'The God Species' by Mark Lynas

19 September 2011

"Every evening over the past week, once the kids were in bed and the washing up done, I've settled down to read The God Species. It's a book that is so good in parts that I wanted to give the author Mark Lynas a big wet kiss. But at times it was also so annoying that I wanted to throw a custard-pie in his face (as Mark did to climate sceptic Bjorn Lomborg)." Read Mike Childs's full review.

Take part in the discussion

Award-winning - and sometimes controversial - science writer Mark Lynas came to Friends of the Earth's London office on 28 September 2011 to discuss his book 'The God Species: How the Planet Can Survive the Age of Humans'.

It was a fascinating and lively discussion. 

'The God Species' presents a radical manifesto, calling for the use of controversial technologies including genetic engineering and nuclear power.

Lynas's starting point is a description of 9 environmental limits - planetary boundaries - which humanity must not cross if the Earth is to continue supporting life and civilisation.

But could he justify some of his radical solutions to an audience of Friends of the Earth campaigners, policy advocates and supporters, in person and online?

The following provides a flavour of this meeting of environmental minds.

Nuclear power

Among Lynas's ideas is that nuclear energy could be a major contributor to the reduction of carbon emissions.

"I don't think there are any strong environmental arguments against it and a lot of strong environmental arguments for it. Nuclear power is the absolute litmus case for the simple reason that the environmental movement became anti-nuclear a long time before climate change was considered a major threat. The killer fact, according to the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is that around 2 billion tonnes of carbon emissions are avoided each year by use of nuclear energy."

Lynas sees some benefit in enticing climate-change sceptics to support reduction in carbon emissions.

"In some ways, nuclear is a bridge between the denial right, who are enthusiastic about nuclear, and the green left who aren't but want to deal with climate change. So for example in America it presents an opportunity to trick the Republicans into supporting a new generation of nuclear power stations, and tackle climate change without telling them that's what they're doing."

An audience member countered that even if nuclear power offers a technological fix, there are inherent dangers such as weapons and proliferation.

Genetic modification

Ten years ago Mark was among those trashing fields that were trialling genetically-modified (GM) crops. So why does he now think GM might be a good idea? A Friends of the Earth campaigner pointed out that not only do these crops give corporations a stranglehold on seed production, but the resulting monocultures are a threat to agricultural biodiversity.

"I've been told that I should have some therapy to get me back to my old position. However, the reality is that we will need to feed up to 10 billion people by mid-century. With pressure on land from biofuels, I don't think you can foreclose on a powerful technology which can improve crop varieties and improve environmental outcomes such as efficient use of nitrogen, use of water, crop yield and land."

Role of science

An audience member asked whether Lynas therefore thinks science and technology hold the solution to environmental problems

Lynas responded: "Science isn't like the Bible, where you can pick and choose any bit you want to support your argument. Science is like a pyramid where the best science is at the top - in the most reputable journals or consensus-building organisations like the IPCC. I have tried to re-jig environmentalism in a more scientific direction which has more in common with the mainstream. My concern is that the environmental movement has been too sidetracked by the small scale, the local or the organic.

"A relatively small number of people in Britain turning their thermostat down will have no impact on global emissions when there are rapidly emerging economies like China, India and Brazil. Therefore lifestyle changes need to be achieved through technology."

Another member of the audience argued that the book argues for technical fixes without considering cultural, political or spiritual contexts, saying "There are more deep-rooted problems that we need to tackle, like the way the economic system works."

Lynas said this was deliberate: "It was intentional to omit all those [cultural, spiritual and ethical] elements, because that's what I think makes environmentalism appeal to only a small minority.

"There has to be a huge demographic out there interested in saving the planet but not interested in breaking corporations, and having everything done at the small, local, organic scale. So the solution has to be technological. We have to see lifestyle changes which are achieved through technology, for example mobile phones technology which is more efficient."

He said few NGOs or politicians publicly dare to change their mind for fear of loss of political capital and support, and they risk losing the air of infallibility that we all strive for.

Mark was grateful for the opportunity to put his side of the environmental debate to a Friends of the Earth audience.

"Some of the responses I had from other elements of the environmental movement have been much more hostile, and much less open-minded and engaging," he said.

What did you think of the book? You can still join the discussion below.

The following guidance is primarily intended for children, young people and vulnerable adults: We want everyone to feel safe and secure. If at any point you feel anyone does anything you find upsetting, please mention this to an adult you trust or email us at webmaster@foe.co.uk

blog comments powered by Disqus