Mike Berners-Lee

What separates There is no Planet B from other climate change books is the way Mike Berners-Lee looks at the numbers. Instead of boring readers with billions of tons of various nefarious elements, chemicals, and compounds, he has transformed them into calories, something most can grasp.

The world produces 5940 calories in plant based food - per day per person. Humans need to consume 2300. So there’s lots to go round. But. 1740 go to livestock, plus another 3810 they pick up in non-crops show more like grass and pasture. But livestock only provide 590 calories to humans per day. It becomes evident that livestock is not a great way to use declining land resources.

People consume 44 calories of protein per person per day, but livestock consumes 89. Animals destroy protein. Then, 1320 calories per person per day simply go to waste, in processing, transport and trash. Cutting waste by half would increase global food supply by 20%.

Using this kind of thinking, Berners-Lee examines the usual suspects: food, transport, heating, etc. The conclusion is unchanged. At current rates of increase, Man will be consuming seven times as much energy by the end of the century. This despite electric cars, solar and wind.

Things like carbon taxes can raise trillions annually to help clean up the air, soil and water. But to do that, Berners-Lee wants to charge hundreds of dollars per ton of pollution. The current rate is about 35. It will mean several extra dollars per gallon of gas. This will not result in the desired reduction in driving so much as rioting, as we have seen with Gilets Jaunes in France. Their carbon tax amounted to about fifty cents per gallon.

The Paris Accord whereby all countries work to reduce emissions and consumption, has of course resulted in this continuing increase in both instead. Holding global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius becomes laughable in that context.

He looks at those countries’ attitudes differently as well. He maintains everyone- every individual - must be active participants, but that inequality around the world will cause resentment among the poorer nations, including of all countries, the United States. He shows that the median American is worse off than Italians, Germans, Spaniards, Brits, French, Norwegians and Icelanders. While the average wealth of Americans is much higher than the rest, average means spreading the huge wealth of the top one percent over the whole population. But of course they have no access to that wealth.

When he looks at actual wealth per person using mean instead of average, the chart goes upside down. Italians are twice as well off as Americans at the median, the very center of the range. But neither seems to know that. This will help prevent forward movement in remediating climate change. Inequality has distorted the American Dream to genuine poverty. To top it off, he says “Trickledown, to be blunt, is a neoliberal self-deception at best, and at worst a lie.”

So much for thought-provoking analysis. The bulk of the book is instruction on how to live. Berners-Lee continually repeats his mantra of living mindfully, not wasting, not driving, not flying, not working for any firm that isn’t climate conscious, and demanding that any politician worth a vote can talk intelligently on Berners-Lee’s 14 point program of considerations. Personally, I can’t name a single politician in the United States who can or will do that. Never mind actually agreeing with them. In order for Man to make any dent at all, absolutely everyone in the world has to be onboard with this 14 point plan. Or we need a Planet B.

Berners-Lee is nothing if not optimistic. Despite all the figures he provides, he still sees the cup half full. All he asks is that everyone agree with him, and act like they do. After all, he does.

In some ways, Berners-Lee is already living on Planet B. He says “In the twenty-first century, it is totally unhelpful to have organisations that exist primarily to make profit …. The profit motive has to be yesterday’s thinking.” This is not going to go very far on Planet A.

There is no Planet B is disappointingly naïve, and unsatisfactorily and unjustifiably positive. This is not the way it is going to be, and pretending so is not helpful.

David Wineberg show less

This is the book on climate change that I’ve been waiting for! I’ve read my share of treatises that describe the current crisis, make prediction both gloomy and optimistic, assign blame. But carbon footprint expert Mike Berners-Lee has set out to write a guide that answers the question, “What can I do??” With this handy book, readers can readily calculate the carbon costs of your own choices: should I fly or take the train or drive? What difference will it make if I pay local show more produce? Paper or plastic—does it really matter? Furthermore, recognizing that it will take a huge concerted effort to save the planet, many of us want to be able to persuade friends and family to take steps to reduce their footprints. Berners-Lee engages us in dialogue designed to make it easier for us all to have conversations together, rather than simply arguing. A thorough appendix lists the carbon footprint of various foods and goods. Written with humor and deep knowledge, offering common sense and concrete solutions, this is a must-read for anyone wanting to live more lightly on the earth.

I received a free copy from the publisher without any requirement for a positive review. show less

This book suggests that it provides all the life hacks that can shrink your carbon footprint overnight. Well, it certainly packs a lot of information into the book but I’m not sure what sort of impact all this would have on my quality of life and if I’m prepared to make the sacrifice. Actually, this review is actually based on the Blinkist summary version of the book. So it’s not completely fair to the original author. In a summary, one inevitably has to leave out a lot of the detail show more and (probably) justification of arguments. Still I think it has given me a good feel for the book. And here are a few extracts that made an impact on me.
Carbon dioxide is but one of many gases that contribute to global warming and to a carbon footprint. Such harmful emissions are known as greenhouse gases and some of them are far more damaging than CO₂. Methane (CH₄), for example, is twenty-five times as harmful as CO₂, and nitrous oxide (N₂O) is three hundred times worse. And then there are refrigerant gases, which are used in cooling systems and can be several thousand times more potent than CO₂.
In the United Kingdom, CO₂ accounts for 86 percent of its greenhouse gas output, while methane accounts for 7 percent, nitrous oxide 6 percent and refrigerant gases 1 percent. [I assume that these figures are given in terms of CO2 equivalent]. A carbon footprint provides an accurate reading on all the major harmful emissions being released. This conversion method is known as carbon dioxide equivalent, or CO₂e.
In Malawi, for example, the average carbon footprint of a person is around 0.1 metric tons of CO₂e per year. The average person in the United Kingdom, however, measures up at around 15 metric tons per year, while the average North American comes in at around 28, and Australians at 30 metric tons.
Berners-Lee has laid the groundwork for a major reduction in the personal carbon footprints through what he calls the 10-tonne lifestyle, which would result in the average person going from 15 to 10 metric tons per year of CO₂e.
Texting someone instead of making a cell-phone call leaves a smaller footprint since it takes up less energy......To be precise, a single text message takes up 0.014 g CO₂e. As of 2010, around 2.5 trillion texts were sent per year, which adds up to approximately 32,000 metric tons of CO₂e, or about one ten-thousandth of a percent of the world’s total carbon footprint.
A daily two-minute phone call, on the other hand, adds up to 47 kilograms CO₂e per year, with a global footprint of around 125 million metric tons per year.
A year’s worth of emailing can add up to 135 kilograms CO₂e, which would account for over 1 percent of the 10-tonne lifestyle we’re aiming for.
To manufacture a 21.5-inch iMac in 2010, it took 720 kg CO₂e, thanks in large part to all the energy required to make microprocessors.....And once the iMac is being used, the electricity usage adds up to 63 g CO₂e per hour. [Confession, I’m using an iMac right now}
The data found within the World Wide Web is stored on massive banks of servers and databases. Keeping these servers running requires an enormous amount of electricity–to the tune of 130 million metric tons of CO₂e in 2010 alone. That amount is predicted to more than double by 2020, coming in somewhere between 250 and 340 million metric tons!
From the carbon dioxide equivalent standpoint, plastic actually beats paper...Plastic is marginally better since it doesn’t rot and create methane emissions like paper does. [ok this surprised me but do we want non-biodegradeable plastic in our landfill and floating down our rivers and into the sea. So it seems there is a trade-off between carbon footprints and other undesirable environmental issues]. .....One disposable plastic bag from a supermarket contributes around 10 grams CO₂e. So if you use five bags per week, that adds up to 2.5 kilograms a year, which is about the same carbon footprint as a single cheeseburger. [But, presumably there will be a leaching of some of the plastic compounds from the bags, into the groundwater and, maybe, these will be carcinogenic.....so I’m not realy happy with hj=is recommendations here].
Meanwhile, one paper bag, made from recycled paper, creates around 12 grams CO₂e, while some of the fancier, thicker retail store bags can add up to 80 grams CO₂e.
Junk mail is the biggest offender of the paper industry, so opt out if you can.
Meanwhile, the average paperback book will add around 1 kilogram of CO₂e. You may think this is a lot, but when you consider the fact that reading keeps you from doing other
carbon-intensive activities, like driving or shopping, it actually has far-reaching benefits. {He seems to ignore the fact that one might be reading the book whilst, say, being a passenger in a car. Anyway, this claim about benefits from what it “might’ stop you from doing, seems very weak to me.}
If you’re using paper products, the one thing you have to do is recycle them, which will keep the paper away from a landfill where it will rot and emit methane.
Gasoline and diesel fueling our cars and trucks leave a big carbon footprint. To produce just one liter adds around 3.15 kilograms CO₂e to a carbon footprint.
Cycling still leaves a footprint since you need fuel to work those pedals. So, if that fuel was cereal and milk, the footprint would be around 90 grams CO₂e per mile. If your pedal power was fueled by a cheeseburger, it would expand to about 260 grams CO₂e per mile. On a crowded subway train, each passenger would be around 160 grams CO₂e. [I found this fascinating....so you have less impact riding in a crowded subway car than you do cycling to work].
For a car, if we take the average fuel efficiency in the United Kingdom, which is 33 miles to the gallon, your footprint would be around 710 grams CO₂e per mile...In a less fuel-efficient car, such as a Land Rover, that footprint could balloon up to 2,240 grams.
As an example, if we take a distance of approximately 800 miles:
• By bike for that distance, on a diet of bananas, it would leave a 53-kg CO₂e footprint.
• By train, it would more than double to 120 kilograms;
• By a small, fuel-efficient car, it would increase six-times over to 330 kilograms.
• But flying would increase the biking footprint tenfold, to around 500 kilograms CO₂e.
A round-trip flight from London to Hong Kong would leave a 4.6 metric ton footprint. That’s the equivalent of producing 340,000 plastic shopping bags and it would take nearly six months off of your 10-tonne lifestyle......Flying leaves such a large footprint because burning fuel at higher altitudes causes the emissions to have a more harmful impact...Aviation is estimated to cause between one and two percent of all global emissions.
Local fruit will have a small footprint, but if you’re eating fruit that travelled halfway around the world to get to your supermarket, that fruit comes with a big footprint....On average:
• An apple at the supermarket will have contributed about 80 gm each, or 550 gm Kg
• Bananas are not that bad; each contributes about 80 gm CO₂e and 480 gm per kilo.
• Oranges, have a slightly bigger footprint, around 90 gm CO₂e each, and if they’re airfreighted that footprint grows to 1000 gm..
• 250 grams of locally grown asparagus will leave a 125-gram CO₂e footprint, but if it was airfreighted to London from Peru, that footprint expands to 3.5 kilograms.
• An uncooked 4-ounce beefsteak has a footprint of around 2 kilograms CO₂e–one that will of course expand due to the energy needed to cook it. Approximately nine-tenths of beef’s footprint comes from what happens on the average cattle farm, and the big contributor here is the fact that cows are ruminants, meaning they chew cud and release lots of methane in the process.
• Sheep are also ruminants and this is why a kilo of sheep or cow meat will have a footprint that’s two-times as large as a kilo of pork, since pigs are not ruminants.
• Bottled water leaves a much bigger footprint than tap water.,,,,an average person’s yearly supply of tap water would still only add up to around 14 kilograms......the average 500-milliliter bottle of water, has a carbon footprint 1,000 times greater than tap water, at 160 grams CO₂e. Most of this comes from the energy spent on packaging and transportation.
• A black cup of coffee or a plain cup of tea will only account for 21 grams CO₂e, most of which comes from the energy needed to boil water.
• The real footprint increaser is milk, since one pint of it requires 723 grams CO₂e due to all the high-carbon necessities of a dairy farm......If you’re getting it from a coffee shop, then the footprint could increase to 235 grams for a cappuccino or 340 grams for a latte.
• All this means that one coffee a day could end up being 1 percent of your 10-tonne lifestyle!
• An imported bottle of beer can come with a footprint as big as 900 grams CO₂e, depending on where it’s from. This means a few bottles a day could end up being 10 percent of your 10-tonne lifestyle. But if you stick to locally brewed beer, you’ll be reducing the transportation and the footprint will stay around 300 grams per bottle.
• For wine, it can come with a 1040-gram footprint, mostly from the glass bottle.
• If you wash your laundry at 30°C and hang-dry your clothes, you’ll only be creating a footprint of 0.6 kilograms CO₂e. Comparatively, a wash done at 60°C and placed in a clothes dryer will leave a 3.3 kilogram footprint....By switching to a drying rack you could save half a metric ton of CO₂e over the course of a year.
• Try to keep your ironing to a minimum.
• An energy-efficient dishwasher; when kept to 55°C, it only leaves a footprint of 770 grams CO₂e. Those extra grams may be worth it, though, since dishwashers tend to eliminate 400 times more bacteria than washing by hand.
• A single bath, will leave a footprint of between 0.5 kilograms and 2.6 kilograms CO₂e.
• The average shower, on the other hand, takes 6 minutes and adds up to 0.5 kilograms.
• When we take all the world’s volcanoes together we have around 300 million metric tons per year. However, this is still less than 1 percent of the yearly emissions produced by humans.
• Studies show that the global temperature went down by 0.5°C after the Pinatubo eruption.
• In 2009 alone, Australian bushfires caused 165 million metric tons of CO₂e emissions. That’s the equivalent of the carbon footprints of 5 million Australians over the course of a normal year.
• All together, black carbon accounts for anywhere between 7 and 15 billion metric tons of CO₂e per year–roughly 15–30 percent of 2007’s global emissions. But only 42 percent of this black carbon comes from outdoor fires–whether natural or human-caused. The majority of it comes from humans, a quarter of which are from fireplaces or other homemade fires.
• Another huge source of human-made emissions is deforestation. For every hectare of forest that gets taken down, 500 metric tons of CO₂e gets released into the atmosphere.
So, if you’d really like to start a 10-tonne lifestyle, one of the best ways to start is to look at your diet. Since it accounts for 20 percent of your own footprint, being more considerate about what you eat is the perfect place to start.
• Eat less meat and dairy.
• Eat only seasonal and local produce,
• Eliminate your food waste, since doing so will cut another 25 percent.
• You can also stop buying low-yield crop varieties, which are foods like cherry tomatoes and baby carrots that take a lot of energy for relatively little produce. This will shed another 3 percent.
• And by always recycling the packaging you can’t avoid, you’ll lose another 2 to 3 percent.
• By cooking more efficiently, you’ll be reducing your food footprint by another 5 percent.
There’s a carbon footprint to virtually every meal, drink and activity in your life, and many of these footprints can be reduced with some simple changes. These include texting instead of calling, drinking tap water instead of mineral water, taking quicker showers and reducing your meat and dairy intake. By being more aware of the hidden contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, you can make adjustments to your daily life without causing too much of a disruption.
I must confess that, just occasionally, I get a little tired of prophets who continually show us the narrow and stony path to heaven. And this book seems to fit the description. Yes we have a problem with global greenhouse gases. And yes, if we pin this down to carbon footprints we can sheet home the responsibility to individuals. And yes, if we all, as individuals, have cold showers, don’t travel and eat raw turnips (locally grown) and no meat...we are going to reduce our carbon footprint. But, to my mind this raises two significant questions that are not addressed. The first is that, however you dress it up, Berners-Lee is proposing that we reduce our standard of living. The second is, that without curbing and reducing world population we are only postponing the apocalypse not preventing it. The world’s population has doubled in less than my lifetime. This means that carbon emissions have doubled even without accounting for the increases in emissions per capita over the period. So, I think that number one on Berner’s Lee’s list should be: “Educate women in developing countries” because that has been shown to be the single greatest factor in reducing population growth rates and maybe as a rider to this...”have fewer children”. Somehow, virtually all the books I read on climate change and greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere ignore the issue of population growth. Yes it’s sensitive but it’s also THE major issue. We really need to explore how to be comfortable without constantly increasing GDP. How to live well with declining populations. (Japan seems to be more or less managing this).
Given these (significant) objections, I think Berners -Lee has produced a bunch of really interesting statistics. And I hope all his readers will cease their international air travel immediately and go, instead, on packed trains. (Difficult from Australia).
I guess I missed in the summary some sort of charts etc that would show graphically how much one could reduce a carbon footprint by taking the actions B-L suggests.
Anyway, three stars from me. show less

A surprising delight! When I first received this book, I quickly paged through it and saw that it's mostly a list of items and their corresponding carbon footprints. As reference books are infrequently read, I dreaded getting started. However, Mr. Berners-Lee uses his wit to bring this reference book alive. Without coming across as a condescending guilt-trip, he manages to bring awareness to the large (or sometimes small) environmental impact of the activity of our lives. Even those who may show more not agree with climate change would find the book informational and fair-minded as the author is fully transparent in his calculations including stating when he is using a best estimate. There were many surprises for me in the book including the relative impact of things like commercial air flights. It's easier to reduce, reuse and recycle fairly frequently but give up travel for climate change? That can be a bit harder! Overall, this is likely one of the most useful and entertaining books on climate change you'll find on the shelves. * I received this book for free in exchange for a review. show less