What do you think?
Prescription for the Planet
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
September 2, 2011
I have to say, I'm pretty disappointed.
Before I turned to the first page, I already believed that our current energy plan is outdated and dangerous. Even removing the politics and the environmental aspects from the discussion and still, coal and fossil fuels are simply too expensive and laughably obsolete. So going in, I was on the side of the author. Let's stop using this poison and find a new way to meet our energy needs.
The three renewable energy technologies he covered; Integral Fast Reactors, Boron fueled transportation, and plasma converters, all seem like win-win options. If his estimates are correct, not only will this energy triumvirate be safe and renewable, it will be mind-bogglingly cheaper than the same-as-usual approach we currently employ to our energy needs.
So if I agree with his opinions, why the 3 star rating and disappointment? Because as a book, it's simply a difficult read. Not because it's too technical. In fact, I wish he spent more time covering the science and engineering aspects of the technologies. It's difficult to read because he's not an easy person to like. He talks down to his reader, constantly repeating the same points over and over in a manner that sounds less like trying to make a point and more like, “come on little simpleton, keep up with the smart man here.” Look, if I spent the time and money to read your book, assume I'm smarter than that. It does the author no good to insult his audience.
He is not shy about his political stance either. His jabs to the Bush administration were eye rolling, yet never once did he give a reason for his contempt. It is just assumed that we know why he hates him and that we agree. Yet, he did cover in great detail how the 1994 congress (in particular John Kerry) and President Clinton halted the IFR research that could be solving our energy and environmental problems at this very moment. The author was fair as he disproved each of Kerry's arguments pointing out mis-information and downright lies Kerry used to convince The Hill to shut down funding for such critical research on the eve of its final proof-of-concept experiment. Yet after explaining this blatant act of ignorance and deceit, he still spends the time to defend the guy and point out that he voted for him.
Perhaps I'm alone in this thinking, but if I believed in something so much that I spent the time to write a book about it, I think I'd be less likely to defend the very administration and even specific people who killed it. ( and not only defend him and his actions, but vote for him for the most powerful political position on the planet )
Then, after spending huge amounts of time explaining the ineptitude of our government and the villainous greed of corporations, he goes on to state that all IFR nuclear facility's operations and safety inspections should be regulated by an international organization run by a joint government treaty. As if one government didn't fumble things up bad enough, we need to bog things down further with international protocol. I won't go into detail, but his plan for “GREAT”, the overseeing organization for the nuclear program, is naive at best, and simply dangerous. That much power ( pun intended ) in so few hands WILL breed corruption. Privately or publicly run, you're asking for trouble.
So to whittle it down here a bit; the technology sounds promising and the book has inspired me to read up more about it, (that's why it gets the 3 stars) but the author did everything in his power to make me want to stop reading and throw his book out the window of a moving car at the feet of a crying Indian. He's simply a poor author covering a promising subject.
Before I turned to the first page, I already believed that our current energy plan is outdated and dangerous. Even removing the politics and the environmental aspects from the discussion and still, coal and fossil fuels are simply too expensive and laughably obsolete. So going in, I was on the side of the author. Let's stop using this poison and find a new way to meet our energy needs.
The three renewable energy technologies he covered; Integral Fast Reactors, Boron fueled transportation, and plasma converters, all seem like win-win options. If his estimates are correct, not only will this energy triumvirate be safe and renewable, it will be mind-bogglingly cheaper than the same-as-usual approach we currently employ to our energy needs.
So if I agree with his opinions, why the 3 star rating and disappointment? Because as a book, it's simply a difficult read. Not because it's too technical. In fact, I wish he spent more time covering the science and engineering aspects of the technologies. It's difficult to read because he's not an easy person to like. He talks down to his reader, constantly repeating the same points over and over in a manner that sounds less like trying to make a point and more like, “come on little simpleton, keep up with the smart man here.” Look, if I spent the time and money to read your book, assume I'm smarter than that. It does the author no good to insult his audience.
He is not shy about his political stance either. His jabs to the Bush administration were eye rolling, yet never once did he give a reason for his contempt. It is just assumed that we know why he hates him and that we agree. Yet, he did cover in great detail how the 1994 congress (in particular John Kerry) and President Clinton halted the IFR research that could be solving our energy and environmental problems at this very moment. The author was fair as he disproved each of Kerry's arguments pointing out mis-information and downright lies Kerry used to convince The Hill to shut down funding for such critical research on the eve of its final proof-of-concept experiment. Yet after explaining this blatant act of ignorance and deceit, he still spends the time to defend the guy and point out that he voted for him.
Perhaps I'm alone in this thinking, but if I believed in something so much that I spent the time to write a book about it, I think I'd be less likely to defend the very administration and even specific people who killed it. ( and not only defend him and his actions, but vote for him for the most powerful political position on the planet )
Then, after spending huge amounts of time explaining the ineptitude of our government and the villainous greed of corporations, he goes on to state that all IFR nuclear facility's operations and safety inspections should be regulated by an international organization run by a joint government treaty. As if one government didn't fumble things up bad enough, we need to bog things down further with international protocol. I won't go into detail, but his plan for “GREAT”, the overseeing organization for the nuclear program, is naive at best, and simply dangerous. That much power ( pun intended ) in so few hands WILL breed corruption. Privately or publicly run, you're asking for trouble.
So to whittle it down here a bit; the technology sounds promising and the book has inspired me to read up more about it, (that's why it gets the 3 stars) but the author did everything in his power to make me want to stop reading and throw his book out the window of a moving car at the feet of a crying Indian. He's simply a poor author covering a promising subject.
December 17, 2009
A must read for anybody (for or against nuclear power) who claims themselves to be conservationist, "against global warming", anti-nuclear, green, ad nausem. Basically read it if you can read. Well written, funny, above all informative. The book presents you with the landscape of the technologies and politics of energy. It is an unabashedly biased presentation; however, it is not a false one. Moreover, Mr. Blees presents a workable if not sci-fi-tastic solution to energy, energy-politics, poverty, water politics, global warming and general earth trashing. Imploringly recommended.
October 10, 2011
This is a great book for those of us who have little background knowledge on nuclear energy. Blees makes a powerful case that we should continue to invest in this technology, his discussion of the Integral Fast Reactor is enlightening and frustrating. Even if renewables continue to contribute to our energy mix one is left wondering why research on promising nuclear technology was abandoned. We obviously, at the very least, need safer reactors to replace our aging fleet. Sun and wind alone is not going to cut it.
Read
October 18, 2016I will have to re-visit this publication, as it outlines the first shift in my own thinking away from the mainstream environmentalist/malthusian line towards a more Fullerite view of human development and the general uplifting of humanity in a sort of secular, enlightenment sense; starting from the first principle of the material constraints on human development. The IFR vs MSR debate may not be touched upon here, but the paradigm-shift happened in a big way thanks to Blees' work.
May 20, 2009
This was recommended by a friend as 'the answer to our new economy'. I disagree. The book seemed far too simplistic. If there were really one, easy answer, I think we'd already be headed in this direction. For such grandiose statements as he makes, I would have expected hard science references. Instead, all the references are to things like magazine articles and others' opinions.
June 18, 2009
Erik - I decided to read the first two chapters and wait. Don't worry if it takes you a while to find the time. I did not initially expect to chapters to take me 111 pages in but the introduction is pretty long. I will just move on with other things and once you are at the start of c3 lets post some ideas. :)
January 18, 2012
Interesting and bold. Blees is not after half measures and aims for solutions to our environmental problems that add up. Idea of using boron as a fuel for vehicles was very interesting and I would like to know more about that. I had a feeling that in parts Blees was too casually optimistic about costs and technical obstacles.
November 22, 2012
A superbly clear and readable examination of the risks, rewards, and opportunities of nuclear and other sources of energy, especially when read in conjunction with MacKay's book Sustainable Energy Without the Hot Air.
February 8, 2009
If there were one book I could make everyone read it would be this book. A very clear map for the future. Integral Fast Reactors. Boron fueled cars. Plasma converters.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews