Matthew's review

Heat: How to Stop the Planet Burning
by George Monbiot

[close]

blog this review

Copy/paste the text below into your blog.

<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1114270.Heat_How_to_Stop_the_Planet_Burning?utm_medium=api&amp;utm_source=blog_review" style="float: left; padding-right: 20px"><img alt="Heat: How to Stop the Planet Burning" border="0" src="http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1181109380m/1114270.jpg" /></a> <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1114270.Heat_How_to_Stop_the_Planet_Burning?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_review">Heat: How to Stop the Planet Burning</a> by <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/167756.George_Monbiot">George Monbiot</a> 
 <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/8168046?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_review"><h3>My review</h3></a>
 rating: 3 of 5 stars Upon finishing George Monbiot's Heat, I am reminded by what a public affairs executive at the Singapore office of an oil major whispered over at a conference: that the debate on global warming seems confusing because it involves so many issues. What do you think we can do? he said. For a start, read Monbiot's book. Not because Heat will answer questions, or make them simpler, but it will help frame the issues. Actually, global warming is easy to understand - the world is getting warmer as a result of human activity, with disastrous consequences for both nature and ourselves. The complex part is the myriad approaches to mitigating global warming, for many of which the estimated costs and benefits are still under debate. There is no panacea, no one single area which, if addressed, would be sufficient in and of itself to combat climate change. That, effectively, is the thesis of Heat. What must we do to avoid global warming?, Monbiot asks in the first chapter. His answer: slash the amount of greenhouse gases we release by 90 per cent by 2030. (This, he argues, is necessary to keep carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to under 450 parts per million, which means a two-thirds chance the world will warm by no more than 2 degrees Celsius.) The rest of the book has Monbiot, a columnist for the Guardian and visiting professor at Oxford Brookes University, poking through reports and chasing down leads, leaving few stones unturned as he attempts to find out whether, and how, the reduction is possible. His target is vastly more stringent than what governments are pledging, and Heat shows why. Monbiot damn near gets his carbon reductions, but only after renewing much of the existing housing stock, revamped the public transport system and energy grid, introduced hydrogen fuel cells and carbon capture and storage. Given the current states of political will and economic structures, all these are unlikely. In the chapter on aviation, even Monbiot concedes defeat, after concluding that to slash emissions there, humans must fly 10 times fewer miles. Besides this, Heat is a great example of the questions we should ask policy makers as they decide our future. Monbiot chases down the “denial” camp, showing that many of the naysayers of manmade climate change are themselves quoting spurious evidence. Writing on nuclear energy, he notes that while plants can, in theory, be run safely, plant operators in the UK are notorious for cheating and covering up on leaks. The book is best seen an a pioneering attempt to take stock of wide research, to cut through noise and blather and to try to come to hard conclusions about what, if anything, must be done. The problem is that in many cases, the information isn’t there. On how much nuclear energy really costs, for example, Monbiot quotes various reports, then says: “The only honest reply is that I haven’t the faintest idea.” 
 <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/list/132592?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_review">View all my reviews.</a>

Matthew's review
rating:

bookshelves: misc-non-fiction
recommended for: Anyone who wants some evidence on climate change
status: Read in October, 2007 — I have a copy to sell/swap

Upon finishing George Monbiot's Heat, I am reminded by what a public affairs executive at the Singapore office of an oil major whispered over at a conference: that the debate on global warming seems confusing because it involves so many issues. What do you think we can do? he said.

For a start, read Monbiot's book. Not because Heat will answer questions, or make them simpler, but it will help frame the issues.

Actually, global warming is easy to understand - the world is getting warmer as a result of human activity, with disastrous consequences for both nature and ourselves. The complex part is the myriad approaches to mitigating global warming, for many of which the estimated costs and benefits are still under debate. There is no panacea, no one single area which, if addressed, would be sufficient in and of itself to combat climate change.

That, effectively, is the thesis of Heat. What must we do to avoid global warming?, Monbiot asks in the first chapter. His answer: slash the amo...more Upon finishing George Monbiot's Heat, I am reminded by what a public affairs executive at the Singapore office of an oil major whispered over at a conference: that the debate on global warming seems confusing because it involves so many issues. What do you think we can do? he said.

For a start, read Monbiot's book. Not because Heat will answer questions, or make them simpler, but it will help frame the issues.

Actually, global warming is easy to understand - the world is getting warmer as a result of human activity, with disastrous consequences for both nature and ourselves. The complex part is the myriad approaches to mitigating global warming, for many of which the estimated costs and benefits are still under debate. There is no panacea, no one single area which, if addressed, would be sufficient in and of itself to combat climate change.

That, effectively, is the thesis of Heat. What must we do to avoid global warming?, Monbiot asks in the first chapter. His answer: slash the amount of greenhouse gases we release by 90 per cent by 2030. (This, he argues, is necessary to keep carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to under 450 parts per million, which means a two-thirds chance the world will warm by no more than 2 degrees Celsius.)

The rest of the book has Monbiot, a columnist for the Guardian and visiting professor at Oxford Brookes University, poking through reports and chasing down leads, leaving few stones unturned as he attempts to find out whether, and how, the reduction is possible.

His target is vastly more stringent than what governments are pledging, and Heat shows why. Monbiot damn near gets his carbon reductions, but only after renewing much of the existing housing stock, revamped the public transport system and energy grid, introduced hydrogen fuel cells and carbon capture and storage. Given the current states of political will and economic structures, all these are unlikely. In the chapter on aviation, even Monbiot concedes defeat, after concluding that to slash emissions there, humans must fly 10 times fewer miles.

Besides this, Heat is a great example of the questions we should ask policy makers as they decide our future. Monbiot chases down the “denial” camp, showing that many of the naysayers of manmade climate change are themselves quoting spurious evidence. Writing on nuclear energy, he notes that while plants can, in theory, be run safely, plant operators in the UK are notorious for cheating and covering up on leaks.

The book is best seen an a pioneering attempt to take stock of wide research, to cut through noise and blather and to try to come to hard conclusions about what, if anything, must be done. The problem is that in many cases, the information isn’t there. On how much nuclear energy really costs, for example, Monbiot quotes various reports, then says: “The only honest reply is that I haven’t the faintest idea.”
...less

Like this review? yes flag

comments (showing 0-0 of 0)

newest »

date

all Matthew's books »