Hot Flat and Crowded

[helpfulgardener]

Thomas Friedman has a follow-up to his excellent The World is Flat entitled Hot, Flat and Crowded. Not quite finished but an integral look at population and it's overall effect on GW, consumerism and the New Flat World. A paradigm shifter for sure....

HG

[still learning]

Friedman's "Hot , Flat and Crowded" should be read by all members of Congress, everyone on the incoming Presidential team, and all state legislators and state executives too, in my opinion.

In the end it's mainly on the need for moving the US (as well as other nations) away from fossil fuels, but a lot of ground is covered, a lot of economics, manufacturing, research and development, foreign policy, the policies of other countries, and a fair amount of history. It's easy to find nits to be picky about and the book isn't a really fast read, but I imagine most of those frequenting this forum will find it worthwhile. Many people will already have detailed knowledge of some of the subjects presented but there's bound to be enough unfamiliar to provoke thought.

Some of the chapter titles are: Our Carbon Copies (or Too Many Americans); Fill 'Er Up With Dictators; Energy Poverty, Green Is the New Red. White and Blue; If It Isn't Boring, It Isn't Green; Can Red China Become Green China?; China for a Day (But Not Two). One of the titles includes "Banana Republic" in referring to the US, where banana means "build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything" as meaning a kind of super NIMBYism that could hold up necessary alternate power projects. Recounted in the book are some of the difficulties in getting approvals and permits to build a transmission line connecting a new windpower project to the main power grid; way more time required for approvals than for construction.

Friedman mentions that the notion of depending on a "Manhattan Project" to get us out of our energy/fossil fuel/CO2 bind is wrongheaded. The results of the Manhattan Project did end World War II in 1945 but it took the efforts and lives of millions of people to get from 1939 to 1945. Getting off of fossil fuels will also take the efforts of many, not the efforts of a relative few.

Recommended, but its not a "page turner". DB

[helpfulgardener]

Nice synopsis, SL. I like your take...

Especially the last bit, where you reference Friedman's "Manhattan Project" analogy. I also hear a lot of people talking about the Apollo program as analogous to the challenge we face, and that is just wrong. This is not a singular focus; it is not even a multi-channelled program with a singular focus. We need to be working in multiple-skill-set teams to come up with whole solutions (you could substitute the "sustainable" word there, but I am getting gun-shy about the overuse of that particular adjective) that address all colors of the spectrum on any particular issue? Sure, imidicloprid is perfectly safe for mammals, but if it is killing and disrupting insects including poollinators like bees, who cares? We mammals had best get used to not having vegetables or fruit if we want to keep using this stuff. Not enough brains looking at that issue led to a bad decision to ok it and many bad decisions to keep it (The NRDC is still awaiting the Freedom Of Information release of EPA's test data). The BANANA track is a good example of how a particular paradigm from one entity can tie things up if that entity is the one in control; multiple inputs from a number of concerned professions are far more likely to reach optimal solutions to ANY problem, and in the case of something as complex as GW, I feel it is a necessity... We must use multiple channels for remediation of atmospheric carbon (and methane and N2O) and there must be group consensus, not complete consensus, but a clear majority, only after weighing all the information. This book is a good look at that paradigm...

HG

[jollygreen]

I suggested this book for my book club at work. We only had a few people read it, but it generated a really good discussion.

As a result, in all our offices at work, we went down from 4+ garbage cans per office (1 under each desk) to 1 communal garbage can per office.

This saves at least 3 plastic bags per day x 8 offices x 5 days a week x 48 work weeks per year = 5,760 plastic bags we did NOT use that year.

I figure that is at least a couple barrels of oil we no longer have to import.

Small changes = big effects. Why not do something similar in your place of business?

[helpfulgardener]

Nice JG!

Welcome to the forum!

See you around!

HG

[atula]

I surely liked the idea u shared JG...it seems practicla and thinking why I di not think of that earlier...will let you know when we too start practicing it in our office....