Particulate Matter Science for Policy Makers: A NARSTO Assessment Book

I voted for this guy back in the day. He got about a million votes as I recall(actually about 300,000). Pretty interesting so far.

Reading this a bit at a time and skimming through all the data when I do. BC was a scientist so it's not realistic to expect him to omit all the data supporting the conclusions he presents. So... I don't feel the need to read all the numbers so I skim that and read the opening paragraphs of each chapter and the closing. Not terribly hopeful in any case. I read on wiki that he and Ehrlich had a disagreement about the need for population control. BC felt that it would be too oppressive and politically dicey in any case. The Chinese have been doing it but that's an autocratic government. Much better at getting things DONE!

Still interesting to read now and then. The "Trash" chapter is a bit outdated as there has been considerably improvement re-cycling. Enough???

Read the chapter on poverty and overpopulation, the stuff that got him into a dustup with Carl Sagan. I find myself much more in sympathy with the late Mr. Sagan than the wonky Mr. Commoner and others whose focus seems to be only on whether we can adequately feed 10-12 billion humans and not on whether its a desirable thing to have so many people as neighbors. I'm agin it! Not only that, but Mr. C. blithely brushes aside the concerns about expanding the environmental degradation associated with overpopulation with more of his recipes for how to deal with technology better(make it less polluting - duh!). Maybe if we COULD DO IT WE'D BE DOING NOW! Meanwhile the wild world keeps shrinking in the face of the relentless advance of "civilization"...

- Once again I had to skip all the technical talk in the middle. I'm beginning to regret voting for the guy!

Read the best chapter so far last night as the author outlines the clash between environmental activists(hard-pathers, the ones who try to confront corporate power) and environmental legislators/lobbyists(those who hang out in Washington and try to "control" pollution via the EPA and compromise with corporate polluters. Let's just say that Mr. C. is not in favor of the path of compromise). He says it just doesn't work. The problem for the hard-path activists(like Greenpeace) is that they seem to the public to be too scary/radical and anti-American and anti-profit. The true progressive path and the only one that will actually work if we don't want our planet to end up pretty much trashed a hundred years from now is the hard/activist path. It's a tough fight because corps. have SO MUCH money!

One more chapter to go. Curious that the author shies away from even the words political and politics. That's where much of the problem lies of course but he wants to steer clear of partisanship. He doesn't seem to get it. The political will... leadership... commitment to make necessary changes does not exist in enough force to make the radical changes required. Not only that, but our political system itself can't seem to deal effectively with the problem. Our government is poorly designed to respond swiftly and dramatically to ecological crises. We can only do damage control and spin. Serious and effective solutions will mean a loss in the short run at least of wealth, comfort, distractions etc. for spoiled, materialistic Americans. The Republican Party has been all to eager to carry on the blocking and denial so that it can gain political advantage and protection for its clients(the wealthy and corporate).

Finally finished this last night and it turns out he does understand the big problem... the lack of political will to choose environment over profits or, if you like the American Way of Life. Recent history shows pretty clearly that Americans are only too willing to remain ignorant, to be lied to, to stay glued to their computers screens and TV sets and allow their addiction to comfort, stuff and money to enable the continuous unfolding of an ever-deepening ecological disaster. Then, when the shit really hits the fan in 50 or 100 or 150 years from now they can whine about how "we didn't know!" Ditto with the disappearance of wild nature over the same period of time. The only "wild" animals left will live in the most inhospitable environments or will live with humans(squirrels etc.). Just wait for the first time wilderness protection is removed from an existing wilderness area when they find something valuable underneath. It's coming...

- BC calls for government to be strong in opposing corporate power. Not if the Republican Party can help it. And they apparently can! he doesn't come right out and call corporations evil but...

- Lots of boring detail brings this book down a bit as well as the lack of the appropriate ideological fire-breathing the problem(s) call for. Plus, some of the stuff is outdated. 3.75 rounds up to 4*