The best
Environmental Economics books:
Reddit reviews
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The best of Environmental Economics books by number of unique Reddit comments:
Top Reddit reviews mentioning Environmental Economics books:
Yep, kids on the way; had to sell his home and move in on the couch of another silicone valley investor to finish the first rocket launch that landed his first contracts. Said he was days away from being negative. This is an amazing read <EDIT harmless joke out> https://www.amazon.com/Elon-Musk-SpaceX-Fantastic-Future/dp/006230125X
False. Read up on Elon. He may not be bending the metal to build the rockets, or assembling the batteries that go into Teslas (what CEO does?), but he knows a great deal about the engineering behind all their products.
If you haven't already, I highly recommend you read this.
Jobs, OTOH, had no background in computer science or engineering and never claimed to. His thing was design, which he (obviously) did really well.
Thinking in Systems by Donella Meadows is good https://www.amazon.se/Thinking-Systems-International-Donella-Meadows/dp/1603580557
>He was in the right place at the right time
Incorrect, read the book on him written by Ashlee Vance and you will understand that it was not just so.
I think you will be surprised to learn that what you have come to understand about neoliberalism and the positions supported by this sub are not always in alignment.
Make sure to read <em>Why Nations Fail</em>. Your first book report is due in two weeks.
My overall view is that he's an increadible, but deeply flawed, person.
He's simultaneously transforming the transportation, space exploration, and energy sectors all at once. He's already accomplished multiple things in aeronautics and transportation areas that nobody else had done before. I honestly think he's possibly the most important person alive, and we're really lucky to have him.
But... he's probably a narcissist, and at least appears to be an asshole.
Like many people who are increadible workers, he demands incredible amounts from the people around him. Often enough that he hurts them. If you read his biography it's replete with stories of Elon hurting people close to him because he doesn't seem to understand how they see the world. His ex-wife, Justine, wrote a really sad article about their divorce back in 2010. This doesn't excuse anything, but his biography strongly suggests he was abused as a child by his father.
He seems to share a lot of traits, both positive and negative, with some of the most successful people in history. It's possible to be that driven that something inside of you needs to be broken, or that you demand so much of yourself that you despise mediocrity in others.
It's outlined in his biography (which is a good read on the details of all these events).
The job was really dangerous and required working in a boiler room and insane temperatures and squeezing between small spaces.
Your body will thank you. Raised vegan, sometimes saw my parents “lapse” into vegetarianism, went to mostly vegetarian as an adult but rebelled by trying inconsequential quantities of meat. I had a myriad of mystery health problems that I couldn’t understand and neither could my doctors; I’m early 30’s. It was a horrible journey, but I feel like a new person on carnivore/zero carb and I’m only three months into it. Also everything is starting to make sense which is glorious.
I’ll be honest with you, changes in weight or muscles are not as visually dramatic for me initially. If your experience is like mine, your body will spend a lot of time nourishing deprived joints, bones and muscles in the beginning, but you’ll feel more energy and stronger. I also experienced extreme oxalate dumping which was tough. I wrote some of my experience here (kind of went on a tangent, tbh!): https://www.reddit.com/r/zerocarb/comments/df5qdp/optimizing_my_way_of_eating_for_further_health/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
If you have more questions, feel free to message me. I’m still learning about meat (I didn’t even know what each cut was or how to cook it) but I hope you enjoy that first steak as much as I did!!!
Oh I suggest some good reading for recovering vegetarians/vegans, message me if you’re interested in a book list but “vegetarian myth” by Lierre Keith is a good primer: https://www.amazon.com/Vegetarian-Myth-Food-Justice-Sustainability/dp/1604860804/ref=nodl_
https://www.amazon.ca/Apocalypse-Never-Environmental-Alarmism-Hurts/dp/0063001691
Very good book and excellent reviews, I'll be starting it tomorrow... He debunks the whole myth of the world will end and even exposes the eugenics as the culprits in all this bullshit.
Spread the truth and educate yourselves on this subject, they are constantly spreading disinformation on this subject in order to further advance their goals of fascism and tyranny... Fascism going forward will come not only from the "War On Virus" hoax but also the climate change hoax.
Despite decades of news media attention, many remain ignorant of basic facts. Carbon emissions peaked and have been declining in most developed nations for over a decade. Deaths from extreme weather, even in poor nations, declined 80 percent over the last four decades. And the risk of Earth warming to very high temperatures is increasingly unlikely thanks to slowing population growth and abundant natural gas.
Curiously, the people who are the most alarmist about the problems also tend to oppose the obvious solutions.
What’s really behind the rise of apocalyptic environmentalism? There are powerful financial interests. There are desires for status and power. But most of all there is a desire among supposedly secular people for transcendence. This spiritual impulse can be natural and healthy. But in preaching fear without love, and guilt without redemption, the new religion is failing to satisfy our deepest psychological and existential needs.
Thats not how efficiency increases work.
When we made aluminum cans that use 80% less aluminum than they did 30 years ago, we didn't start ALSO mining more aluminum as a result.
Fact is, when we make the production of something more efficient, we make less of it.
There are entire books about this effect that break down this result for every single material you can think of from aluminum to gas to rubber to argon. https://www.amazon.com/More-Less-Surprising-Learned-Resources_and/dp/1982103574
I literally don't feel like I'm human. Not in a cool way where I'm special or unique. More like maybe my original destiny was to be a nonphysical systems planner for a planetary organism but something went wrong and now I have to live in a body.
I also find it much easier to understand myself and other people if I back off until I can see what's happening as a whole system. When I'm zoomed in, I see things as "behavior" or "personality traits" and they're confusing. When I stand back far enough that the system is holistically viewable, I can see that these "traits" or "behaviors" are simply emergent properties of the system as it currently functions.
INFJs, you would all love the work of Donella Meadows: https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Systems-Donella-H-Meadows/dp/1603580557
The basic reason is that "green" technologies like wind and solar power are unreliable. Obviously the wind doesn't blow all the time and the sun doesn't shine all the time so the energy output will be highly variable which is a huge problem. To augment the lulls you will need extra reliable (non-green) capacity, you will have to rapidly fluctuate between different energy sources the net result being a less resilient grid and higher energy prices. Solar and wind are parasitic forms of energy - they cannot be relied upon themselves and are only usable at all because they are propped up by reliable sources like fossil fuels, nuclear and hydro power. Trying to power a civilization with them would be suicide.
The best book I can recommend on this topic is Alex Epstein's The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. It's a great read for thinking rationally about climate/energy issues and goes into great detail on the drawbacks of "green" energy. He also has written/spoken a lot about the questions you're interested so those would also be well worth looking into.
More death. Period. End of story.
The nuclear bomb won WW2. I know that there are people who disagree, but most boots on the ground agree that the invasion of Japan would've been a long brutal affair with millions more dead. And, without nuclear deterrence, the US may have gone to war against the USSR because conventional wars seem far less of a losing proposition than mutually assured destruction and a potential extinction levelevent.
Nuclear energy, is actually the safest and cleanest energy production method we have. (I highly recommend you check out: this book by Michael Shallenberger for a more thorough treatise on the benefits of nuclear power. In his book, he outlines how oil, gas, and coal are responsible for a LOT of pollution and the shortening of the lifespans of many people due to air pollution-related illnesses. In a world without nuclear power, we move from energy-dense matter-poor energy production techniques to more matter-dense materials. These materials create pollution and are more prone to environmental catastrophes like oil spills, fires, etc.
Now, you may be saying "yeah, but what about wind and solar?" Wind and solar are causing extinction issues in birds and bats, and are woefully inadequate at this time to solve our energy problems. Developing nations are actively lobbying against renewables like wind and solar because they are so unreliable.
So, in summary: Nuclear weapons make the cost of war heavier than conventional warfare. A world without nuclear weapons sees more war in the 20th century and more war-related death. Nuclear energy provides clean electricity and a world without it becomes far more polluted, leading to more deaths and shorter lives.
You only need the part after "dp". Check this out:
Will take you to the same page as:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0307719227/
Good URL hygiene is important!
>Unless I'm mistaken that's exactly the definition of growth.
For practical reasons, it's how growth is calculated, but a growth in GDP isn't quite the same as economic growth. For example, when the US had a 9% contraction in their Q2 of 2020, it would be a mistake to assume this means that the US economy suddenly lost 9% of its capacity to produce goods and services.
>But once again : what good is it to be rich if you have destroyed the environment in the process (destructive growth). You're not going to be able to buy anything when the ecological crisis comes. You're still using money as a proxy for quality of life which is true to some extend... but isn't once you reach a certain physical limit (the limits of earth and natural resources).
This is certainly an argument against the relentless pursuit of growth. But it's a normative statement, not an economic one. Also consider for a minute the fact that the US is using fewer resources now than it was 30 years ago despite huge increase in productivity:https://www.amazon.com/More-Less-Surprising-Learned-Resources_and/dp/1982103574
>Sorry, but I'm really not convinced by your answer.
Not really trying to convince you of anything. Just letting you know about the alternative arguments out there for growth-based policy.
Hello and welcome. I had gastroparesis before I had weight loss surgery, and one of the only consistent pieces of advice I was given by multiple practitioners was to reduce fiber intake. As the vegan diet is very high in fiber, it is not optimal, or even suitable, for someone with gastroparesis.
Let me say that I also felt very guilty about eating meat and even fish, but after doing some personal research, I realized that....life IS death. They are opposite sides of the same coin. You cannot have life without death, because all organisms are consuming something in order to live. That is just the natural law of life. Many of us assume that the most compassionate thing is to eat only plants, but in reality, growing plants is very resource-heavy work, too. Harvesting plants kills many animals, particularly in industrial agrilculture. Industrial agriculture also relies mostly on fossil fuels, which pollute the land and destroy watersheds. You really can't have sustainable plant agriculture without animal input from manure....the system isn't a closed loop.
I highly recommend this book: https://www.amazon.com/Vegetarian-Myth-Food-Justice-Sustainability/dp/1604860804 It is NOT perfect, and there are some logical flaws and hyper-emotional arguments made, but I think there is valuable information for those of us struggling with the ethics of eating meat.
The best advice I can give you is to eat soft eggs and nice flaky fish to start. Your body is going to be SO happy - and my guess is, it's going to tell you LOUD and clear what it needs.
Be well.
Yep. A lack of basic systems thinking is why we are all fucked. The term "feedback loop" came from this discipline. The more I learn about systems thinking and complexity theory the more I understand about the world and how deeply hopeless our plight is.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1603580557/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_fabc_N.a9FbRM79XRR
You might also be interested in...
>There is so much technological change, representing room for optimism, that was absent from my childhood.
Indeed - here is a good start:
https://www.amazon.com/More-Less-Surprising-Learned-Resources\_and/dp/1982103574
Maybe not the type of Progressives that San Francisco has: Book: San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities. Much exaggerated as a generalization, but applies well to S.F.
Do you not believe that people locked up in mental wards are force fed drugs?
The solution isn't a harder government hand, its a smart approach. Look I agree with your desire for a safer streets, id just rather achieve it though other methods. first lets try better solutions like the ones proposed in San Fransicko, then lets maybe actually allow people to protect themselves....
I agree things will get worse if nothing is done. I just think its hilarious that people think "This time the government will get taking away people rights and locking them up the RIGHT way".
There are so many other good solutions, you should give San Fransicko a read, lots of other good solutions proposed other than giving the government wild approval to force feed drugs to people.
His own biography
“While Musk had exceled as a self-taught coder, his skills weren’t nearly as polished as those of the new hires. They took one look at Zip2’s code and began rewriting the vast majority of the software. Musk bristled at some of their changes, but the computer scientists needed just a fraction of the lines of code that Musk used to get their jobs done. They had a knack for dividing software projects into chunks that could be altered and refined whereas Musk fell into the classic self-taught coder trap of writing what developers call hairballs—big, monolithic hunks of code that could go berserk for mysterious reasons.”
From his own biography.
“”While Musk had exceled as a self-taught coder, his skills weren’t nearly as polished as those of the new hires. They took one look at Zip2’s code and began rewriting the vast majority of the software. Musk bristled at some of their changes, but the computer scientists needed just a fraction of the lines of code that Musk used to get their jobs done. They had a knack for dividing software projects into chunks that could be altered and refined whereas Musk fell into the classic self-taught coder trap of writing what developers call hairballs—big, monolithic hunks of code that could go berserk for mysterious reasons.””
I have so many thoughts after watching this video.
On climate, pollution, etc.., Smith is repeating basically the same lines that Kenney did. Positive about Alberta energy vs other (dictatorial, more rights abusing) producers and sharing a fairly balanced view of the future of energy and petrochemical products while acknowledging our responsibility to reduce emissions and limit climate effects. She even invokes Shellenberger and (like Shellenberger) talks about lifting people in the developing world out of poverty using Alberta's LNG, etc.
However, these well reasoned opinions are literally opposite of Conserative party policy provincially and federally. Climate change denial is official party policy. Reducing Canada's foreign aid to nations with desperate poverty is party policy.
The fact that she still blames inflation on Trudeau is just embarrassing politicking. It's world-wide and Canada actually faces far less inflation than many other nations. Later in the interview she complains about "legacy" media fishing for soundbites, but it doesn't stop her from using meaningless talking points with no grounding in reality.
Alberta has, under former conservative governments, had among the greatest healthcare and education systems in the world. Yet she describes how those governments did it wrong and proposes to absolutely decimate what is left of those systems to install a wild-west privatized system of service delivery that has never worked ever any other place o the planet.
The last comment I have is that, throughout the interview, it appears that Smith is fully under the sway of the utterly debunked "efficient market hypothesis".
Edit: I'm not suggesting Alberta has a perfect rights record, so I added the more above. We don't have kill squads.
LOL. Wasn't thinking that but that analogy works here too!
It was in reference to Elon Musk being known notoriously to be a bad programmer. "Spaghetti code" in dev-speak means unstructured and difficult-to-maintain code.
From his biography:
>
While Musk had exceled as a self-taught coder, his skills weren’t nearly as polished as those of the new hires. They took one look at Zip2’s code and began rewriting the vast majority of the software. Musk bristled at some of their changes, but the computer scientists needed just a fraction of the lines of code that Musk used to get their jobs done. They had a knack for dividing software projects into chunks that could be altered and refined whereas Musk fell into the classic self-taught coder trap of writing what developers call hairballs—big, monolithic hunks of code that could go berserk for mysterious reasons.
​
Think of reading a text book or novel that has no paragraphs, chapters, subject titles, spacing, references, or punctuation. It'd be a giant block of solid text that's near impossible to read or find the typos in.
His father who owns a share of an emerald mine in Sough Africa, gave he and his brother $25k for their first company, Zip2, which they sold.
He left apartheid South Africa for Canada because he didn't want to participate in the mandatory service.
His biography has a good set of details on his early days.
Je te suggère de lire ceci Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All
Elon isn’t known to be good at efficient programming. From his own biography.
>While Musk had exceled as a self-taught coder, his skills weren’t nearly as polished as those of the new hires. They took one look at Zip2’s code and began rewriting the vast majority of the software. Musk bristled at some of their changes, but the computer scientists needed just a fraction of the lines of code that Musk used to get their jobs done. They had a knack for dividing software projects into chunks that could be altered and refined whereas Musk fell into the classic self-taught coder trap of writing what developers call hairballs—big, monolithic hunks of code that could go berserk for mysterious reasons.
>You know what does cause homelessness? Cutting welfare programs, making homelessness illegal so that they can't even have the chance of getting on their feet, preventing shelters from being built because of NIMBYism, etc. In short, not actually addressing the causes of homelessness, which is blatant in your post.
Incorrect. homelessness is caused by enabling open air drug markets. go read https://www.amazon.co.uk/San-Fransicko-Progressives-Ruin-Cities/dp/0063093626 that's my source. I can't read it for you.