The God Species: How Humans Really Can Save the Planet... [Paperback]

The paperback edition of "The God Species" by Mark Lynas has been withdrawn from sale by Amazon just as it was launched, after somebody complained it was "not as described". The author suspects foul play - and having read it I can see that he might have made some enemies.

But importantly - and this is the reason why you should read the book - Lynas's argument is so groundbreaking that there are a number of different traditional "camps" within which someone may have been offended enough to try to stop the book in its tracks. Lynas has been seen by many as on the side of the Greens, as he speaks about the need to avoid catastrophic environmental change. Hence opponents of the Green movement may automatically be opponents of Lynas. But in "The God Species", Lynas has taken the bold and innovative step of making strong argument in favour of using our technology to make us more responsible as stewards of the Earth, which he views us as now ruling with the power of Gods.

Perhaps most controversially, Lynas argues that nuclear power and genetic engineering do have a place in avoiding dangerous climate change and protecting food security - clearly views which risk alienating many traditional Greens. But the point is that Lynas has backed up his case with extensive and well-referenced evidence, so this is not an idealogical book - yes it still is his opinion, but it is a well-informed opinion which can be challenged point by point by counter-evidence if you so wish.

Lynas has successfully broken free of the chains of partisan views in the environmental debate, which must be a good thing - polarization of the argument has led to entrenched positions which will ultimately do nobody any good, and lead to underhand behaviour such as (in this this case, it seems) the suppression of free speech. But that is precisely why the book should be read - it's a novel, independent view about which you can make up your own mind.

My guess is that anyone who reads this book would find something they agree with, something they disagree with and something utterly surprising. I wholeheartedly recommend it to anybody that is interested in a fresh take on environmental matters, whichever "side" you think you are on.

This is one of the best books I've read on the environmental issues we face and how to solve them.

He convincingly argues against many stances of both climate-deniers *and* die-hard environmentalists with a more rational and pragmatic approach. By accepting that our species can cause drastic changes to the planet, we can choose to consciously manage the planet to stay within live within scientifically-defined ecological "safe" boundaries.

He argues that this can be achieved by applying (largely currently available) technology with affordable investment. Along the way, he illustrates how the often anti-capitalist and technophobic position of environmentalists is counter-productive. All too often they are as guilty of scientific cherry-picking to suit their position as they accuse climate-deniers of being. Indeed, he admits his own formerly anti-GM stance was based on exactly this kind of blinkered thinking and it was humbling to read his explanation for his about-turn. I even personally re-evaluated my anti-nuclear stance based on the much-needed rational discussion in this book. e.g. he discusses the dramatically reduced half-life of waste material from fast-breeder reactors, something I was previously unaware of and seemed missing from any debate on nuclear fission.

Except for the damning and almost painful to read outline of the species we've driven to extinction, the book has a largely positive tone. It is within our means for even an increased population to live safely on this planet with access for all to modern "Western" mod-cons. Sound implausible? Read this book.

Humanity is powerful enough and knowledgeable enough to take an intelligent approach to consciously manage the planet.

A group of scientists, each a world expert in their subject, nailed down the key parts of the earth system most effected by humans. They then quantified the "planetary boundaries" for each: the biodiversity, climate change, land use, nitrogen, freshwater, toxin, aerosol, ocean acidification and ozone layer boundary. Mark Lynas sets himself the task of publiscising their conclusions.

Mark contends that mankind anthropogenically now affects every one of these issues and poses a threat to each which he expounds with authority. But unlike many environmentalists he is not a pessimist nor does he believe in austerity and sacrifice as the solution. He does believe in innovation and enterprise as a solution.

Mankind has the technical ability - for example at the extreme, Craig Venter, one of the first sequencers of the human genome, has made self replicating life form out of the memory of a computer and booted it up inside an empty cell. Mankind also has the organisational ability - for example the response of the international community through the Montreal Protocol in 1987 to effectively reduce the levels of CFC's in the atmosphere after CFC's were identified as creating holes in the ozone layer. The scientific debate about the importance of CFC's as a cause at that time mirrored the raging debate about climate change today.

The strength of Mark Lynas's approach is the sheer ambition - he does not shrink from the big picture - and the move away from exclusive fascination with climate change to encompassing other critical issues. He shares the optimism of Lomberg and Ridley and advocates looking at the success stories and cautioning against disillusion. For example he celebrates the success of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants in 2001 on tackling the production and use of the most damaging endocrine disrupting and long lived chemical pollutants. But he abhors their conclusions that climate change in particular shoud not be a key priority.

He holds some unenvironmentalist views and advances unexpected ideas. Urbanisation is good for sustainablity because it reduces population growth and concentrates huiman impact on the land in a smaller area. Privatisation of water supply worldwide by the WTO and eliminating subsidies and trade barriers would make internatinal trade in water efficient and therefore conserve water resources. The development of nuclear power, genetic engineering and the rejection of crazy subsidies on ethanol into fuel are all advocated.

He believes that the international community can and must act.

The major reservation to his argument is a feeling of disjoint from some major events and the relative costs of his proposals. For example low cost shale gas is becoming a major source of US energy but there is no mention of it in the book. Offshore windfarms which he advocates are hugely expensive.

The plantery boundary approach is probably controversial among scientists but is an interesting approach. But Mark Lynas broaches no doubts about the scientific evidence and the absolute necessity of saving the planet from the certainties implied by the plantery boundaries irrespective of the opportunity costs. He places no priorities on tackling each of the issues - they must all be done. And other issues e.g. malaria eradication or education get no priority.

The confidence in the ability of the international community is encouraging. His argument that international political leadership as the only way of bringing private interests in line with community interests is convincing.

But in a world of limited resource surely priorities have to be established and whilst international government can impose limits and regulation, resources have to be allocated and so opportunity cost canot be ignored as Mark Lynas seems to do.

But an ambitious and stimulating book.