Name: Under a White Sky
ISBN: 9781847925442

Elizabeth Kolbert

The Nature of the Future

Under a White Sky

The Pulitzer Prize-winning author of The Sixth Extinction returns to humanity's transformative impact on the environment, now asking: After doing so much damage, can we change nature, this time to save it? "A superb and honest reflection of our extraordinary time."--Nature That man should have dominion "over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth" is a prophecy that has hardened into fact. So pervasive are human impacts on the planet that it's said we live in a new geological epoch: the Anthropocene. In Under a White Sky, Elizabeth Kolbert takes a hard look at the new world we are creating. Along the way, she meets biologists who are trying to preserve the world's rarest fish, which lives in a single tiny pool in the middle of the Mojave; engineers who are turning carbon emissions to stone in Iceland; Australian researchers who are trying to develop a super coral that can survive on a hotter globe; and physicists who are contemplating shooting tiny diamonds into the stratosphere to cool the earth. One way to look at human civilization, says Kolbert, is as a ten-thousand-year exercise in defying nature. In The Sixth Extinction, she explored the ways in which our capacity for destruction has reshaped the natural world. Now she examines how the very sorts of interventions that have imperiled our planet are increasingly seen as the only hope for its salvation. By turns inspiring, terrifying, and darkly comic, Under a White Sky is an utterly original examination of the challenges we face.

Bahasan tentang dampak dari hewan invasifnya informatif, dan aku cukup mengapresiasi update tentang metode-metode yang sedang diuji untuk mengatasi kerusakan lingkungan. Tapi overall, tulisannya lempeng dan kurang diberdayakan sebagai media aktivisme. Kolbert berulang kali mengangkat isu bahwa solusi untuk satu hal bisa jadi masalah di sisi lain. Ini pedang bermata dua, yang bisa membuat makin putus asa, atau justru bisa kembali memantik harapan. Tapi akhirnya penulis melempar balik kepada pembaca; silahkan jalin informasi-informasi ini dan buat kesimpulan sendiri. Sah-sah saja sih, cuma rasanya seperti menyia-nyiakan kesempatan untuk menarik benang merah dan menjadikan bukunya lebih kohesif dan memorable.

Laporan tentang orang-orang yang tidak berhenti berusaha mencari solusi itu memang perlu. Dengan begitu, mungkin yang baca atau dengar bisa terinspirasi untuk juga mencari solusi di bidang masing-masing. Kalau rantainya bersambung terus, mungkin suatu hari muncul solusi yang benar-benar berarti. Kalau tujuannya begini, nada lempeng mungkin kurang pas untuk mengoper baton semangat. Daripada buku ini, rasanya mendengar TED Talk lebih nendang. 

Tentang solusi yang malah menjadi masalah, mengingat kata Pak Rukman, ilmuwan memang bisa senaif itu tentang implementasi, sedangkan pemerintah kita yang suka sembrono kadang lalai untuk mendasarkan kebijakan pada sains. Sementara, sumber daya kita terbatas untuk coba-coba dan gagal maning, padahal sistem yang terlanjur terwujud sulit diubah. Pusing. Sebagai warga biasa aku doa saja semoga semakin banyak ilmuwan yang masuk pemerintahan dan mengurus birokrasi, dan sumber daya kita tidak keburu habis diserap praktik jelek (misal deboning ikan dari US di Vietnam, lalu kirim lagi ke US karena orang murika GAK MAU MAKAN IKAN MAS DENGAN TULANG, dan semacamnya TT baru ngeh makanan olahan seterkutuk itu TT).

Andrew John Kinney

Elizabeth Kolbert has written a book about all the ways in which we are destroying the natural world which nurtured us and gave humans the chance to create civilization, science, etc. She uses several examples, and she starts with our attempts to control the Mississippi River, which have resulted in the gradual dissolution and sinking of southern Louisiana, and moves on to the introduction of exotic species in that river, notably Asian Carp, which are destroying the ecosystem of the Mississippi Basin's waterways. From there she moves on to examine the endangered fish which populate the waters of desert caverns in the western US and the attempts to save them by creating artificial environments, and thence to the story of scientists trying to breed hardier corals to withstand warming oceans.

I've seen beautiful and diverse coral reefs diving in the Caribbean, but something the author said stopped me: the degree of biodiversity per cubic meter on a healthy tropical coral reef exceeds that of the healthiest patch of Amazonian rainforest, which would be its closest terrestrial competition. Coral reefs are, as far as is known, the most biodiverse places on Earth. Approximately one in four fish on the planet lives at least part of their lives on a coral reef. And the reefs are dying, worldwide, because of the warming of the oceans. The scientists who are working on breeding hardier corals view their work as a way to save, not everything, but at least a portion of the reefs that are so vital to ocean life, as a bridge to a future where we have somehow stabilized the climate. And that way of thinking among scientists is a theme that runs through the book.

Kolbert next describes how frighteningly easy it is to modify the genetic code of an organism with CRISPR, to the point that one is put in mind of Margaret Atwood's MaddAddam books. And yet, used responsibly, genetic modification can solve problems; it can give us back the American Chestnut, which was killed off by, of course, an invasive species in the form of an imported Asian fungus. The genetically modified blight-immune chestnuts already exist at a New York university, but are confined by law to greenhouses for now, as transgenic species requiring federal permitting. Conversely, genetic modification can also produce bacteria that are immune to antibiotics, or viruses that are more deadly than Ebola and spread more rapidly than the South African variant of COVID. 

Finally, the crux of the book is in asking the question, what now? Forget about mankind's dangerous fiddling with the ecosystems of pretty much everywhere via introduction on non-native species, or even our so far modest actions in creating genetically modified organisms of various types. It is quite likely that the global warming that mankind has put in motion is too big to control without drastic measures, if it even can be controlled. And given our admittedly poor record at anticipating the consequences of our actions, what do we dare do? Shoot particulates into the stratosphere to dim the sun? Well, maybe. Because even if we do everything else we must do: decarbonize, deploy technology to scrub CO2 from the air, change our farming techniques, et cetera ad nauseam, it's too slow. The oil and coal companies managed to stop real action from being taken 30 years ago, when the timeline was reasonable to avoid the 1.5 C of warming that looks more and more like a tipping point. We will (and are beginning to) go through a period of time when temperatures rise to levels unseen in millennia, i.e., since before human civilization existed. 

But we could possibly avoid maximal disaster, including the collapse of most agriculture, by the "white sky option" of injecting a reflective particulate into the upper atmosphere, which is an option fraught with risk and uncertainty and moral hazard. Just as no one who was cancer-free would ever voluntarily submit to chemotherapy, in the world of the past with a "normal" climate we would not even think of doing such a thing as dimming the sun. Because safety is not guaranteed. The problem is, as one scientist put it, that we live in a world where "dimming the f-ing sun" might actually be the better option; it's where we are, sadly; we might have to use it to buy time to save ourselves, so we better understand it as well as we can. But the first thing everyone has to understand, if sun-dimming technology is to be used is this: sun-dimming is not a solution. It does not reduce the acidification of oceans by CO2, and it does not free us from the urgent need to decarbonize; it simply buys us time to get to a decarbonized world. 

And yet....if one looks at Greenland ice cores (and Ms. Kolbert tells an interesting story of how the US Army produced the first such cores, incidental to an idiotic Cold War initiative involving shuttling ICBM's around in ice tunnels), they tell us something both interesting and frightening: the last seven thousand years have been a tremendously unusual climactic period in Earth's history. The climate has been far more stable in the current period than at any time in the previous hundred thousand years, and that stability is the key to why human civilization exists. Exactly because the climate of the last seven thousand years was relatively reliable, relatively dependable in terms of rainfall, agriculture came into existence, and cities, and universities, and science, and all the rest. And the conditions that made it possible appear to have been a fluke, a lucky roll of the dice. Easily destabilized. Which we have done. Whatever happens, whatever decisions are made, the next ten years will be critical to humans and to nature, of which we are a part, whether we think so or not.

A very good book, and important for as many people as possible to read and understand, because hard decisions await.

Interesting exploration into man made solutions to man made problems. 

Crew

Shona Tiger

A good read, by the end; fascinating subject matter. Buuuut reads like a long long read, American-style.

Garrett Jansen

This is probably one of my last updates on Goodreads. I'm headed over to StoryGraph, an independent, black-owned website that has quite a bit of promise and a really strong recommendation system. Feel free to follow my account over there as it continues to get updates:

https://app.thestorygraph.com/profile...

As for this book:

There's an amount of insight into the changing of our environments in a way that points to larger-scale issues that are likely to impact our way of life sooner, rather than later. When we hear about climate change and the impending climate catastrophe, we often only think of temperatures rising and some sort of apocalyptic scenario in which we all burn to a crisp. I think this book provides an important amount of context to what's going on now in the world that is directly linked to these changes and how they're only going to be exacerbated without some sort of immediate action. It's a great primer for folks who want to know why climate change and human intervention matters, with numerous visible examples along with responses that are being considered.

Fraser Simons

This surprised me because I did not think I’d care for the granular—very granular—details on waterworks and issues with water levels changing, climate change in general, and people who work the water for a living. From fishers to patrollers, to scientists, the narrative is really good at being all encompassing. There are maps and papers and things supplementing the information, which was very helpful. 

It is also very overlong for a layman like me on the subject. I felt it made it’s point early and kept on going. I don’t need to be convinced of these things, as I do know, broadly, about climate change effects. So this was more supplemental than cornerstone for me, on a hyper specific issue. 

3.5 rounded up

Mattea 

An insightful and thought-provoking nonfiction book that takes on the assignment of researching and presenting instances where humans proposed and/or implemented solutions to problems by manipulating the environment. . A great dive into challenging perspective of humans attempting to conquer nature.

Cindy

(3.5 stars; rounded up to 4)

This was a really interesting look at the relationships between humans and the natural world they inhabit. Kolbert has a pretty clean, sharp writing style that helps distill what could have easily been dry subject matter. She covers everything from coral bleaching to carp invasiveness to the damming of the Plaquemines Parish and presents this mélange of topics in a journalistic format. Granted, the collection of stories feels like Kolbert's "Greatest Hits"; there isn't a whole lot of cohesion that ties the different chapters together and the collection as a whole ends so abruptly that I had to rifle through the index to make sure I hadn't missed anything. Nevertheless, Under a White Sky is a very eye-opening look at the ways new human interventions can mitigate the environmental damage caused by (wait for it) human intervention.

Christine Liu

Elizabeth Kolbert is one of my favorite nonfiction authors. She has such a knack for writing in a clear, compelling way that makes you think and marvel and ask questions you've never considered before. In her previous book, The Sixth Extinction, she catalogs all the ways in which humans have drastically changed the natural world, ushering the new age of the Anthropocene. Under a White Sky is an exploration of the ways scientists around the world are trying to undo those changes. There are people engineering unique solutions to combat a variety of environmental threats: invasive carp in the Chicago River and cane toads in Australia, Louisiana's rapidly disappearing Mississippi River delta, rare species that now depend entirely on human conservation for their continued survival, and, perhaps most pressingly, the problem of rising carbon emissions and global climate change.

That there are brilliant minds working innovatively to solve these problems inspires optimism. But these sobering portraits really highlight the extreme human measures it takes to keep at bay the problems caused by humans interfering with nature in the first place. We've already transformed the planet; how much more will it be transformed by these interventions, and in what ways?

Bryan Alexander

Under a White Sky explores ways humans are presently trying to protect or improve nature, which sounds much less interesting than the book actually is. Kolbert writes admirably, clearly explaining complex topics (scientific, engineering, local politics) with a sense of humor and keen eye for human personality. She also describes the nonhuman world brilliantly.

The book consists of short essays about different human interventions in the natural world. It offers stories about attempts to control Asian carp in Chicago, to preserve tiny pupfish in Death Valley, to resurrect corals around the Great Barrier Reef, and ultimately to adjust global warming. Until the last it reminds me of John McPhee's 
  Control of Nature
 (1989), which Kolbert namechecks as she explores attempts to protect Louisiana's southern edge from the Gulf of Mexico and the Mississippi. 

Throughout Kolbert maintains a tricky attitude, mixing empathy for human daring with sympathy for parts of nature suffering catastrophic change. Under a White Sky is neither optimistic nor pessimistic, but documentary and wondering.

Recommended.

Jorge Cimentada

** spoiler alert **
           This book was far from what I expected. 

Some people suggested it because it can help balance out 'How to avoid a Climate Disaster' with readily available technology that is ready for usage. The only chapter I slightly enjoyed on this book is the one about geoengineering but overall I didn't think the book is well written. There were sudden jumps throughout the text to interviews which seemed out of place. There was no 'real' explanation of any phenomena and when you found one, it quickly diverged to a quote from someone Kolbert was interviewing, putting you out of place. There's no depth in the arguments or explanations but rather a superficial account of some technologies that we're using to adapt the planet to climate change. I give it to two stars because towards the end of the book I started to enjoy the chapter on geoengineering but it was mostly because I find that topic interesting more than the content or writing style. 

Some things I took from this book:

- Geoengineering is literally playing god. We have no idea what will happen if we spray stuff in the troposphere/atmosphere to keep earth cooler. Moreover, there are difficult political dilemmas associated with this.

- If we stop producing carbon dioxide tomorrow, the earth will continue to warm and there's no guarantee that it goes back to pre-industrial times. In parallel to any effort we make to reduce carbon dioxide we should be striving to use things like genetic engineering to make crops, fish, coral reef and other animals which are much more heat resistant because heat will simply not go away for a long time.

Under a White Sky The Nature of the Future