Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming

List Price : CDN$ 27.00

Amazon Price : CDN$ 17.01

Usually ships in 24 hours

Amazon Marketplace : CDN$ 10.19

Usually ships in 1-2 business days.

Product Details

Author : Bjorn Lomborg
Binding : Hardcover
EAN : 9780307266927
Edition : 1
Number of Pages : 272
Product Group : Book
Publication Date : 2007-09-04
Publisher : Knopf
Release Date : 2007-09-04

ASIN : 0307266923

Customers who bought this goods also bought.

Customer Reviews

An incomplete book on a complex issue (2008-02-29)

XXXXX"The arrangement of this book is simple.1. Global warming is real and man-made.2. Statements about the strong, ominous, and immediate consequences of global warming are often wildly exaggerated.3. We need simpler, smarter, and more efficient solutions for global warming rather than excessive if well-intentioned efforts.4. Many other issues are much more important than global warming."The above is found at the end of the first chapter of this intriguing book by the skeptical environmentalist himself, Bjorn Lomborg. Lomborg is, according to this book's inside back flap, "adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School." Through my own research, I discovered, amongst other things, that he also has a Ph.D. in Political Science. Note also that he is not a statistician but he did give lectures in statistics.The above four points are those points that this book revolves around. Each chapter expands each point into a discussion. Unlike Lomborg's first book "The Skeptical Environmentalist" (2001) which is quite long and detailed, this book is very short. Personally, I was surprised that Lomborg admitted that global warming is real since in his first book he seemed to be in denial that there was any significant environmental problem. On top of that, he admits that global warming is man-made.The real bug-bear with Lomborg is how global warming is being dealt with. He writes:"Global warming is happening; the consequences are important and mostly negative. It will cause more heat deaths, an increase in sea level, possibly more intense hurricanes, and more flooding. It will give rise to more malaria, starvation, and poverty. It is therefore not surprising that a vast array of environmental organizations, pundits, and world leaders have concluded that we must act to fix global warming."He goes on:"The problem with this analysis is that it overlooks a simple but important fact...From polar bears to water scarcity, as [Lomborg shows] , we can do relatively little with climate policies [which are too expensive according to Lomborg`s cost-benefit analysis] and a lot more with social policies [that is, use the money ear-marked for climate policies to fight social problems such as HIV/AIDS, malnutrition, malaria, and drinking water]"The first question I asked myself is "How can a book about global warming be so short." It's so short because Lomborg is cherry-picking facts to support his thesis. This kind of cherry-picking creates errors. I will mention only five though there are many:First, Lomborg tells us that the main problem with present-day global warming is that the Earth is heating up. In fact, this is not the main problem!! The problem is the rate of warming. Also, some people mention that the Earth has warmed in the past. This is true but not at such a fast rate that we're seeing now. Second, Lomborg implies that we don't know what a planet suffering from global warming looks like and therefore we can and should delay doing anything about it (by investing instead in social problems). Actually, there is a planet suffering from global warming--our sister planet, Venus, the second planet from the Sun. Its atmosphere is over 95% carbon dioxide which causes a massive greenhouse effect, raising its surface temperature so that Venus is actually hotter than Mercury (the closest planet to the Sun)!! Thus, if we heat up the Earth, we will suffer the same fate as Venus, making our planet uninhabitable. So the question is, "Should we delay alleviating global warming only to suffer the fate of Venus." Lomborg seems to think we should.Third, from Lomborg's cost-benefit analysis, he implies that the rich will be able to survive better during global warming than the poor. However, in his entire analysis, for some reason, he doesn't mention who caused global warming. Answer: the rich countries. Thus, as developing nations like China get richer and want to enjoy the luxuries of a richer country, their greenhouse emissions will increase. If these emissions are not curtailed, then global warming will increase substantially.Fourth, Lomborg's entire book is about humans and global warming. (To be fair, he does mention polar bears.) He does not delve into species extinction. The fact is some species of animals and vegetation are very sensitive to increases in temperature. (I guess Lomborg failed to look into this because it doesn't fit into his cost-benefit analysis.) Lastly, and I was surprised by this, Lomborg does not consider the effects of the internal combustion engine on global warming. He does tell us that "traffic deaths are one of the ten leading causes of death in the world" and cost over $500 billion per year but concludes travel is necessary and reducing it would cause us to have a "medieval" world. The fact is the internal combustion engine in the form of the automobile is one of biggest polluters and it contributes significantly to global warming. Finally, I want to explain my rating for this book. Those who can see the many flaws in Lomborg's book will give it one perhaps two stars. Those who are satisfied with this book and cannot see or don't want to see its flaws will probably give it five perhaps four stars. My final rating is an average of these two extremes.In conclusion, I do agree with Lomborg when he says that, "global warming is real and man-made." I leave you with the words of the late, great astronomer and planetary scientist Dr. Carl Sagan, inspired by a Voyager 1 spacecraft image of the Earth as seen from 3.7 billion miles away: "Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand."(first published 2007; preface; 4 chapters; conclusion; main narrative 165 pages; acknowledgements; notes; references; index)<>XXXXX

Agreed. Global Warming ranks; but once you cool the rhetoric ... (2008-01-30)

This is a wonderfully skeptic book by someone whole goal is as laudable as those whose books it debunks: to make the world a better place. Global Warming is a valid problem that we can do something about. Once you cool the popular rhetoric however, you can see that there are many other ways to make the world better still: Malnourishment, Malaria, and ... well, read the book, cool off on Global Warming, get cracking on making the world a better place, and let Bjorn's brilliance return to more pressing problems.

The other side of the story (2007-11-22)

Everything E. Haensel said in his or her review except the opposite.I do not know if everything Lomborg says is accurate. What I do know is that there is a great deal of hype and exaggeration from the purveyors of climate change catastrophe, including Al Gore. As an economist, Lomborg is highly qualified to talk of the economic reality of various options in dealing with climate change. His basic conclusion is that there are better ways to deal with the real threats of warming and that the benefits of warming are left out of the arguments put forward by the purveyors of catastrophe--many of whom have a vested interest in exaggerating cause, effect and the impact of solutions like Kyoto. Furthermore, worst case scenarios are the best route to getting research on climate funding maxed out for those whose scientific interest lies in this area of study.This is a book you should read if you are interested in getting another perspective.

Same as last book, no intellectual integrity (2007-11-15)

I have a fascination with reading what is popular in non-fiction no matter how idiotic the book appears. I have at times been surprised and my intuitions about a book proved completely wrong. That was not the case with this book.Lomborg, has nothing new to say, he has no specialization in education or experience that is in anyway relevant to the topic he has chose to discuss, and he has no sense of proper scholarship. One would have thought that the fire storm that broke over his last book would be enough to get him out of the spotlight, but alas, still a best-seller. As with the last book, where several of the scientists whose data he used said he had grossly misrepresented it, this book is full of false uses of data. I am actually realizing as I write this that there is one use that this book could be put to that it is better suited than any others, it could be studied by students of the sciences and social sciences in order to show them how statistics and data can be manipulated to make arguments that are obviously false. As a last point, I have no idea why best selling literature always leans towards the unspecialist, people read journalist Friedman on economics, instead of Nobel Prize winners Joseph Steigltz or Amartya Sen; and now they read Lomborg, who has not one single article published in a per reviewed journal on climate change.In closing I agree completely with the Publishers Weekly Review above: "Though he argues passionately, Lomborg's efforts seem more about pushing his opponents' buttons than facing honestly the complexities of global climate change." This is a book for ostriches hoping to keep piling sand on their heads, luckily for them, with more an more people reading this book, their will be a lot more sand to go around in the near future.

Look for similar items by category