The Vanishing Face of Gaia | The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning

Important Reading | The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning | James Lovelock

books:


	• The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning James Lovelock Basic Books, 2009 - 288 pages average customer review:based on 21 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

highly recommended

"There are no set of rules or prescription for living with GAIA, there are only consequences"

XXXXX

"-----GAIA THEORY:

A view of the Earth introduced in the 1980s that sees it as a self-regulating system made up from the totality of organisms, the surface rocks, the oceans, and the atmosphere tightly coupled as an evolving system. The theory sees the system as having a goal--the regulation of surface conditions so as always to be favourable for contemporary life as possible. It is based on observations and theoretical models; it...has made eight successful predictions."

The above comes from the glossary of the engrossing and slim book by James Lovelock (who is 90 years old). He is an independent scientist, inventor, author, researcher, environmentalist, and futurist who lives in southwest England. Lovelock is the recipient of many scientific awards and other honours. Given his stature, this writing (as well as his other writings) deserve close attention.

GAIA (named after the Goddess of Earth in Greek mythology) which essentially views the Earth as kind of a super organism has overcome its main critics to become part of a distinguished historical tradition of serious (if not controversial) science. Lovelock and his proponents regard GAIA as a scientific theory since (as stated above) it has passed predictive tests.

Generally, Lovelock, being an independent scientist, lacks confidence in mainstream science climate models. He makes the case that it's too late to prevent global warming (which he calls "global heating"). Thus we must think about how to adapt and act fast. The best chapters (at least for me) concern survival strategies, such as energy and food options. And he tells the reader:

"The few countries likely to escape relatively unscathed [from the effects of climate change and global warming], Canada among them, should figure out how to cope with the millions of environmental refugees that will wash up on their shores."

There is much to be taken away from this book. Some examples: I was initially surprised by Lovelock's preferred energy source until I read his reasoning. He tells us the "best available measure of the heat absorbed by the Earth." and "like it or not, we [the sheer number of humans] are the problem." Lovelock's thoughts on being green (or not) are illuminating.

There are four graphs and three tables found in this book. In the center of the book are thirteen colour photographs. My favourite has the caption:

"The 'Ice Hole,' the vast area of Arctic floating ice that melted in the summers of 2007 and 2008. Like the 'Ozone Hole' it was unpredicted and is potentially deadly."

Finally, don't know what the meanings of such terms as "GAIA Theory" or "Earth System Science?" Then check out the helpful glossary at the end of the book. (The meaning of GAIA Theory found at the beginning of this review came from this glossary.)

In conclusion, this is both an entertaining and terrifying book by James Lovelock, an independent, respected scientist. The fact is GAIA will survive in one form or another. But will we??

(first published 2009; list of illustrations; acknowledgements; forward; 9 chapters; main narrative 160 pages; glossary; further reading (references); index)

XXXXX

for more information click here

The Vanishing Face of Gaia

One of the most important books of the 21st century.It is probably Lovelock's final warning since he says so in the title.It is both a good read and a must read.

Important Reading

This book has a helpful perspective in assessing the growing dangers of global warming. Lovelock is a scientist...whose career began as a specialist in chemical intrusions into the environment...and continued to evolve as planetary scientist at JPL in California and in Houston. This book goes beyond his early specialty scientific work to focus upon the "big picture" physics of the planet. It's a perspective that goes beyond solely anthropocentric derived concerns. For this reason, it has the potential to be irritating...and even unacceptable...to some early 21st century readers.

To my mind, this is a all the more reason to read it and understand its message.

When the Challenger exploded, Richard Feynman, the Nobel laureate on the study panel, eschewed esoteric specialized explanations for the catastrophe, by focusing upon the contraction of the Challenger's o-rings in ice water. The failure of a complex system like Challenger...as the earth system Lovelock has named, Gaia...could be explained by something as simple as the contraction of the o-ring material in a glass of iced water. Similarly, James Lovelock cuts to the quick concerning the planet's ocean system...and the physics of the continuing melting at the poles...and in fact for 97% of the earth's glaciers.

Whenever, due to greenhouse gases...especially carbon dioxide...ice melts and open water is exposed, 80% of heat is absorbed, instead of reflected. This additional heating then accelerates ocean heating...as once ice melts it's 60 times easier to raise its temperature. It's what's called a positive feedback loop. Except, for one little thing....It's decidedly a negative for humanity.

As this science is fundamentally being accepted by the IPCC, Lovelock then proceeds to connect the dots in a way that the IPCC does not. Lovelock, James Hansen of NASA, and other prominent climate scientists have given their warnings. Locklock in this book, and Hansen in his assertion that 350 ppm must be maintained, in order to avoid the Gaia earth system from flipping to a new equilibrium, at an average mean temperature not to our liking...and in fact, threatening the survival of our civilization. Modern society shows no signs of effectively acting on this most crucial issue. The fact that the Gaia earth system's history demonstrates that this change of equilibrium can be quite abrupt, adds urgency to his warning.

He then ruminates, not only on the negative effects of the increased specialization of science....but also, on the flaws in the modern environmental movement itself. He finds them both wanting.

One of the points I find great sympathy with, is his stance on nuclear power. Though I live but six miles "as the crow flies" from Three Mile Island, I completely agree that the fear mongering regarding nuclear power has been an enormous burden on the truth. Lovelock explodes these myths effectively with several telling examples. Nuclear does not produce greenhouse gases...and storage is not the bogeyman all too many environmentalists assert. Good for James Lovelock.

What he does assert several times, is that the population of the planet, at seven billion and rising, is insupportable for habitable equilibrium...at the high level of culture of advanced countries....no less millions of third-worlders with the same aspirations. In this, he is quite sanguine in his quite correct assessment. He does not expect this historic population surge to cease anytime soon....certainly not in the 20 year span that Jim Hansen proposes. In one swoop, he calls into question the Sisyphean economic imperative of most governments and corporations, to service these growing masses....as well as the many religious scruples associated with population restraint. Good for James Lovelock.

He then takes Lincoln's dictum..."He has a right to criticize who has a heart to help."...to its conclusion, by surveying the possible interventions (and their possible side effects), to delay global warming, while humanity takes to time to reorganize itself to be good stewards of the planet....a term itself, he considers inadequate, and often applied unwisely, in its early 21st century iterations. And there will many such dead-end iterations...including skyscraper farming now being proposed for New York City. How exactly humanity reorganizes its settlement patterns, will be highly dependent upon a flurry of factors, some of which can only be imagined at this point, but the need for planning the reorganization of the world will become apparent, Lovelock posits.

In fact, in spite of this scientist's search for solutions, his realistic assessment is that the physics of warming has already gone too far for a happy conclusion. To him, it's more likely that the Gaia earth system will find a new equilibrium from 6 to 8 degrees hotter than today...a condition that James Hansen, of NASA describes as guaranteeing "a different planet".

It's this pessimistic side of his thesis, which leads him to envision how a new civilization, fully informed through experience, might evolve. In the end for Lovelock, it's his love of the living earth...Gaia, the Greek goddess of the earth...to which humanity must aspire. More than its dominance through force or economics, it is love for Gaia, the earth system, Lovelock proposes...as much as love of ourselves. It's a love, he urges to be put at the center of human civilization itself. In the end, this, he thinks, is the prudent way to honor the dignity of human life...to see ours as one part...the intelligent part...of the ever evolving whole earth system.

I was inclined to like to book and support its thesis, from my following of the work of James Hansen. As I said earlier, some readers might find this work bogus. Certainly James Lovelock has been criticized by scientists...some of whom see his thesis as not rigorous enough.

However, what is rigorous, is that their computer models on ocean rise have been off by 60%....that is, 60% short of reality. The report card of science will be its measure of the real world...not the cloistered laboratory. It's to this real world, that James Lovelock and James Hansen, and other highly qualified climate scientists, refer...and warn us about. In fact, this book is Lovelock's final warning.

for more information click here

Not as informative as I hoped, but well worth reading

I read this because Lovelock is one of the grandees of environmental science. And also because he's come out swinging against the traditional green establishment, by supporting nuclear power and geo-engineering among other things.

I found Vanishing interesting and sometimes downright alarming. Basically, he posits that we might very well be on the edge of, or past, a point of no return. The planet might move to another equilibrium point where it is hotter and will be difficult to cool off. Of concerns are things like methane release, CO2 proper, acidification of the ocean. Given that, Mr. Lovelock suggests that governments should start thinking in terms of saving "their" people. Notice the possessive. He believes the UK to be better placed, being on the ocean, than most inland areas, and puts its max population limit around 100 million. He does not really explain how the extra 40 or so million residents would be chosen from the large numbers of refugee candidates. There is an underlying sense of lifeboats on the Titanic and perhaps a bit of Brit nationalism as well.

But the book also falls somewhat short at times. He is pro-nuclear. Fine, that is an opinion I share as well. However his dismissal of nuclear fears is glib, artless and barely articulated. He calls radiation natural, which it is. But higher levels of radiation do cause damage to humans, so being concerned about them is not irrational. I expected a better defense of what he considers a very very necessary change in our way of thinking.

Likewise, he dismisses many of the upcoming green technologies as being driven by business-as-usual lobbies looking to cash in government and consumer spending. True, perhaps, but there are degrees within that. First generation bio-fuels, and especially their large farm subsidies, are a classic example of lobbies over reason. Can we say the same about all other climate-driven changes to our technologies and consumption? How does he propose we discern between bogus, greed-driven, proposals and useful ones? Again, he doesn't argue this point much, except for a very interesting snipe at the economic and logistical difficulties of getting anywhere with large scale wind power. I mostly like wind power, and assumed it made sense, in terms of scalability and expenditures. He says it doesn't and I will pay more attention to its critics.

He scathingly dismisses the science-by-consensus approach of the IPCC. Yet, while the actual physics of climate change is not governed by human opinion, I expect that its interpretation and, more importantly, what to do about it, would be subject of debate and negotiation. Nevertheless, if his dismissal seems a bit abrupt, it is useful to remember that just because our countries' representatives agree to say that a 2 degree C change limits risk to acceptable levels, that may not necessarily be true in practice. It might. Or not. I happen to think that public opinion has come a long way in a short time, though it might not be enough in the end.

On Gaia theory itself, I was surprised that he scorns the green mysticism surrounding it. He sees his work is scientific in nature. But, this being my first real exposure to the author, I had a hard time figuring out if he considers the planet in a solely utilitarian light or whether he attributes some special qualities to keeping it "alive" and protected. Some parts of the book made me think he does, some don't.

This book is definitely well worth reading, but left me somewhat frustrated in that it seems he bit off too much to cover. Large passages are biographical or contemplative in nature, leaving relatively little space to what I wanted to read about - hard information on how he sees the future unfolding and what he thinks we should do.

for more information click here

Celebrities drive hybrids, Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize, and supermarkets carry no end of so-called ?green? products. And yet the environmental crisis is only getting worse. In The Vanishing Face of Gaia, the eminent scientist James Lovelock argues that the earth is lurching ever closer to a permanent ?hot state? ? and much more quickly than most specialists think. There is nothing humans can do to reverse the process; the planet is simply too overpopulated to halt its own destruction by greenhouse gases.

In order to survive, mankind must start preparing now for life on a radically changed planet. The meliorist approach outlined in the Kyoto Treaty must be abandoned in favor of nuclear energy and aggressive agricultural development on the small areas of earth that will remain arable.

A reluctant jeremiad from one of the environmental movement?s elder statesmen, The Vanishing Face of Gaia offers an essential wake-up call for the human race.

for more information click here

reviews: page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

hot