![]() For the most part, the tools are merely hinted at. What would make it a real plan? For me, it would be a deeper dive into how to implement these 100 solutions. Also “A road map with a moral compass,” which is also true. The introduction calls it a “play book,” which is nearer the mark. What this book isn’t, despite its subtitle, is a plan. And of course, arresting climate change will be the ultimate measure of sustainability It’s about sustainable development solutions. And they describe life returning to their land - flocks of songbirds, native grouse, fox, deer, and pollinating insects such as bees and butterflies.”īroadly speaking, in fact, this book isn’t just about climate change solutions at all. “Practitioners describe significant increases in income due to higher productivity and reduction in expenditures for herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, diesel fuel, and veterinary costs. Farm practices are so site specific, and their interactions with plants, soils, water, and topography are so complex, that measuring outcomes across farms becomes nearly impossible.īut what is also clear in the grazing section (and echoed throughout the book), is that many of the proposed solutions have multiple benefits in addition to their climate impact. In the area of farming - grass-based farming in particular - studies evaluating the collective climate impacts of grazing just aren’t there. Unfortunately, the section on managed grazing was disappointing. Basically, “biomass energy is a viable solution if it uses appropriate feedstock.” When it relies on trees only, the trees may/will grow back eventually, but that’s “a lengthy and uncertain lag time to achieve carbon neutrality.” Biomass gets a pretty tepid endorsement as only a “bridge” solution to climate change - useful only until cleaner energy sources are brought online. I paid pretty close attention to ideas that were particularly relevant to the Farm, like the entry on biomass energy. ![]() Given my environmental background, I feel like I should have understood this concept a long time ago, but I never did. And the relative ranking of impact - even if there’s likely a considerable large fudge factor, helps you understand where we might focus on first.įor example, while reading the energy section (by far the most straightforward chapter), a lightbulb went off in my head (a compact fluorescent one!): Because of the vagaries of renewable energy (the sun doesn’t shine all day or every day wind doesn’t blow consistently water doesn’t flow evenly year-round), capitalizing on the potential of renewables requires building a more flexible grid and improving energy storage. (There is an extensive list of references in the back.) This may leave a lot of room for experts to nitpick in any given field, but as a layperson, I fully appreciated the synopses. Reading through them, I envisioned stacks of research papers backing up each crisp summary. (All the “greenhouse gases” are converted to carbon equivalents for apples-to-apples comparisons). Within each category, it discusses and ranks different strategies according to each one’s potential to reduce carbon emissions. The book is organized into eight categories (Energy, Food, Women and Girls, Buildings and Cities, Land Use, Transport, Materials, and the intriguing, “Coming Attractions”). With it’s clear, clean, and attractive design - both graphically and editorially - it conveys an enormous amount of complex, often technical information in an amazingly readable and engaging way. There is so much to digest here, and the information within these pages works as an appetizer, main course, or dessert. We do, and they are and were.True confession: I didn’t read all of Drawdown, Paul Hawken’s new book with the audacious subtitle, “The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed to Reverse Global Warming.” I dove into many whole sections, but I also skimmed, scanned, and read lots of captions. And I thought we had some really bright, smart people. And so I was really so impressed by Al Gore's book Earth in the Balance And Bill McKibben’s The End of Nature and Jim Hansen’s work. You know, until I moved out of Berkeley.Īnd I knew I didn't know much about climate. So I kind of thought everybody was an environmentalist. And I was always an environmental writer and grew up in the Sierra Club and around, you know. Paul Hawken: That evolution, it started in 2001. I'm happy to be here.ĭave Chapman: Well, let's take the next step then from Natural Capitalism to Drawdown. The most complex, radical climate technology on Earth, is the human heart and mind, not a solar panel.” There is not a brain trust that’s going to figure it out, work out the problems while we ponder and wait. Paul Hawken: “To put it simply, no one is coming to help. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |