Editorial Review:
Excessive burning of oil, gas, and coal is raising our planet's thermostat to unacceptable levels-a problem which as already resulted in increased natural catastrophes: storms, floods, droughts, and fire. Yet big oil companies have repeatedly hijacked efforts to slow global carbon emissions. The Carbon War is a major call-to-arms for the safety of our planet. Throughout the last decade, Jeremy Leggett, a distinguished scientist at Oxford University and former director for Green peace, has worked doggedly to alert human kind to the threat of ecological catastrophe, He contents that the main enemies-Arab countries, the United States government, oil companies, and automobile manufacturers-have used junk science, an army of lobbyists, and outright lies to ensure that their profits stayed safer than the planet's future. With the grace of a novelist and the precision of a scientist, Leggett recount his maddening interactions with scientific councils, international governmental meetings, and business leaders. Still, despite the government's backpedaling on eco-promises, the media's laziness, and fossil fuel company rhetoric, the transition to solar energy is coming, he argues. Called the "best book yet about the politics of global worming" by John Gribbin the London Sunday Times, The Carbon War is a riveting read and a critical contribution to the fight for sustainable energy.
Cached date: AWS Called=true
You may also be interested in these products:
These categories may also be of interest to you:
Customer Reviews
Average Customer Rating: 
An inside look at the politics of global warming 2008-12-05
I found Jeremy Leggett's The Carbon War: Global Warming and the End of the Oil Era quite
interesting and informative. Leggett, a renowned scientist at Oxford and a former
Greenpeace UK director, discusses the politics of global warming. He focuses on oil
dependence, while working in explanations of resulting climate change and the possible
impacts. It?s engaging because it goes behind the scenes in recounting important
conferences with scientific, intergovernmental, and business representatives, not all of
which would be covered by the media. He traveled all over the world for nearly a decade
while he directed Greenpeace's Climate Campaign, and wrote this account of it in a kind
of journal style with entries spanning from October 1989 to December 1997. I appreciated
his vivid writing style in illustrating scenes and people, which helped relieve the
density of scientific detail. While I had expected a dry, rather dull scientific text, it
proved appealing as well as instructive.
The first portion of the book concerns the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
which is a panel set up in 1988 by the UN General Assembly to advise governments on the
issue. The IPCC gathered worldwide input from scientists and experts over a year and a
half to formulate "consensus reports on the science of global warming, the probable
impacts, and the potential policy responses" (2), which is collectively called its
Scientific Assessment Report. At the time it was being prepared for the World Climate Conference where governments come together to decide what action to take. Leggett describes a series of
conferences with various governments, groups, scientists, and business leaders concerning
the final draft of this report. The first meeting mentioned deals with the summary of the
document. Strikingly, the draft states that 60-80% cuts in carbon dioxide emissions are
necessary to stabilize its atmospheric concentrations, a daunting goal. Leggett doesn?t
directly mention it but at least in the US such an extreme cut would be devastating to
the economy, with our dependence on oil leading to the colossal success of several major
oil companies. Thus throughout conferences in the book the US government, as well as oil
giants Saudi Arabia and Iran, refuses to set targets and timetables or make any kind of
commitment, arguing that the uncertainties over impacts make such action too drastic.
Legget emphasizes how scientists are certain that the current rates of greenhouse-gas
emissions will lead to climate change, but there is uncertainty over the degree of the
impacts because of the complexity of the climate system. Feedbacks in the climate system
are difficult to predict and almost impossible to calculate, making resulting climate
changes similar to a roll of dice. Toward the beginning of the semester we learned about
positive and negative feedback- positive leads to increase in a response while negative
contains the response, controlling it. In a warming world positive feedbacks would
amplify the warming by triggering extra carbon emissions from repositories in nature, and
negative feedbacks would suppress it (5). The concern is that the positive will end up
outweighing the negative. And the draft read that an overall increase rather than
decrease appears likely. All of this was more understandable because of learning about
climate change in class and about the carbon cycle.
Leggett has to deal with the frustrating responses of many people. Representatives of the
coal and oil industries, and countries dependent on them, deny the issue so their
livelihood won't be jeopardized. Others think that global warming is just a theory and
not a certainty, or aren't aware of just how urgent the situation is. At one point
Leggett gives a speech where he delivers his research of what the runaway greenhouse
effect or worst-case scenario would be. It describes how many island nations would be
submerged and coastline lost, unbreathable air, increase of famine, in areas of extremely
hot temperatures there would be many deaths leading to much conflict over water and food,
ect. He gives a survey on the worst case to around 100 different scientists- about 13%
say that they think it is a possibility. But the survey results are released to the media
who misrepresent the information, saying that only 13% of scientists thought that global
warming was happening. An oil company representative also gives a presentation and warps
the information because he is trying to recruit employers.
With this context you can really understand his vexation, and it draws the reader into
the cause. But yet his writing is hardly ever centered on himself despite the journal
style, but rather externally oriented. Other major points were the increase in coral
bleaching, which I hadn't known are the second major ecosystem in the world. He discusses
oil drilling at length, actually going to Siberia for an interview where a Texan company
is drilling. It should how drilling is happening in increasingly uninhabitable land, and
the Texans said that their motives are selfish, they don?t care about the earth and just
want to make money. Oil spills are another major issue. Each spill releases millions of
tones of oil onto the surface or in the ocean, which, in cold areas, doesn't evaporate
and breaks down very slowly.
The insurance industry is also in danger of crashing from paying the coverage of so many
major storms, which are increasing in frequency and intensity. Finance in general will
suffer great losses from cuts in emissions. After talking about insurance Legget mentions
a high tax on carbon use as a way to lessen emissions.
In trying to combat climate change I think the first step is raising awareness of the
urgency of the issue. Al Gore has admirably tried to do this, but the media has taken
hold of the topic and sensationalized it, which makes people less inclined to take it
seriously. Reliable information is key with this because of possible misrepresentation by
the media, as Leggett shows. This makes the public even less informed, and can be used to
downplay climate change to the public. Release of the runaway greenhouse effect
description could be very effective if delivered in a way that wouldn't cause a panic.
I think a carbon tax would help to an extent in decreasing emissions, but of course
carbon would still be burned. As the title of the work imparts, we are approaching the
end of the oil era. We cannot continue burning oil at our current rates for another
century without serious, even disastrous, consequences. This means we should focus on
research and development of alternative energy and fuel sources. Especially in such a
developed, industrialized, and technologically dependent country like the US, we are much
too used to moving around very quickly, making retrogression to earlier forms of
transportation out of the question. As alternative fuels are more accessible they will be
invested in, bringing back the economy. A huge issue is trying to convince the colossal
China, as well as India, to attempt to make cuts as well.
The Dark Side of Global Warming Politics 2008-01-18
The Carbon War is aptly titled - it shows that the rough and tumble politics of global warming is actually a type of war, one fought with political weapons in the finest (or worst) Machiavellian approach using deception, lies, abuse of power, money, and any other means of gaining the desired goal. Although both sides in the debate (big business and governments beholden to big business versus environmental groups) resort to various machinations and deception to promote their agendas, as this book clearly demonstrates from a personal eye-witness (of one who was "in the trenches"), the big business consortium is much more guilty of lies, corruption, and blatant mis-use of power than the environmental side. One reason may simply be that the traditional energy industry (petrochemical and coal) fear they will lose significant amounts of money if they change the way they do business.
This book would be interesting to read in about 100 years. If things do not go well with mitigating climate change, the book could serve as an indictment of the guilty parties. If things do go well, people could say "I'm so glad governments didn't listen to those energy companies".
Easily five stars. Also, unfortunately in some ways, a very eye-opening look at the way international environmental politics is conducted. It probably goes without saying that many large energy companies really do not care about what is right for the average human, they only care about what is right for their shareholders. If you are still undecided on whether or not global warming is real, or is an issue you should be concerned about, and you receive conflicting information, keep in mind as you decide who is most likely to more truthful - the side trying to keep the planet livable, or the side with the most money to lose?
(Second Review one week later, same Reviewer): Title of Second Review: Casualties High in the Carbon War.
Jeremy Leggett has written a fascinating first-person account of an environmental organization representative's front row seat to the battle waged during the development of the Kyoto Protocol. As others have stated, politics is really a type of blood sport, with the winners left standing and everybody else dying or wounded. As Mr. Leggett points out, the real casualties are the truth and the average person. Huge amounts of money are at stake in any plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and most plans will create new winners in the changing market, and also will create new losers. No existing company wants to be one of the losers, and they will do everything in their power to maintain the status quo. If you aren't already suspicious of the petrochemical energy business, you probably will be after reading this book. (Note: Large energy companies do not necessarily have your best interests in mind.)
The Carbon Policy Wars  2007-01-15
For a geologist Jeremy Leggett is a suprisingly good writer. As described in the previous reviews he details some of the history leading up to the Kyoto accords and provides insight from the participants perception. The meetings, the debates, the radio and TV interviews are all here. You will also read about all the tension and conflict that this global problem with its immense economic immplications brings to a head.
This book is mainly about the politics of the world climate change policies and does not have very much content regarding the science of climate change. I would have liked to see more of the science and perhaps a bit less of the details of meetings after more meetings. If you want to learn more about the science I would recommend Spencer Weart's The Discovery of Global Warming and John Houghton's Global Warming: The Complete Briefing. If you want to read about the war between Exxon,big Coal,corporate media, and environmentalists, scientists, and the countries that are first in line to suffer from the consequences of global warming this is your book.
Required reading for the informed citizen 2005-08-17
Many authors, in meticulous science journalism style, write good environmental science and policy books that are worth reading.
Jeremy Leggett's "Carbon War" is an outstanding contribution from the front lines. A journal from a key player in the carbon war, with insights on other key players on all sides.
Leggett puts you at the international summits, to witness the best and worst elements at work. There are many books that will inform you on global climate change issues (and some that will intentionally disinform you). But few, if any, let you peer into the international efforts (and counterefforts) to deal with climate change like the "Carbon War."
Climate Change and Politics 2005-02-04
Jeremy Leggett's "The Carbon War" is the story of how the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 came about, and how companies in the business of thermal fuel (coal, oil, gas) - Leggett calls them the "Carbon Club" - tried to derail the process of setting enforceable goals for lowering greenhouse gas emissions. It is also the story of how self-interest, not surprisingly, overrides the general interest; how the United States, home to some of the largest oil and gas multinationals and the world's premier carbon dioxide emitting nation, sided with the Carbon Club; how Australia, the world's largest coal exporter, joined forces with the United States.
The Kyoto Protocol will come into force on 16 February 2005. It has been ratified by more than 55 of its signatory countries. The United States, led by George W. Bush, however, walked out on the agreement in March 2001.
The fact of global warming is hardly disputable. The five hottest years recorded since 1880 were 1998, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2001, with 1998 having been the hottest. Whether the warming effect is man-made is still subject to discussion. But a full three quarters of scientists working in the field of climate change make the burning of fossil fuels responsible for the recorded increase in temperature.
The emission of carbon dioxide could be easily reduced if power could be economically generated by photovoltaic solar energy (PV). However, Adam Smith's invisible hand won't do the job in this particular case. It is a Catch-22 situation because PV will only be economically viable if the PV cells are mass-produced, but they are not mass-produced because people can't afford today's expensive PV products. This is a situation where government would have a proper role to fulfill - to jump-start a process that would help the common good where the mechanics of the market do not work. But unfortunately most governments do not care to do that.
Already in 1997, Leggett notes, "every country had its companies lost in skepticism about climate change. But in the USA the scale of the collective denial was unique." (264) Eight years later it is not much different. This denial comes at a cost, though. Not only the cost of becoming more and more isolated from global trends and losing the moral authority the USA enjoyed after Roosevelt and Truman established the country as a world power, but also an economic cost. State of the art ecological cars that really sell are not made by GM or Ford these days, but by Japan's Toyota. World-class oil companies with a comprehensive environmental policy are not ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco of the US, but BP and Shell of Europe.
Jeremy Leggett, by the way, founded his own company to promote and sell PV technology after he realized, with a certain bitterness, that his lobbying efforts to get emission limits agreed were not getting anywhere.
|
|
