Environment and Nature Books

The cover and description of this book makes it sound like it details easy and painless ways to be more environmentally friendly, or possibly a book telling you how certain things you think are environmentally friendly really aren't. In reality, it is an advertisement for companies that bill themselves as "green." All it does is list companies in different categories that bill themselves as environmentally friendly. If you are interested enough in the environment to pick up this book, you probably already know about a lot of them. You can find everything this book tells you for free on the internet if you are interested in making a purchase in one of these categories. But even easier (and lazier) is to just not buy this stuff in the first place. Don't waste your money on this book- just think of the trees you'll save!

One of the few environment frienldy-go green books that I am actually hanging onto. Great resources listed for the consumer from clothing, to energy sources, to food. Compact, easy to read, and makes going green doable.

Good book, lots of info & websites and references for those of us who are lazy, but want to help the environment.

The average person needs to feel empowered to make change at their level. Let's face it, most people don't write letters to their politicians or participate in local debates about the environment (more people should do this). The reality is many of us are caught up in the race of raising children, paying bills, etc. I like how this book empowers the average citizen to make better choices. If we all think that our minor impact is unimportant, then we are taking a few steps back. Who cares if being green is trendy? I rather have it become trendy than unpopular like it was 35 years ago (reserved for only hippies). The important thing is that the trend begins a wave of change around the planet as to how we see the resources that are available to us and how we can best use them. Great Job Josh!

This book has compiled so many wonderful resources and information for any type of "green living". If you want to build, add solar panels, clean or eat green this is the one book that has it all. I refer to it as the green dictionary and use if as a source of info all the time.

A science journalist and a true believer of the man-made global warming theory, Mr. Weart provides a very honest account of the origins, evolution and present day state of the research supporting the scientific "consensus" about the anthropogenic global warming theory. This book allows you to see step-by-step how real science works, the mistakes, how scientists learn from the mistakes, the slow progress, the uncertainties, the limitations of the simulation models, and mainly, how a theory is built like a giant jigsaw puzzle. Consistent with the accurate account the author followed throughout the book, also the alternative theory of global warming driven by the Sun is presented. How refreshing it was to read about a global warming without the typical political biases found in most of the literature on this subject.

Since the book account ends with the IPCC's 2001 Report (TAR), it became a bit outdated considering recently developments. The reader can complete the story of what happened afterwards and up to 2007 by reading Chapter 1: Historical Overview of Climate Change Science, of the IPPC's 2007 Report (AR4) (Climate Change 2007 - The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (Climate Change 2007) or get the PDF for free through the web).

My only disagreement with the conclusion of this detail recount of the "discovery" has to do with attribution of the causes for the observed warming, this is, the process of establishing the most likely causes for the detected climate change, and this is a difficult issue, since it is not possible to conduct a controlled experiment with our planet climate. Cleary, it is a fact that CO2 has increased due to man-made emissions, and that until recently, temperature has had a similar trend, but in science this is not enough, though it is a very reasonable assumption. As recounted in the book and also explained in detail in Section 1.3.3, Chapter 1 of the AR4, the theory of anthropogenic global warming or climate change makes this key cause and effect relationship or attribution based exclusively on the results obtained with simulation models. Despite of the widespread assumption the mainstream media, most politicians and of course, environmental advocates that the science is settled, significant uncertainties still exist in the modeling, additional research is ongoing, and the limitations of the AR4 forecasts are made explicit in Chapter 8: "Climate models and their evaluation". Significant improvement in modeling have been made, and putting aside the demand-side assumptions and related uncertainties, some of the main limitations are still the same, as recounted Weart's book, and also as reported by the AR4. These uncertainties are: (i) water vapor, not CO2, is the most important greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, and the low upper-tropospheric concentrations contribute disproportionately to the `natural' greenhouse effect. As explained in the AR4, cloud feedbacks are a primary source in the observed differences between the several models used, with low clouds making the largest contribution. Water vapor in the clouds is the main responsible for positive or negative feedbacks, producing cooling or warming of the Earth's surface, as more or less sun light is reflected back to space; (ii) substantial uncertainty remains regarding Earth's surface permanently frozen (cryosphere) feedbacks, such as most of the Antarctica continent and sea ice, and scarce data hampers evaluation; (iii) systematic biases have been found in most models' simulation of the Southern Ocean (the water mass surrounding Antarctica), which is important for ocean heat uptake, again scarce data is a limitation. Finally, these models required parametrization to compensate for the climate physical effects not directly simulated. Among others, parametrizations are still required to represent the physical processes regarding cloud formation processes, radiative processes, layer-boundary processes, and the role of aerosols, which interact among them on many temporal and spatial scales. The climate scientists are well aware of the limitations of their work, just go to the IPPC site and read the "Guidance Notes for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report on Addressing Uncertainties".

Therefore, clearly we are still in presence of a work in progress, and the science is far from settled, and this is precisely my only disappointment with the book, as the author so easily accepts the existence of "scientific consensus", a modern construct that does not belong to the scientific method. This "consensus" is a construct necessary only for pushing a political agenda, not part of science, and in fact my concern is that it is hindering scientific research and the open inquiry characteristic of good science, as any alternative theory is now considered suspect. Why do I worry, because western society is about to embark on a very expensive enterprise to compensate for our society's carbon print based on incomplete science, while there are plenty of short term urgent needs such as the impact of increasing oil prices, the food crisis, and serious social and health problems in the poorest countries.

Despite my personal caveats, I think this is a great book and highly recommended it for the general public, regardless of which side of the controversy you are, and especially for those with a genuine interest in the science behind global warming. For those concerned with the science, I recommend reading this book together with The Deniers: The World Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud**And those who are too fearful to do so and Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, Updated and Expanded Edition, particularly the first four chapters. This trio will allow you to have a good sense of the real strength and degree of maturity of the science supporting the consensus theory, and a chance to compare it with the alternate hypothesis regarding the influence on climate of solar variations and cosmic rays. And yes, this is a serious hypothesis based on research from several sources that is still at an immature stage when compared with the vast research on the anthropogenic global warming theory. This alternate theory is trying to explain how the Sun radiation and cosmic rays affect cloud formation, precisely one of the main uncertainties of the man-made GW theory, and several authors even consider that both phenomena are overlapping their effects. For a deeper understanding on the real confidence we can put on the global climate simulation models read The Future of Everything: The Science of Prediction.

In the end, as the history of science demonstrates, the theory making the most accurate predictions will prevail, regardless of consensus, research budgets, or the mainstream media support. As Karl Pooper said: "The game of science is, in principle, without end. He who decides one day that scientific statements do not call for any further test, and that they can be regarded as finally verified, retires from the game."

The author Spencer Weart has been able to write a surprisingly interesting account of the history behind how global warming was discovered (of course, some people think that you can't discover what doesn't exist). The book is refreshingly free from the current politics surrounding global warming, it tells us of the people that noticed something was going on with the climate, and how they came to the conclusions that the earth, in all likelihood was indeed warming.

The book is not an introduction to global warming. I found it most helpful as a supplemental background to understanding current global warming issues.

Weart is a scientist (physicist) who looks at the history of the idea of global warming from its genesis in the late 1800s to the present. The book painstakingly covers material from over 1000 peer-reviewed papers. It discusses the important researchers, ideas and problems more or less decade-by-decade. It does a good job of covering the theory as it related to observed conditions at each point in time, and as such answers issues surrounding such things as the 1940-1970 cooling trend as well as the 1970s-era thoughts about a coming ice-age. It also gives a fairly good explanation of everything that went into the Global Circulation Models and how they should be viewed. Over all, the book gives an excellent background on how we came to be where we are as far as understanding of climate issues goes and it suggests why it is important to look both at the big picture and be aware of the latest research results. The book also gives interesting insight into the process of research and some of the ways the field developed and evolved and the ways in which people became interested and worked together. The conclusion is that while there are still many unanswered questions, the field has coalesced into a legitimate area of inquiry and there is ample and convincing evidence that we are in the midst of a warming trend brought on by elevated levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This would be a good book for any global warming skeptic to read. It certainly takes into account all of the wrong turns from the past as well as the questions and limitations that still remain. The reason that it is important to know the whole history of global warming awareness is that attempts to debunk or discredit it often use outdated arguments or fail to take into account the historical context of ideas or data that is referenced. Once you know the history of how we got to where we are, many of the skeptics' arguments seem misguided.

In "The Discovery of Global Warming," Spencer R. Weart's stated objective is to write "the history of the science of climate change"(xii). But, he proposes, the discovery of man's effect on the earth's climate is outside the rules of normal scientific methodology.

Weart argues that "the tangled nature of climate research reflects nature itself. The earth's climate system is so irreducibly complicated that we will never grasp it completely, in the way that one might grasp a law of physics."(ix) Isn't this bogus science? Does not removing the study from the discipline of the scientific method unduly permit individual or social biases to skew scientific findings? In Weart's treatise scientific discoveries are nothing more than the consensus of attendees, albeit scientists, at conventions. Conclusions which are the result of give and take among a cohort cannot substitute for rigorous experimentation and independent verification.

While admittedly the study of climate is multidisciplinary, that is not an excuse to sideline the scientific method. Weart counters, "such a logical sequence, with definitive results, does not describe work in interdisciplinary fields like the study of climate change."(viii) Thus it seems a questionable methodology is the founding principle of the science of global warming.

The scientific method instills discipline and methodology into discovery. It is a process based on four steps: observation and description which leads to the formulation of an hypothesis to predict a phenomena that is then confirmed by independent testing. Weart et al are hung up on the first step. They observe and describe a phenomena, i.e. global warming, then are convinced that mankind is the cause? That the earth is in a warming cycle seems self evident. Milder winters, glacial melting, land use and the burning of fossil fuels, are reasons to speculate that humanity is a contributor, but the cause? Where is the evidence? Where is the verification?

Extreme weather is reported and frequently taken as indication of man's effect on the earth's climate. The number and severity of hurricanes in 2005 seemingly raises that possibility. The biggest improvement in tracking hurricanes has come from satellite imagery which permits advanced warning. Just as the weather service uses sophisticated models to predict hurricane tracks, computer models purport to predict climate change. Predicting the paths of hurricanes remains unreliable and the models cannot foretell landfall precisely.

The inability to accurately forecast and predict the behavior of hurricanes escalates the costs and inconvenience of preparations. Imagine what the costs would be for errors on a global scale! Would not it be a more prudent goal to first be able to perfect models that accurately predict something "simple" like hurricane paths (or tornadoes, or droughts?) before we place our trust in climate models to predict something more complex as man's effect on global warming?

Global warming is certainly a hot button topic. Its relevance will not recede in the ensuing years but the politicizing of science is not the answer. Incontrovertably it is in man's best interest to protect the environment, but in a reasonable manner. Absent scientific verification of man's culpability for global warming, the difficulty is in defining the meaning of reasonable and manner. That is a political issue and, contrary to Weart's assertion, we have not "run out of time."(200)

As a reviewer of nonfiction I tend to rate based on whether or not the author achieves the goal stated in the introduction. When this book was written the shelves were far less crowded than today, but it still serves its purpose in giving the reader a layout of a surprisingly lengthy history in a concise and easy-to-read manual. Although it gives few details on the raw science itself it deftly describes all the difficulties as well as achievements. The book is appropriate for skeptics as well as reference users.

Quite a bit of the book details early achievements including the first calculation of global warming due to carbon dioxide by Svante Arrhenius in the year 1896, and Syukuro Manabe's computer modelling in 1958. The most interesting three pages are the final three in which Weart breaks out of scientific testimony to describe personal feelings on what can be done about global warming.

This book doesn't have the dazzle that the newer books (Gore, Flannery, Kolbert) have, but it's still every bit as worthwhile, and better for reference.

Well written, concise and precise in our fast moving world , of twoo much inofration.

As a subscriber to the weekly Grist email, I bought this for my mom to enlighten her with green ideas. She loved it and immediately started telling me things that she started doing at home and at work to make a difference for her granddaughter's generation. Another reason for them to fall even deeper in love - their environment!

Wake Up and Smell the Planet is nonsence and hard to read. I did not enjoy it.

"Wake up and Smell the Planet" is just as advertised: it details common-sense, and not so well-known, ways to help our planet survive us. The light touch is welcome, and deftly used.

every house in America should have this....
It is written in a manner that is totally doable to some level.
The author has also choosen not to insult your current way of life but at the same time asks you to ponder an alternative that works just as well.

I purchased this book because of all the high ratings. Being a 50 year old woman myself I eagerly anticipated a " WILD " read. Melissa Walker claims she spent some 200 days within the wilderness...I wonder how many days she alone was in the deep wilderness. There was not one chapter in which she wasn't mentioning names of whom she was with on many legs of her journey. It seemed to me like she took a few weeks of solitary sojourning and heavily peppered them with experiences she had with others.

I myself have lived on the Olympic Peninsula for twenty years. Within the last year I have seen elk herds numerous times (layed in a meadow and watched them graze) coyotes, cougar, bobcat, red fox, mink and bear. I consider myself fortunate but wouldn't blow it up and state that I live in the wilderness simply because I share my land with these amazing creatures.

I gave her the rating I did simply because she had a dream and pursued it. Some parts of it were informative and I did find it interesting to see when the named Wilderness Areas actually came into the system for protection.

I also felt that Melissa Walker was very blaise about the dangers that anyone may encounter by the " Human Animal " while hiking in the wilderness and the need to be prepared to protect oneself. Just two years ago a mother and daughter were out for a day hike near Mt. Pilchuck which is Northeast of Seattle and were brutally murdered

All in all I was very disappointed and would not recommend this book to anyone.

Very Inspirational when we all loose ourselves in the hustle of everyday life, I have adapted the saying Wilderness Time every time I feel rushed, it has a calming effect on me now, even being a outdoor addict, there are many of times I feel rushed in the outdoors. The book has made me appreciate that time more.

I did not give the book 5 stars, simply because there was to much reference to Melissa being with someone, in a resort, in a hotel, and not being "alone" as the book lead me to beleive, I realize all the people she was with were for resources, but it got to be to much. Pretty picky I know! I always felt there she be more to the story that never got answered or told.

My sister told me to read this book and I liked it so much, I returned the half read book to the library and bought one of my own so I could savour it!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (She is right, I live in Washington, and the Olympic National Park is west of Seattle, not east as the text says.)

I loved this book. I can't imagine having the "guts" to do what she did, I feel too vulnerable as a female. We are too easily overcome by strength, but I think she used her wits not to put her into these situations. I loved it when she hit the guy in the stomach for blocking her in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There were two mistakes in the text however: page 65 "when I thought I might encounter the largest predator to roam the wilderness." The male polar bear is the largest land predator to roam the wilderness I believe, not the grizzly, and upon checking several resources they seem to agree. page 73: "then the next day we drove all the way across the state of Washington to the Olympic Peninsula National Park, east of Seattle." Upon checking a map, this peninsula and park appear to be west of Seattle. When I read mistakes like this in books I wonder why they haven't been caught by editors?????

I actually learned of this book from the author on a rainy Georgia afternoon while touring her beautiful backyard garden which was part of a local tour. She and her husband Jerome were so interesting and kind to me and my tour buddy whom I also just met that day! This all proves once again, there are no accidents.

After our garden tour, Jerome led us on a tour of his photography gallery. He explained that he took the stunning pictures when he joined Melissa several times out on her wilderness adventure. The sights were spectacular.

Since I had traveled by car/van out west myself in my 20's and 30's, I was curious about a 50 year old gal out on her own in a tent! Immediately on returning home I ordered the book. I could hardly put it down! WOW, did she have some amazing experiences out there!

Melissa is descriptive in the scenery, the people she meets along the way and her personal feelings and challenges while touring our nations wilderness country alone . . . and with a few new found friends from the trails.

As a woman who's recently turned 50, I can relate to her own life curiosities of wanting to make a difference in our country. The fact that she actually made the quest on her own, and lived to tell the tale is so inspiring!

Her travels make it seem possible that I too could pack up my CRV and hit the road again with a more deliberate purpose and find my own calm inner spirit by becoming one with our Motherland.

This would make a great gift book for any woman who is at, or is reaching, that middle age point of life re-evaluation and personal self discovery. It's a book you'll cherish if you love the out of doors, animals, big skys and peeing in the middle of the wide open spaces! Her personal humor is a blast!

Buy it, read it, share it with others! I feel blessed to have met Melissa and Jerome. They are now a part of my life journey!

A comment on the reviewers here. When I see the word "denier" used as in "Global Warming Denier" it tells me everything I need to know about the person. They are ignorant of scientific method and the difference between hypothosis, theory and fact. And that is a shame, because people like them have been manipulated in the name of one "Great Cause" or another for all of history. (The Crusades, Eugenics, Prohibition - they all worked out so well.)

There is a need in humans to feel guilt about that which they do. A belief in a devine power (a god) handled this need for millenia. Since god has fallen out of favor with the masses, some new form of mythos was needed. The sane concern for clean water and air has morphed into a new religion. Like all religions, it needs leaders who live as they like while chastising their followers to live austerly (and send them money and gifts to pay for their guilt). It needs masses who feel guilty about (fill in the blank) and seek forgiveness from (fill in the blank). They receive it by donating money to the cause and giving up things that make them happy. In past religions it was slaughtering a sheep or giving a daughter to the temple, more recently it was giving up sex, drugs or alcohol. In the new religion of "Global Warming"....oh wait..."Climate Change", the congregation gives up big cars and houses or they salve their guilt by buying solor-powered patio lights and sending money to Green Peace. If they fly in private jets they save face and buy forgiveness by donating money to plant trees - CO2 offset or sin tax - take your pick. (Nevermind that when the tree dies the decomposition makes CO2 net gain zero - those science facts conflict with doctrine so ignore them). Pope Al Gore the First sits at the top of the hierachy taking up collections to the tune of over 100 million dollars while his followers carefully select the science they believe in order to be consistent with their religion and berate the unbelievers. To question doctrine is to be branded a "denier".

The earth cools for ten solid years? Ignore Occam's Razor. Explain it away with convoluted facts strung together to suit doctrine. All facts must fit into doctrine. Mars warms because of solar activity? It flies in the face of doctrine so pretend (even though it denies scientific method) that what happens on one planet can not happen on another. The ice record shows that CO2 increases AFTER a warming period? Just slide the chart over a little bit to make it fit doctrine. There. Now CO2 is a cause and not an effect. Doctrine is fulfilled. All is well.

I'm all in favor of freedom of religion. If you need it to feel good about yourself please worship in the fashion you choose. But science thrives on constantly questioning, testing and evaluating observations. If you create a religion based on loosely strung together observations, label it "science" and then expect no one to question it, your ignorance of science and history is sorely lacking. The louder you scream at the people questioning your doctrine, the more you prove our point about it being - at best - poor science and at worst - just another religious fad. Good luck with that.

The book? A little dry in places. Says little I have not already heard. Maybe it'll get through to some people on the fence, most likely it's preaching to the choir. Hope it sells a million copies. Maybe then I won't have to use stupid florescent lights in my home in order to satisfy someone else' religious beliefs.

BTW. I drive a Civic Hybrid and a Cadillac. The Caddy because I like a nice car and I am totally guilt free. The Hybrid because even if Global Warming is not real, the economic effects of it are. You won't be seeing $3/gal gas again so remember to thank the people who stopped us from drilling for 30 years in the name of their god/godess.

Let's see, should we believe the 95% of climate scientists and the IPCC reports on global warming? Or should we believe a man who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from oil and energy companies?

Source:
Writing in Harpers Magazine in 1995, author Ross Gelbspan noted that "Michaels has received more than $115,000 over the last four years from coal and energy interests."

Wake up people--global warming naysayers paid by oil companies are hardly credible sources of information.

If thousands of astronomers from around the world said that an asteroid would hit Earth in 30 years, would you believe them? Or would you believe a handful of pseudo-astronomers (paid for by special interests) who claim otherwise?

The book is way to technical. I need to read it but it is boring as hell. Most of the text is spent on minutia about obscure details. Buy something else. This book bits

This book is a collection of essays by global warming skeptics. It's pretty much the same old rhetoric that the global warming deniers repeat as often as anyone will listen. As usual, they downplay the green house gas effect on climate change and suggest unproven alternative theories like solar variation. The introduction by Michaels goes over the supposed problems with the consensus. They claim there are misleading statements in the IPCC report. They also knock Mann's "Hockey Stick" graph as being misleading and incorrect but again they only offer their opinion. They dedicate a significant part of the book to undermining Mann's work and playing-up the Hockey Stick routine for full-effect. They also focus on the observational differentials in surface temperatures compared to atmospheric temperatures. There is also considerable time spent on the notion that increases in global temperature have an only a minor effect on weather (Tell that to the people of the gulf coast and south Asia.)

Most of these arguments have already been refuted by several prominent climate scientists. They might gain a following among those who already deny anthropogenic global warming. This book is sure to please them.

They reach the conclusion that there is still much work to be done to fully understand climate change and that policy makers should avoid making hasty decisions that could result in economic problems.

I agree there is still much work to be done to fully understand our changing climate. I strongly disagree with the idea that we shouldn't take preventive measures to reduce the impact of global warming. Not all actions to reduce CO2 emissions will necessarily have a negative impact on the economy. To the contrary, the renewable energy industry could see explosive growth. There is also something to be gained from reducing our dependence on fossil fuels for energy production.

For those of us who really care about the environment and the future of our civilization, this book will have little or no impact on our views of climate change. The only thing it might shatter is the record for the time a book goes to press to the time it goes into the recycling bin. It is a boorish read filled with flawed logic.

Further proof that the circumstances of the earth's temperature aren't as simple as Al Gore et al would have you believe. Remember that the global warming alarmists including NOAA, IPCC and the rest have predicted that devastating hurricanes would impact the US over the past two years due to global warming. There has been almost no hurricane activity much less even one major storm strike the US during that time. If they are wrong about even one thing such as hurricanes that they were so certian about how can their opinion be trusted on such major issues as overall global temperature.

This book did a great job providing a brief early history of the car and illustrating the problems with them. The chapter on how to do without your car was informative and well researched but very repetitive.

This book inspired me to bite the bullet and become car-lite (I live a little too far from town to achieve car-free just yet). It has a lot of exciting examples of how being car-free and car-lite can lead to a more pleasant lifestyle, as well as motivation why it's a good thing to do. Katie's own example is also inspiring, as she has significantly reduced car usage while living in a rural area in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, a place with legendary winters. Now when I get whiny about putting on my rain suit in the winter here in Northern California and want to jump in my car instead of riding, I think about Katie and her husband biking in the snow of the U.P.

I'm moving out of state next year and won't be taking my car with me. Life will probably be more difficult in some ways but it's worth it. When you read about cars and study about them and think about them, it's really unbelievable the amount of death, destruction, and suffering that they've caused over the last hundred years. I've read a lot of anti-car books and this is one of the better ones. It's very thorough while not being too dry or academic like some of the others. Read this book and you'll learn things that will surprise you, like how much money it really costs a society when it uses cars as its main form of transportation. And don't forget perhaps the greatest tragedy of all. Cars gave rise to one of the lowest forms of life that the human race has ever known - the car salesman!

Divorce Your Car, by Katie Alvord, is thought provoking. In the United States of America, an automobile is many things to many people: transportation, status symbol, hobby, money pit. Alvord takes apart the place of the car in modern society (the focus of the book is on North America, though she does refer to Europe and the Third World in places) and roundly condemns our dependence.

Her book is split into three parts--the first covers the history of the automobile and other forms of transport. She legitimizes what I'd often heard and dismissed as a myth--the car industry bought up the transit systems of cities in the US early in the 20th century and replaced them with buses. The second is a laundry list of the negative effects of the car (which, I must confess, I didn't finish--too depressed after the first thirty pages). The final section covers alternatives, including walking, biking, mass transit, non-gasoline cars, and telecommuting.

I found the book to be quite good in outlining the problem and highlighting solutions. The dependence of modern life on the car is a dependence on convenience. But, to some extent, it's a matter of inertia. Automobiles are so prevalent and easy that many of us never try the alternatives, let alone use them in preference to our car. A strong point is that she realizes that car-free living isn't for anyone, and makes a point that going car-lite can have a positive effect as well. She also touches on the far reaching implications that technology decisions have had on our society, our cities and our lives--from subsidies to the development of advertising. It would have been interesting to read more about that, but what she did say was definitely thought provoking.

However, I do have three quibbles. Alvord cites sources extensively, but her arguments would be more compelling were the sources less biased (as you can tell by titles like Asphalt Nation) and more first hand. She ignores two factors that would affect my divorce. Giving up your car, or at the very least being aware of alternatives, makes drunk driving less likely--a good thing! On the other hand, if you don't have a car, you suddenly have a dearth of available camping and hiking activities. But these concerns aren't everyone's, to be sure.

Overall, a book well worth reading, especially if you commute a lot. Too bad they don't sell it as a book on tape!

Alvord makes a very convincing argument for divorcing your car. So convincing, in fact, that my husband and I will likely divorce our one and only car in the coming months.

Divorce Your Car explains the obvious--how divorcing your car will save money and help protect the environment. More intriguing, though, is the explanation of how divorcing your car will actually save you time.

How can divorcing your car save time, you wonder? Alvord factors in not just how long it takes to get somewhere (by car versus by other modes of transit), but also how much time you have to spend working to pay for all the costs associated with a car. When all is said and done, the car doesn't move any faster than a bike.

While Alvord does mention that walking and biking instead of driving have health benefits, her calculations of time don't include another big factor working against the car--making time for exercise. Many people complain that they don't have "time" for exercise. I used to complain about this too. But now that I bike virtually every day, making time for exercise is a non-issue. It may take me 20 minutes to bike somewhere I could get to by car in 10 minutes, and ditto for the return trip. But if I had to find another 40 minutes each day to exercise (plus time to drive to and from the gym!)...geez, no wonder I didn't used to have time to exercise.

By ditching the car, you can save enough money to work less (Alvord has some inspiring examples) and easily work exercise into your daily routine. As an added perk, you even get to help save the planet. What's not to like!

The wonders of the world as seen from a child's perspective are rendered beautifully in this story. I long to visit this part of Maine to capture the same wonder as the two girls, from jumping off a rock into the bay, to the sounds heard through the fog, to an oncoming hurricane and the preparations for it. Everything is described in calm language and illustrated beautifully. Probably McCloskey's most exquisite, wonderous children's book. A child will love having this book read to them--it brings a time and place to life that all children should experience.

Being a fan of Make Way for Ducklings, I was in search of other books by Robert McCloskey when I found this gem of a book. It is gentle, lyrical and so beautiful in it's prose and artwork. My children like to listen to it at bedtime and it lulls them to sleep each time. It is a book that celebrates nature and it's beauty. It's hard for me to describe but it touches me deeply, evokes memories of my childhood camping trips in the mountains.

Great book, especially for those of us who love Maine. You can almost smell the sea air, feel the wind coming off the water and hear the gulls in the distance as you read this!

The reviewer who found this book "boring" must not have much in the way of imagination. This was one of my favorite books as a child and I still remember it fondly (I'm 38). It doesn't matter if you haven't had experiences exactly like those of the children in the book. The writing and the illustrations make you feel as if you are there. You can practically smell the sea, hear the wind and rain, and the laughter of the kids at the beach. While drawing a vivid picture of a concrete time and place, the book also invokes a sense of timelessness, as well as of "deep time" and the ancient rythyms of nature. I think my favorite moment is when one of the girls stands in a forested area on a misty morning, her eyes closed, and listens to nature awakening around her.

This is a book about taking a break from the fast-paced modern world and connecting with nature (and appreciating its power), with the past, and rediscovering your sense of wonder. Written in the mid-50's, it was ahead of its time in some ways and is definitely as relevant today as it was then, if not more so.

I read my children to sleep with this book every night. They call it their dream book since they drift off to sleep with thoughts of sand and sea in their heads. The words draw beautiful pictures.

Ed Ayres gives us another example of breathless doomsaying replete with the usual warnings of environmental destruction and mass extinctions. What we really need to fear is the overwhelming hubris represented by people like Ayres! Yes, our climate is changing. It has changed many times in recorded history, with temperatures both higher and lower than the norms of today. The coast of Greenland was once habitable and verdant. In 1776, the Hudson River was frozen solid enough for soldiers to drag canon accross. The notion that our species can directly influence or "correct" global climatic shifts is ludicrous. Scientists can barely predict weather 48 hours in advance, yet they ask us to believe computer simulations of the Earth's climate projected 50 years into the future!

The real danger to our way of life is the unchecked and growing powers of bureaucracies that whittle away at our liberties under the guise of environmentalism or security. Ayers glosses over this larger and more imminent threat.

On November 1999, Time magazine published a set of fascinating and thought-provoking articles on a variety of subjects entitled "Visions of the 21st Century". Amongst these articles was one authored by Ed Ayres under the title "Will We Still Eat Meat?" and what a fascinating couple of pages worth of statistics and insight for those intelligent and sensitive enough to care!

While only the text of it can be easily found on the web (http://www.junkscience.com/nov99/ayres.htm ), it summarizes eloquently some of the resource-availability-and-impact issues which are masterfully detailed in this extremely important book "God's Last Offer: Negotiating for a Sustainable Future".

Civilized countries should revise their educational programs to incorporate this book into their systems while there may be time to revert some of the human-made ecological disasters that result from the common "Quick Buck" mentality and particularly the cruelty associated with animal meat consumption - but, unfortunately they will not. Well established meat profiting industries, as well as, idiotic religious fervor will get in the way to promote the perpetual and biggest crime of humanity. What a shame!

By all means - BUY THIS BOOK if you haven't.

In this 1999 masterpiece of activist writing, Ed Ayres eerily predicts what the future holds if humanity continues upon it's suicidal path of rising carbon, consumption, population, and biodiversity loss. Reading this today (May 2003) will bring chills to your spine. Everything Ayres prognosticated in 1999 has come to pass: massive terrorism from non-aligned organizations (bin Laden-ism), widespread corporate deceit (Enron), rise of mega-viruses (SARS), and unimaginable species extinctions. And for those of us who arenýt in denial and choose not to ignore, we realize the worst is yet to come. There is little chance of reversing this downward spiral... but doing nothing is too shameful to contemplate. This book should be required reading for all graduating college - or even high school - seniors.

After reading this very well researched, cogent analysis, I am increasingly convinced that the world is threatened as perhaps never before, that it is urgent that steps be taken immediately to move the earth away from its present perilous path, and that a shift to plant-based diets is an essential part of the changes that must be made.
Ed Ayres is extremely well qualified to write this book as he is editor of "Worldwatch" magazine, the semi-monthly publication of the Worldwatch Institute, a Washington-based thinktank that produces annual publications, including "State of the World", that aim to alert people to current critical environmental threats. Ayres is also editorial director of the Institute. His book makes it abundently clear why the following ancient rabbinic teaching that has been generally ignored over many centuries is extremely relevant today:
In the hour when the Holy one, blessed be He, created the first person, He showed him the trees in the Garden of Eden, and said to him: "See My works, how fine they are; Now all that I have created, I created for your benefit. Think upon this and do not corrupt and destroy My world, For if you destroy it, there is no one to restore it after you." Ecclesiastes Rabbah 7:28
In his compelling, well written book, Ed Ayres stresses the importance of what he calls four megaphenomena that are having great effects on the world today and increasingly will threaten the world's future unless fundamental changes are made. These are four revolutionary changes or spikes in variables that had been relatively constant throughout history: the carbon spike, the extinction spike, the consumption spike, and the population spike. Here is a brief summary of Ayre's discussions of these four important spikes:
1) The carbon spike: There is an extraordinary worldwide concensus of climate scientists about global warming and its potential impacts. After a thorough study and several reviews of their findings, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a task force of leading climate scientists from 98 countries, unequivocally concluded that global warming is already rapidly occurring, that human activites that increase atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are a major driving force, that global warming is a problem of enormous consequence that will continue to unleash devastating weather disturbances ranging from unnaturally heavy storms and floods to heat waves and droughts, and therefore it is essential that carbon emissions be cut sharply worldwide. There seems to be abundant reinforcement for these conclusions from many recent news reports of record temperatures, severe hurricanes and other storms, and severe droughts in Israel and other countries.
2) The extinction spike: While largely invisible to most people, this spike may ultimately be the most important one, because it threatens to unravel the web of life that sustains our everyday lives. Many biologists believe that we have entered the fastest mass extinction in the world's history, possibly even faster than the period when the dinosaurs died out.
3) The consumption spike: The global economy expands as much in a year today as it did in any entire century prior to 1900. This rapid increase in commerce is drawing down the earth's finite resources far faster than natural processes can regenerate them. Hence, along with rapid population growth, rising levels of unsustainable consumption contributes to many current environmental and climatic crises.
4) The population spike: while it took all of world history up to about 1800 for the world population to reach its first billion people, in recent years there have been increases of a billion people about every 12 years. While the world faces many critical environmental threats with its present 6 billion people, it is projected that there will be over 3 billion additional people by the middle of the 21st century.
Ayres skillfully shows how all of these spikes are interrelated. As world population grows and people consume more, more fossil fuels are burned, thereby increasing the carbon spike. As more land is used for housing, industry, and agriculture, habitats are destroyed furthering the extinction spike. When the temperature rapidly increases, many species are unable to migrate fast enough to higher altitudes or latitudes, and hence they begin to die off.
In addition to calling attention to these four megaphenomena that so threaten the world''s future, Ayres also analyzes why so little attention seems to be paid to these threats that are related to "the most world-changing events in the history of our species", and why so many people are unresponsive to the challenges that now loom before us. Among the reasons he thoroughly discusses and illustrates using many examples are the failure of the media to probe beyond immediate events for underlying causes and connections, the power of the fossil fuel industries and others who gain from a continuation of the status quo to control the U. S. economy and stands taken by politicians, media attention on side issues rather than critical issues, the fragmentation of knowledge caused by specialization so that few people see the big picture, and the creation of false extremes by corporate PR managers.
Ayres stresses that what we do now to confront the challenges of these spikes will determine whether human civilization can survive in the long term. In his analysis of the steps necessary to avert current global threats, Ayres, a long-time vegetarian who wrote an excellent article in the November 8, 1999 issue of Time magazine that argued that meat consumption will decrease in the 21st century due to the great environmental and other societal costs of animal-based diets and agriculture, emphasizes the importance of shifting to vegetarian diets. He indicates that the production and consumption of animal products is significantly related to increased disease rates, the wasteful use of water, land, and other respources, and many ecothreats.
In summary, I strongly recommend this book to every citizen, especially our political, religious, and industrial leaders, so that they will recognize the urgency of our current situation and the need for fundamental changes. It is especially recommended for vegetarians, because it provides much valuable information and arguments that can help in efforts to make other people aware of he importance of shifts to plant-based diets in order to reduce current global threats.

If I could afford to, I would buy a copy of this book for everyone I know and almost everyone I encounter, on the off-chance that they might read it and take personal action (or at least, begin to connect the dots between their own consumer frenzy and the fate of the planet). Although I was already aware - in fragments - of most of the looming crises mentioned in the book, Ayres puts it all together and makes causal connections: between the Aswan Dam and famine in the Middle East; between the shortage of wheat in China and rising prices in America; and if course, between a society gone mad for SUVs, fast food and mansions in the suburbs and the potential (or rather, current) disastrous changes in the world climate. The message of the book is that life as we know it is no longer sustainable, but if we act now, and act together (Ayres also makes a wonderful case for community as opposed to "survivalism") there is hope not only for life on this planet, but a better life for its inhabitants. Read this book; your life may depend on it. And pass it on.

Great book, covers vast majority of important topics, and written by ex-contractor with real-world experience and building knowledge. Def recommend.

this book was well written and fairly clear, even to me as a building novice. i was fairly disappointed, though, at how many of the green approaches seemed to focus on expensive, high-tech commercial green materials. i was hoping for a lot more on how to integrate traditional and very basic do-it-yourself techniques such as recycling used materials, mud plastering, simple greywater systems, and so on into existing buildings. in the end, i could hardly use any of the information in this book because i couldn't afford the materials. if you have the money, though, and are hoping for a very polished and professional look, you will probably enjoy this book.

As a recent Interior Design graduate I was looking for books to remodel the interiors of homes in a "green", sustainable way. I ordered this book but upon inspection found it to be more suited for an owner/builder. I ordered "Good Green Homes", by Jennifer Roberts as well and found it to be similar in that it would appeal more to owner/builders/architects.

A good reference book for any contractor new to green building.

Explains the basics of indoor air pollution and how to choose different building materials that are both "green" and healthy. Broken down into different sections, i.e., the kitchen and bathroom for example makes it an easy to follow guide. The check-lists at the end of each chapter offer an easy way to make sure you've considered everything with the project.


Dan Stih, author of Healthy Living Spaces: Top 10 Hazards Affecting Your Health.

I read the book from start to finish but found myself skipping over many passages of repeated information. Although the information provided was useful, the same exact info. is rehashed many times in the same chapter and throughout the book. The book format may have something to do with that with it's many recaps and review.

Good basic introduction to the green industry with much information.

This book does not disappoint. It is written in Mr Heinrick's usual style which puts complex scientific information into language the average person can understand. He doesn't dumb it down; he explains how a process works by giving first hand observations and his opinions. It was as if I was sitting with him in his woods. He explained the science behind our ordinary observations-why some trees are tall and other not, how they grow from center and lateral buds and how that can show age for example. This is a very enjoyable book for the nature/outdoors reader. I learned much from it and had a good time doing it.

I am always on the lookout for books that demonstrate a naturalist's mind to my students. I have often used May Watt's Reading the Landscape of America, which is still a classic in the genre. This semester I will be using The Trees in My Forest.

It is nothing short of a pleasure to follow Heinrich as he muses on the trees, their guests, their prey and their admirers in his forest. Heinrich takes the reader into the mystery of puzzling about why something happens one way and not another, suggesting possible answers where he has them, admitting his befuddlement when he doesn't. All aspects of tree life in the forest are covered, from seeding and germination to damage and decomposition. All attendant forms of life, from mycorrhizae to humans, are woven into the picture as well. The book also contains beautiful color sketches of various buds, leaves, fruits, twigs and fungi.

If you were ever looking for a smooth and pleasurable introduction to forest ecology - or just a good read about a good mind/heart still climbing trees many years after his boyhood, this is the place to turn.

This thoughtfully entertaining volume reports a close look at three hundred acres of Maine -- a forest ecosystem and the many lives it contains and impacts. Just over two decades before this writing, Heinrich returned to his native state and bought an old farm near his boyhood home. The grown scientist revisits childhood memories, seeing the whole and the parts with deeper understanding. He shares profound insights into biology and interdependence, evolution and population dynamics. Each essay follows a different strand of the web of lives: mice, mushrooms, sapsuckers, giant trees and tiny clubmosses each held up for a closer look. Heinrich seems more resigned to "progress" than I will ever be, and more optimistic about the future of our forests, but his lucid observations deepened my appreciation of the subtlety of natural systems and their ability to adapt. I could not agree more with his observation that "a vision of eco-system as life is a common thread that, if taught and encouraged, could unite all of mankind."

This book is an informal introduction to the science of trees. Heinrich, known for his studies on animal behavior, originally trained in forest ecology. In this book, he provides a general introduction to many aspects of forest ecology. Starting from the acreage surrounding his cabin in Northern Maine, Heinrich considers many different aspects of the trees he encounters there, from the overgrown apple orchards to oaks and pines, from tree evolution to tree geometry and tree reproduction. In addition to the trees, he also examines other elements of the forest ecosystem, including fungi, birds, and insects. End material includes a checklist of trees found in Northern Maine and an extensive list of references. The book is illustrated with black-and-white drawings and a set of color plates, all drawn by Heinrich. This is an excellent introduction to forest ecology suitable for general readers and beginning naturalists alike.

Bernd Heinrich's abilities in acute perception are well portrayed in this book. He possesses extensive scientific training and research in natural conditions - having published on bees, ravens and geese. This account ties much of that research to a wider view of those animals' home territories. It's a study of the patches of woods surrounding his home. What trees are growing there, and why? Which animals and birds are attracted to the area, and what keeps them away? What's the value of a forest fire, and is "machine logging" more destructive to the forest environment than the more traditional felling and dragging? All these and more questions are addressed here with deep insight and related with Heinrich's fine expressive powers. It may not be too much to say that if you own but one book on trees and forest environments, this is the one to have.

Raised in rural Maine, Heinrich returned in 1977 and restored a 122-hectare bush near his early home. Heinrich describes himself as "partly arboreal", but adds to that a weighty talent for patience. As he has demonstrated in other books, he can sit for hours observing birds and insects. Trees require a different sort of patience; one that needs the additional dedication to record changes over lengthy time periods. He studies their growth and how they spread their offspring around the land. Which trees are shade-tolerant and which need extensive sunlight? Which ones encourage certain insects or birds, and how. Which ones attract them and how? He describes the way trees draw water from the ground - a molecule at a time at the leaf end, not "pumped" from below. Consider the evolutionary steps that led a species of pine to retain its seeds until very special conditions ensue. The cone housing them pops open and disperses them only when the temperature reaches 60 degrees - heat that can only be generated by a forest fire.

We all abhor the destructive force of a forest fire, but that's only because we fail to consider the forest from the tree's longer perspective. As trees die and fall, new patches of soil are exposed to the sun, bringing in species competing for resources. Fire is the only way to cleanse the forest floor and eliminate some trees shading others. As recovery species emerge, moose and other browser species again populate the forest. More birds and small mammals also arrive, extending the diversity but also acting as tree predators. Heinrich's account of how trees control predation is enlightening. One is tempted to ask whether a tree "thinks". As he makes clear, however, the control is part of the co-evolutionary process of a tree and its environment.

Logging is another intrusion on forests and Heinrich is scathing at how the industry handles the forest. Centred on the ubiquitous white pine, lumbering his area goes back to the early colonial period. At one time Bangor, Maine, was the greatest lumber shipping port in the world - in thirty years its population jumped from 277 to over fourteen thousand. "Clear-cutting" does more than just remove trees. It destroys the foundation of mycorrhizal fungi that are part of the tree's nutritional network. The replacement of felled trees by plantations of single types denies the development of the proper ecological balance a true forest requires to flourish. The next generation of trees is shorter and less robust than those first taken. On the other hand, Heinrich notes the differing impact on the forest when trees are felled and removed by horse, dragged out on a skid or both felled and removed by a huge mechanism. The giant "cutter-buncher" was the least environmentally damaging!

Heinrich's prose style, which, translated into classroom lectures surely keeps attendance high, gives the reader a sense of being right in company during his wanderings and watchings. Under his deft touch, the word "ecology" rises above the status of "environmentalist" buzzword. Without ever using the term, he demonstrates the importance of understanding the interacting of all the parts of a forest, from microbes to arboreal giants. The reader isn't overwhelmed by technicalities, but the science of his account permeates every page. Add to that expressive ability, the detailed drawings, images of trees and their components, capped by sweeping aerial photographs all provide the panorama a forest requires to tell its story completely. Heinrich provides the narrative, but it's the forest itself dictating the account. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]