagery that can track forest loss nearly in real time. But the past few years may represent only a brief break in the long-term loss of the Amazon: a recent study found that deforestation was up significantly in 2012.

Chapter 3: Climate Change | By Jeffrey Kluger

For a long time now, Earth has been running a fever. Never mind the few remaining climate-change deniers — really, never mind them; the world has at last moved on — it’s getting awfully toasty down here. The numbers tell the story: 2012 was the hottest year on record in the continental U.S., the 15th driest and the second most volatile, with 11 natural weather disasters, including Superstorm Sandy. Of the 10 hottest years on record worldwide, nine have occurred in the 21st century; the exception was 1998. Average temperatures around the world are up 1.4ºF (0.8ºC) since 1880. On a planet whose water-based chemistry tips one way or the other on tiny thermal fulcrums, that’s a lot.

More important than those statistics are our everyday experiences — the droughts and wildfires searing the American West, the succession of 90-degree days in U.S. cities that once enjoyed less-punishing summers, the steadily rising sea levels inundating coasts and swallowing islands. The planet is sweating, and we feel it every day.

Nowhere is the fluctuation in the earthly thermostat more visible than in the Arctic, as the above Timelapse video of diminishing glaciers demonstrates. In just the past decade, the average size of the summer polar ice cap has been slashed nearly in half, from 2.7 million sq. mi. (7 million sq. km) to just 1.4 million sq. mi. (3.6 million sq. km). In some areas, a clear, navigable passage has opened up during the warmest months, and while that may seem good for global trade — and it is — it’s very bad for the health of the planet. The ice that melts off the Greenland landmass is a key contributor to rising sea levels. What’s more, the ice loss is accelerating, and it will continue to do so for quite some time even if global temperatures stopped rising today. That’s because bright white ice reflects sunlight back into space, while dark blue water absorbs it. Every acre of sea that opens up therefore becomes something of a heat sink, raising the water temperature higher and higher, causing the remaining ice to melt even faster.

For the U.S., this is very much a close-to-home problem, since some of the most dramatic glacier loss is occurring in Alaska — a fact the new Landsat imagery shows in crisp detail. (See above.) Columbia Glacier, in Prince William Sound, once spilled from 10,000 ft. (3,050 m) above sea level in the Chugach Mountains, down though an inlet and out into the water past Heather Island. It barely moved an inch from that position from the time it was discovered in 1794 until 1980.

Since then, as the video reveals, it has not so much retreated as practically fled. At one point in 2001, it pulled back at an estimated speed of 98 ft. (30 m) per day. It has now lost about 12 mi. (20 km) in length and nearly 1,300 ft. (400 m) in thickness. The forlorn reminders of the glacier’s former footprint remain, just beyond Heather Island, in the form of icebergs that calved away as the main mass crumbled, later clustering together in what environmental scientists have nicknamed an “ice mélange.” But the dark, warming waters should ensure that the mélange melts too, and the only reminder of Columbia’s original size will be found in the photo archive.

Mendenhall Glacier, not far from Juneau, has been similarly dying — and its decline has also been captured by Landsat. Smaller than Columbia — at its maximum size, it was just 14 mi. (22 km) long — it has lost at least 1.75 mi. (2.8 km) so far. The summer of 2004 was an especially bad time for Mendenhall, when a dramatic collapse of its leading edge caused it to lose about 600 ft. (200 m) of ice at once.

The immediate solution to the problem of melting is, well, never mind. None exist. The answer will, instead, be a slow process of healing that will only begin with an aggressive plan to curb greenhouse gasses and gradually return us to a thermal equilibrium. Sadly, the commitment to a plan like that doesn’t exist yet either — and that may be the true tragedy.

Chapter 4: Urban Explosion | By Bryan Walsh

“Moving to the city is the first step to getting filthy rich in rising Asia.” So the Pakistani author Moshin Hamid writes in his new novel How to Get Filthy Rich in Rising Asia — and billions of people apparently agree with him. The story of the past century has been the story of urbanization, of the great migration of human beings from the rural countryside to the city. It happened first in the developed West and in countries like Japan, resulting in the explosion of major cities like New York, Los Angeles and Tokyo. And in younger cities like Las Vegas, a settlement carved out of the desert and built on little more than dreams, the expansion is continuing.

But it’s in the developing world that the urbanization wave is truly epochal. Hundreds of millions of people in Asia, Africa and South America have moved from villages and farms to swollen megacities, filling slums and tenements, providing the human fuel for the engine of an amazing economic transformation. Cities like Shanghai (see video below), Lagos, Bombay and São Paulo have blown up, sprawling over neighboring territory. From space, these megacities look like tumors colonizing the tissue around them.

And this is only the beginning. In 2008, for the first time in history more than half the world’s population lived in urban areas; that proportion will only increase in the years to come as more and more people seek their fortune in cities. Right now from 3% to 5% of the world’s surface qualifies as urban. But according to a 2012 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, urban territory will expand by more than 463,000 sq. miles (1.2 million sq. km) by 2030, eventually covering about 10% of the planet’s land. More than 75% of that increase is expected to occur in Asia, especially in countries like China, which already has more than 160 cities with at least 1 million people. The urbanization wave will be even larger in Africa, where urban area—which amounted to only 16,000 sq. miles (41,000 sq. km) in 2000 — is predicted to grow by 590%.

The urbanization wave can sound scary — especially if you visit the polluted and congested slums that ring new megacities like Lagos and Jakarta. Still, hundreds of thousands of people are leaving the countryside each day because there are real economic opportunities to be found in the city, not to mention a taste of freedom and excitement that doesn’t exist in the village. And if urban migration is handled well — with smart city planning and environmental protection — it can actually be good for the planet. Concentrating people in dense settlements allows them to use less energy than they would in spread-out rural areas. (A Manhattanite’s carbon footprint is some 30% smaller than the average American’s.) As people move to cities, they eventually have far fewer children, helping curb overpopulation.

Ultimately there’s no turning back the urbanization wave, but thanks to Timelapse, we can view a few key case studies:

Shanghai: Shanghai isn’t a new city. The major port has long been China’s second city after the capital of Beijing, as well as its chief portal to the outside world. But the changes Shanghai has undergone over the past two decades dwarf those experienced by almost any other city in the world. Shanghai’s population has grown from 13.3 million in 1990 to over 23 million in 2010. The city has sprawled out from its historic center at the mouth of the Yangtze River, with new developments gobbling up ancient farmland and villages. The Timelapse images above show Shanghai as an urban stain expanding relentlessly in all directions.

The most astounding transformation has taken place just across the river from the heart of old Shanghai. Pudong was little more than farmland and a few river wharves in 1993, when the Chinese government turned the area into a Special Economic Zone. Freed from China’s restrictive economic laws, Pudong quickly became a mecca for Chinese capital, allowing Shanghai to soon regain its status as the country’s financial heart. Futuristic skyscrapers bloomed almost overnight, including the iconic Oriental Pearl Tower and the tallest building in China: the Shanghai World Financial Tower. Seen at night through a typically misty Shanghai sky, Pudong looks like the set of Blade Runner come to life. Shanghai, the most populous city in the most populous country in the world, is the face of the 21st century.

But that sharp growth has also strained Shanghai’s environment. Air quality in the city is often atrocious, as it is in other Chinese megacities. The rapid increase in wealth has led to a spike in car ownership, and despite the breakneck pace of new road construction, traffic in Shanghai often comes to a standstill. The worst problem is Shanghai’s water: the city’s growth has taxed freshwater supply even as pollution has poisoned it. Earlier this year thousands of dead pigs were found floating in the Huangpu River, which flows into Shanghai, and no one could explain why. Government officials have taken steps to address the problems arising from the city’s rapid growth — investing in a subway system and restricting private car ownership — but more will need to be done to keep Shanghai from choking on itself.

Dubai: In the mid-1980s, when the Timelapse images begin, Dubai was a small desert city of about 300,000 people, overshadowed by nearby Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates. What growth Dubai had experienced was mostly recent; in the 1950s it was little more than a village, with pearl diving its chief industry. Today, Dubai’s population exceeds 2.1 million, and the metropolis has asserted itself as the financial center of the Middle East.

Dubai is a city that seemed to grow almost overnight, like a desert oasis made real. It has the world’s tallest skyscraper — the Burj Khalifa, seen in Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol — as well as its largest mall, its biggest theme park and its longest indoor ski run. Writer George Saunders calls Dubai “the Disney World of the Middle East, if Disney World were the size of San Francisco and out in a desert.” He’s pretty much right. Not content with simply building in the desert, over the past couple of decades Dubai has built out into the sea. Sand dredged from the seafloor has been used to create artificial islands of recognizable shapes — including a pair of palm trees. In the lower-right corner of the Timelapse images, areas of empty sand are filled up with new buildings, as the city grows further and further away from the sea, pushing into the desert. That breakneck pace of development has slowed somewhat in recent years, as Dubai was hit hard by the global recession of 2008. But Dubai is still the place to go in the Middle East to spend money — which means artificial palm islands may only be the beginning.

Las Vegas: Before Dubai, there was another city that grew out of desert nothingness. Las Vegas has a few decades on Dubai, but it’s only over the past 30 years — captured in the Timelapse imagery above — that Sin City has hit the big time. And has it ever—the population of Clark County, Nevada, home to Las Vegas, has grown from a little under 500,000 in 1980 to about 2 million now. While most of the attention has been focused on the glitzy Las Vegas strip — home to megasize casinos like the MGM Grand and the Bellagio — the real growth has been not up but out. Throughout the 1990s and much of the 2000s, the boundaries of metro Las Vegas kept expanding, as new housing developments were thrown up to accommodate the throngs of Americans who wanted to take advantage of the region’s booming economy. From 2000 to 2010, the city’s population grew by nearly 50% — a rate that’s hard to find outside the developing world.

But if Las Vegas boomed along with the housing sector during the first several years of the 21st century, it went bust when the recession hit. The city was ground zero for the foreclosure crisis. As late as 2012, Las Vegas had one foreclosure filing for every 99 housing units, good for the fourth highest rate in the country. And as economically unsustainable as Las Vegas’s growth has proved to be over the past several years, it may be even more environmentally unsustainable. The city receives almost no rain, and most of its water comes from nearby Lake Mead. But as can be clearly seen in the Timelapse images, Lake Mead is drying up, the victim of a prolonged drought — potentially abetted by climate change — and the increasing demand placed on it by Las Vegas’ growing population. Lake Mead’s water level has fallen from a little over 1,200 ft. (365 m) to 1,125 ft. (343 m) now. In recent years, officials in Las Vegas have taken admirable steps to reduce water waste, but if Lake Mead keeps shrinking, Sin City will stop growing.

Credits: Executive Producer: Jonathan D. Woods / Editors: Edward Felsenthal, Steven James Snyder and Adam Sorensen / Design and Development: Daniel Bernard, Peter DiRenzo, Katie Rooney, Alexander Ho, Micah Ernst, Christine Lim and Eujin Measson / Video: Ian Orefice, Jim Fields and Evan Michals / Photo: Mikko Takkunen, Tanner Curtis, Erica Campbell, Elizabeth Herman and Richard Conway  / Infographics: Heather Jones / Google: Rebecca Moore,  Peter Birch, Simon Ilyushchenko, Matt Hancher, Eric Nguyen and Nate Tyler, / Carnegie Mellon University: Randy Sargent, Yen-Chia Hsu, Paul Dille and Illah Nourbakhsh  / USGS-Landsat: Tom Loveland / NASA: Jim Irons / Additional Footage: Denise Zmekhol (ZD films)

802 comments
dylan.e.mcfarlane
dylan.e.mcfarlane

Is it possible to see images starting from 1972? Also, can the resolution be increased? My images appear more grainy than those from the LandsatLook Viewer or Google Earth. And can we see more images on monthly basis?

starsalign
starsalign

True, we have a raging, compounding problem that humans have created on the planet. This is very, very true.  We carry countless despicable acts out against our planet and environment every single day.  Yes, burning fossil fuels may only be a fraction of the problem but it is undeniable that we are DESTROYING Earth in myriad aspects.

Maybe we should stop promoting people who are trying to live in the desert where resources are scarce and they need to take, take, take as many resources they possibly can to do anything and everything to live comfortably (for example, air conditioning, green lawns, pools, long showers, food, etc., where it really doesn't belong and would not naturally exist otherwise).

Perhaps everyone needs to wake up and realize that we need to stop pointing the finger and start living a more sustainable life on our own terms for the sake of ourselves and our planet. 

The general population is ignorant and destructive in every possible manner.  The only way to stop this is change society's ideology and it's not going to happen until the puppet masters stop pulling the strings, or we start clipping the strings ourselves.

We could do this in a variety of ways; we could start with education and maybe spending some U.S. money on improving education.  Education that educates the character of the future youths of this country, education that teaches young students to THINK and CARE rather than cite a one-sided biased non-fiction research article or maybe education that doesn't tell students they aren't allowed to memorize their multiplication tables. 

Maybe we can start by teaching people to PRACTICE that garbage belongs in a trash can, or maybe even that you can dispose of green waste outside instead of putting it in a plastic bag which inherently gets placed into another plastic bag before it gets placed into a landfill, or perhaps that harmful chemicals probably do not belong in natural flowing sources of water or down the drain where they obviously end up in natural flowing sources of water.  Maybe we could stop using plastic and start using glass since glass is almost 100% sustainable, and yes it might require energy to make, but at least the glass can be broken back down. 

Maybe we should stop telling the world that Nuclear energy is a great option because it's cleaner burning, because we all know that Nuclear plants never break down and harm our ecosystem.  Perhaps we can slow down and instead of gobbling McDonald's GMO Biochemically Engineered beef, chicken, and god knows what else, since we all know they are jamming these animals into giant tanks all for our lovely consumption, and we all know that contributes to global warming too.

Maybe our government should stop allowing Energy Companies to ship tons of fuels (in various forms) overseas where they can be used in areas with far fewer EPA laws and restrictions, because, you know, we all live in the same planet and what happens thousands of miles away will not eventually affect everyone.

Maybe we should stop complaining about greener energy technologies such as wind or solar, making arguments like, it ruins my landscape or it’s too noisy, while we never object to billboards, airplanes, or highways, which commit all the same acts as the noisy, ugly wind turbines, yet we still want to plug our i-Phones in to charge at night, along with our laptops, microwaves, televisions, electric cars, light bulbs, etc…. 

Sorry for the rant here, but wake up people.  We need to start calling people out and making a stand even if goes against life's little conveniences. This doesn’t mean start taxing people and putting more restrictions on people, because we all know it doesn’t work.  We need an ideological shift.  We need to re-prioritize.  We can talk this until we are blue in the face, they can tax and regulate us until we’re blue in the face, but until it comes from top down or bottom up, we’re doing nothing.  I try to make a small change with the students I teach every day in my classroom, but this change needs to grow (and it’d be great if children were raised to be environmentalists).  The facts are there and we need to stop trying to pinpoint the problem and we need to stop trying to pin the problem to one particular thing.  The particular thing is you and me.  None should be free from guilt here.  We need to reevaluate the system that teaches everyone that greed is the way and that getting something done as fast as non-humanly possible is the best option.  We need to stop blaming our problems on others.  We need to be accountable for our own actions and if we don’t change soon, our accountability is going materialize in a massive food and water war until there is nothing left.

We should all be Environmentalists.

“If we could see the miracle of a single flower clearly, our whole life would change.”

By the way, here's an error, and I'm not trying to be an alarmist over the Penguin mishap, I think the article was referring solely to the Gentoo Penguin on the Arctic Peninsula and saying that the Gentoo Penguin does not live on the Peninsula, but solely on Antarctica:

For the U.S., this is very much a close-to-home problem, since some of the most dramatic glacier loss is occurring in Alaska — a fact the new Landsat imagery shows in crisp detail. (See above.) Columbia Glacier, in Prince William Sound, once spilled from 10,000 ft. (3,050 m) above sea level in the Chugach Mountains, down though* an inlet and out into the water past Heather Island. It barely moved an inch from that position from the time it was discovered in 1794 until 1980.

*should read through

tynkyr_belle
tynkyr_belle

Now be good little breeders and have brat after brat and litter after litter because YOU think you're green because you bicycle to work and recycle aluminum cans.


After all, it's not YOUR brats who're overpopulating the Earth, it's all those other people's brats.

PeterPollock
PeterPollock

As I look at this TimeLapse article again .. I think that whoever put together this story did a pretty good job!  You'll notice that the article does not just focus on climate change, but also on man-made impact on the Earth and resource-depletion.  Many readers here are focusing a lot on "global warming".  But that is only one piece of the puzzle.

Let's look at the timeline.  It is NOT hard to understand ...

2014 .. 7.2 billion people now living on the Earth

2043 ... 9 billion people are projected to be living on the Earth

2060 ... 10 billion people are projected to be living on the Eath

It is these simple numbers that are driving the critical deadlines for Planet Earth - not just global warming.  We cannot keep "burning parts of our global environment" and think it will be a liveable place by the end of this century.  There will be no good world left for our children's children !!  Computer simulations are saying exactly the same thing in a mathematical way ... these unsustainable growth trends will break down.  They have to - it's only common sense if you think about it. 

Pete, Los Angeles

PeterPollock
PeterPollock

In reference to several comments below - two thoughts:

1.  I agree that more reliable scientific data are needed - they are!  The trouble is that really reliable data may take years or decades to obtain.  But by that time we may be "out of time".  It is possible for us to get behind the curve as a global community.  And then by the time we definitely prove that serious action is needed ... it is beyond our practical capability to large scale problems.  We are fighing "decision paralysis" here.  And by the way, this decision paralysis definitely works in favor of the corporate interests and the politicians who are benefiting from GREED.

2.  Climate change is one factor influencing our future - but it is only ONE factor.  Other things are also important: resource depletion (or more expensive resources), food production, pollution, disease and destructive pests, and OVERPOPULATION.  These trends combined are the total problem .... we are most certainly on an unsustainable path for Planet Earth.  And when things are unsustainable - the system will break.  Which means our global community will break.

Pete, Los Angeles

ScottSinnock
ScottSinnock

Am I blind? I saw the glaciers staying in about the same place, except for the final frame for the Columbia glacier which seemed to be a summer picture (given the flashing of the snow pack). But before that 2012 image, the "winter" front of the glacier seemed to me to stay about the same place. I could not see any movement at all along the front of the Mendenhall glacier or its neighbors. Am I blind? or is this site just a polemic with anecdotes that don't even support the conclusions, but who looks at data nowadays anyway?

NeNo1
NeNo1

Is there an option for viewing all over the world, or those locations that interest me?

HateToSayItbut
HateToSayItbut

You should check out the Aral Sea. This is the proper time frame to see it's decline. Lake Chad was another major collapse caused by human consumption but it happened prior to these images.

RaveendranNarayanan
RaveendranNarayanan

DEFUSE I,P,C.C. CLIMATE GROUPPosted on November 10, 2013

DEAR FRIENDS OF MOTHER EARTH,
Sea Water Desalination Researcher & Author of many published papers by INTERNATIONAL DESALINATION ASSOCIATION WORLD CONGRESSES since 1995 is writing the following:
Oceans analysis since 1980 indicating that Conc. DEICERS FROM DESALINATION SYSTEMS of the Middle East is responsible for the Climate Change.
During October 2009 my paper” CONNECTIONS OF MUSHROOMING OF DESALINATION SYSTEMS IN THE MIDDLE EAST & ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTERS AROUND WORLD” was not published at DUBROVNIK 2009 CONFERENCE, CROATIA, INFORMED WORLD LEADERS INCLUDING IPCC CHAIR Dr. RAJENDRA PACHAURI WITH ATTACHMENT 47 PAGES G-MAILS. NON CARED.
Challenged 76 Climate Change, Environmental, & GLOBAL WARMING SCIENTISTS, NON REPLIED.
Wherever written ” ARCTIC MELTING” BY IPCC SCIENTISTS should be changed to” DEICING OF ICE SHELVES” MELTING AND DEICING ARE TWO DIFFERENT PROCESS.
ESTIMATED AMOUNT BY INTER-GOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE ( IPCC ) FOR CLIMATE CORRECTION IS $ 61 TRILLIONS (DOLLARS SIXTY ONE TRILLIONS ONLY)
With strictest REGULATIONS & STRICTEST ENFORCEMENT CLIMATE CALAMITIES CAN BE REDUCED AT MINIMUM COST.
In Green Land why the SHORES ARE ONLY MELTING? !!!!!
WHY THIS YEAR HURRICANES REDUCED MINIMUM?
WHY I am able to solve CLIMATE CHANGE CALAMITIES? 
Continuing Education through TOTAL INVOLVEMENT. 
Specialized in many TECHNOLOGIES including SEA WATER DESALINATION
Collected OCEANS & SEAS ANALYSIS since 1980
Nobody can stop me now because I am all over INTERNET. THROUGH 14,300 TWITTING, 1,520 GOOGLE WEB SITES, G+ , 360 WORD PRESS BLOGGING S, FACE BOOK, FACEBOOK PAGES, SARVA KALA VALLABHAN GROUPS, AIR CONDITIONING OF MOTHER EARTH, YOU TUBE VIDEO BLOGGING, G MAILS TO ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS, GLOBAL WARMING GROUPS & CLIMATE CHANGE GROUPS .
DETERMINATION TO BE A WORLD LEADER IN CLIMATE CHANGE.
● NOT CO2 & SUN,THEN WHAT? http://wp.me/p25H2W-9M via @Raveendrannaray
● BY CAPTURING DEICERS FROM DESALINATION SYSTEMS HURRICANES, GLOBAL WARMING, SEA LEVEL RISING ARRESTING & AIR CONDITIONING OF MOTHER EARTH IS PROGRESSING. 
● CLIMATE WAR WILL BE WON BY ME THAT IS WHY CLIMATE CHANGE 3rd GROUP, AIR CONDITIONING OF MOTHER EARTH WAS STARTED BEFORE TWO YEARS. THE GROUP MUST BE APPROVED BY WORLD AGENCIES AND REPRESENTATIONS MUST BE GIVEN TO ATTEND CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCES AT UNTIED NATIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
RECENTLY NASA & GOOGLE JOINTLY RELEASED CLIMATE CHANGE NEWS THAT ARTIFICIAL ISLAND DEVELOPMENT IN UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, PERSIAN GULF, WITH SATELLITE IMAGES. SO MY TECHNOLOGIES ARE CORRECT & IT MUST BE APPROVED & REWARDED WITH OUT DELAY.
SINCE 9 MONTHS WORD PRESS MESSAGES WERE HIGHLIGHTED BY TWITTER. DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY, YOU TUBE GAVE ME TRADE MARK WHILE I COMMENTED A CLIMATE CHANGE VIDEO.
DIGITAL MEDIA IS FAVORABLE TO ME BUT PRINTED MEDIA WANTS $$$$$ DOLLARS.

● Book publishing in US ” ENVIRONMENTAL RAPES AND H.R. ABUSES LEAD TO CLIMATE CHANGE CONTROL” ( full colors-500 pages:)

http://world.time.com/timelapse/

https://www.google.com/search?q=Raveendran+Narayanan”%2B”Climate+Change”&oq=Raveendran+Narayanan”%2B”Climate+Change”&aqs=chrome..69i57j0j69i64.8136j0j8

NASA announced that 2008 & 2009 were MINIMUM SOLAR YEARS

http://science.nasa.gov/…/2011/02mar_spotlesssun

NOT CO2 & SUN,THEN WHAT? http://wp.me/p25H2W-9M via @Raveendrannaray

PaulLauenstein
PaulLauenstein

What happened to the interactive "EXPLORE THE WORLD" button? That was the best part of this site!

ThinkingCritically
ThinkingCritically

How can I believe anything Time says when they caption a photo with "[p]enguins are only found in Antarctica?"  Penguins are found on every continent in the Southern Hemisphere.  This includes the Gentoo, with some being found in Argentina and Australia.  Time is displaying its ignorance or, at the very least, lack of fact-checking.

Inkster
Inkster

Sob, sniff, sniff...the virtual sob-a-thon is making its way over the world like a long lost shadow of doom.  Oh, woe at the people here, hiding in their hutches, just ready for disaster.  But meantime, they will continue observing their screens of whatever ilk.  Cause the Screen World is really...now.

'RikSmoody
'RikSmoody

Noble thoughts, Scott, but PLEASE do physical oceanography WITH MATH and measurement.
I agree that we should be doing more desalinization, but... it's got to be economical or it won't happen.

Here are some quiz questions like ones from early in an Ocean Bowl  (NOAA's science competition for HS students).
Finding these answers will help you see further.

What fraction of the Earth's water is salty?
Of the fresh water, what fraction is liquid? Vapor?
To one digit of precision, how much water is there on Earth?

How much denser is air at 100% humidity than completely dry air at 20C and 1 atmosphere?

What is the coefficient of thermal expansion of water at 20C?

How many joules does it take to raise 1m^3 of water from the ocean to the top of Lake Powell?
How many joules to evaporate it?

(BTW: I know about trick question(s))

ScottKelly
ScottKelly

Seems like we should get on top of desalinization in using ocean water to refill our fresh water lakes and ponds. Would help restore the balance and theoretically solve the problem of ocean level rise.

MSjbhatti
MSjbhatti

Real time satellite  imagery willbe available to poor communities when fear of war among nations is finished. This facility will ensure all kinds of projects and will ultimately eliminatepoverty. 

SMoo
SMoo

May want to do some fact checking on the Las Vegas water usage / Lake Mead statistics. Lake Mead provides water for people in southern California, Arizona, as well as Nevada. A main source of depletion of Lake Mead's water has been for irrigation in California, not to mention the increased populations all over the southwest during that time period. Attributing the low water level to one city's growth? Not all together true.

http://www.usbr.gov/projects/Project.jsp?proj_Name=Boulder%20Canyon%20Project%20-%20Hoover%20Dam

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/water-environment/lake-mead-shrinks-california-uses-more-its-share-water

76Manu76
76Manu76

@conderuiz @idebarron LA tontería es que creáis que está provocado por la acción del hombre, en la línea de las armas químicas de Siria, Sr

BillRymer
BillRymer

@PeterPollock  Don't worry about being out of time. There is nothing of any significance that mankind can do about climate in the first place. Real data is always good to have regardless, but (thank goodness) we have essentially negligible ability to affect climate or weather. Who would you like to see given that rudder to manipulate ?  Go back to 100% prehistoric practices about the time fire was discovered and stay that way for 2 or 3 decades and the effect is only minor. By the time you do that,  a natural cooling cycle may start up anyway and all we would have done is made fools of ourselves at an expense no one is willing to incur. Our maximum percentage control over climate is so small it is simply negligible. Then remember that you might get 5% of the earth's population to exercise that negligible control and what you have is maybe 1/20 of zero. Just forget it. 

Bill, Pax River. 

PeterPollock
PeterPollock

@ScottSinnock Think you may be focusing oo much on one particular place on the Earth.  I can tell you that the glaciers and ice on top of Mt Klimanjaro (Afica) are disappearing - quickly.  I know that because I spoke to scientists who were desperately taking ice core samples to try to sve the historical records buriend in that ice.  Likewise, i can also tell you that small individual glaciers in places like the High Sierras are disappearing and will soon be gone forever - climbers know this.  It's important to realize that changes in the Earth's climate are happening differetly at different places.  So while some glaciers are generally retreating, in some other locations there may appear to be small changes.

jonwoods
jonwoods moderator

@PaulLauenstein Thanks for writing - you may need to view the page on a more high-resolution monitor, or ensure your browser is maximized. Sorry for the trouble - we agree! Explore the world is the way to go.

PeterPollock
PeterPollock

@ThinkingCritically  So for the sake of one issue about penguins - you are willing to throw out all this data being displayed in this TimeLapse.  Is that really "critcal hinking"?

LauraXOTG
LauraXOTG

@Lakewaylady: @TIME Used it to watch what happened to our lake with the drought. Awful.” Ditto for deforestation of rainforests :(

ScottSinnock
ScottSinnock

@'RikSmoody Actually humid air is less dense than dry air, cet paribus, you are basically replacing nitrogen (N2 = atomic weight 14) with water (H2O = atomic weight =10) 

Zaida_Lak
Zaida_Lak

@elionnor Claro que sí profa, ¿mañana andará en la facu o dónde se lo llevo?

ScottSinnock
ScottSinnock

@PeterPollock And in yet other places glaciers are advancing, like the south slope of the Northern Cascades (north slopes retreating, or perhaps I got them vis-a-versa). Mt Shasta glaciers seem to be growing, those in Glacier National Park are disappearing rapidly, some of those in the Tweedsmuir area of BC are "galloping", ie. surging rapidly (which may be an increase in shedding ice, so a facet of shrinking, but the fronts are advancing). So it is not a simple story of "glaciers are melting". sure they are. some of them. Some seem to be growing as well. Overall? I don't know, and I suspect few if any do; but some are starting to work on it rather that shout the shibboleth "climate change" whenever a retreating glacier is photographed. Anecdotes sway passions, statistics sway the intellect.

wmshorr
wmshorr

@jonwoods@PaulLauenstein What resolution and browser do I need, and where should the "Explore the world" button be?

BillRymer
BillRymer

@ScottSinnock @'RikSmoody  -- I am no chemist but is there some reason why water molecules REPLACE air molecules in damp air as opposed to  being additive ?  Why are you replacing as opposed to adding ?  I would have thought that temperature was the main determinant on air density anyway, not moisture (?) 

Zaida_Lak
Zaida_Lak

@elionnor de hecho, para cuando lo ocupa, ya vi que lo tengo que entregar el viernes.

jonwoods
jonwoods moderator

@wmshorr you can use any browser, but to see the "Explore the World" function, you need a browser width of no less than 1125 pixels in width. Thanks for writing!

ScottSinnock
ScottSinnock

@BillRymer @ScottSinnock@'RikSmoody Sum of partial pressures equals total pressure. Total pressure depends on the number of molecules banging against a pressure gauge and how fast they are moving (i.e. their temperature). The number of molecules in the air remains constant if the pressure and temperature remain constant, like wherever we might collect a sample. So if one type of molecule goes up, another must go down, so the partial pressures still add up to the total (which has not changed, cet paribus). It's all a consequence of what chemists call the Ideal Gas Law(s). Why? I don't know, it just happens that way.

elionnor
elionnor

@Zaida_Lak ¿Te parece bien el viernes? Supongo irás al examen de Pepe, ¿no?